Need audio recorder

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fran
  • Start date Start date
F

Fran

I need a freeware audio recorder, similar to EAC, but with more options
(sample rate, to be more exact). I'm transferring my audio tapes to PC, any
advice would be welcome.
 
Fran said:
I need a freeware audio recorder, similar to EAC, but with more
options (sample rate, to be more exact). I'm transferring my audio
tapes to PC, any advice would be welcome.
Click to expand...

------------------------
dBpowerAMP Music converter
http://www.dbpoweramp.com/
use the dMC Auxiliary Input (extra download)

Good luck
H.N.
 
| Fran wrote:
| > I need a freeware audio recorder, similar to EAC, but with
more
| > options (sample rate, to be more exact). I'm transferring my
audio
| > tapes to PC, any advice would be welcome.
|
| ------------------------
| dBpowerAMP Music converter
| http://www.dbpoweramp.com/
| use the dMC Auxiliary Input (extra download)
|
| Good luck
| H.N.


Herb, a little more information, please.
I'm confused by the web site. Is the program freeware or
registerware? I see that an enhanced version is on the way. Are
there limitations in the present offering.

A bit more info might be useful.

Thanks

Richard
 
-------------------------------

Herb, a little more information, please.
I'm confused by the web site. Is the program freeware or
registerware? I see that an enhanced version is on the way. Are
there limitations in the present offering.

A bit more info might be useful.

Thanks

Richard
Click to expand...
------------------------------

Richard, I've recommended this freeware on many occasions, that's why I
probably just throw a chunk nowadays, sorry. I just had a look at dMC's
website, and it does look a bit cluttered.

dBpowerAMP Music Converter is freeware, as is its Auxiliary Input
(additional plugin), which you need for recording. The codecs are free as
well.

You need to download both the dBpowerAMP Music Converter AND the Auxiliary
Input to be able to record your sound.

Go to :
http://www.dbpoweramp.com/dmc.htm
The links to the downloads are in the bottom half of the page.
Download dBpowerAMP Music Converter Release 10.1 , then download Auxiliary
Input Release 3 .

I recommend to also download more codecs from Codec Central, if you want to
try different codecs like Ogg or others. (If you don't know, what codecs
are, disregard this part).

I deliberately didn't give you the direct links, for one, because some are a
bit long and might cause word wrap, and secondly, because you might want to
read through what you're downloading.

btw. there are no limitations in the present offering. It's a nice program,
and it's free.
You can also rip songs from CDs and convert from wav > mp3 > others > and
the other way round, if you have more codecs.
If you're interested in more info, also have a look here:
http://www.dbpoweramp.com/spoons-audio-guide.htm
HTHH
H.N.
 
Fran said:
I need a freeware audio recorder, similar to EAC, but with more
options (sample rate, to be more exact). I'm transferring my audio
tapes to PC, any advice would be welcome.
Click to expand...

Windows Sound Recorder is as good as any. Get around the recording length
limitation by recording nothing, rewinding, recording more, etc. repeating
until you have a file of sufficient length. When you want to record a tape,
overwrite that file and "save as" which gives you a ton of choice.

If making a template is too much trouble, most wave editors will let you
record and select a desired sampling rate when saving. Audacity is nice and
free. No install, one registry entry.
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/about.php?lang=en

More info in my dandies below.

--
dadiOH
_____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.0...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
____________________________
 
Herbert Nagler said:
------------------------------

Richard, I've recommended this freeware on many occasions, that's why I
probably just throw a chunk nowadays, sorry. I just had a look at dMC's
website, and it does look a bit cluttered.

dBpowerAMP Music Converter is freeware, as is its Auxiliary Input
(additional plugin), which you need for recording. The codecs are free as
well.

You need to download both the dBpowerAMP Music Converter AND the Auxiliary
Input to be able to record your sound.

Go to :
http://www.dbpoweramp.com/dmc.htm
The links to the downloads are in the bottom half of the page.
Download dBpowerAMP Music Converter Release 10.1 , then download Auxiliary
Input Release 3 .

I recommend to also download more codecs from Codec Central, if you want to
try different codecs like Ogg or others. (If you don't know, what codecs
are, disregard this part).

I deliberately didn't give you the direct links, for one, because some are a
bit long and might cause word wrap, and secondly, because you might want to
read through what you're downloading.

btw. there are no limitations in the present offering. It's a nice program,
and it's free.
You can also rip songs from CDs and convert from wav > mp3 > others > and
the other way round, if you have more codecs.
If you're interested in more info, also have a look here:
http://www.dbpoweramp.com/spoons-audio-guide.htm
HTHH
H.N.
Click to expand...

I recommend Super Mp3 Recorder at http://www.supermp3recorder.com. It's helpful.
 
| > >> ------------------------
| > >> dBpowerAMP Music converter
| > >> http://www.dbpoweramp.com/
| > >> use the dMC Auxiliary Input (extra download)
| > >>
| > >> Good luck
| > >> H.N.
| > -------------------------------
| > >
| > > Herb, a little more information, please.
| > > I'm confused by the web site. Is the program freeware or
| > > registerware? I see that an enhanced version is on the way.
Are
| > > there limitations in the present offering.
| > >
| > > A bit more info might be useful.
| > >
| > > Thanks
| > >
| > > Richard
| > ------------------------------
| >
| > Richard, I've recommended this freeware on many occasions,
that's why I
| > probably just throw a chunk nowadays, sorry. I just had a
look at dMC's
| > website, and it does look a bit cluttered.
| >
| > dBpowerAMP Music Converter is freeware, as is its Auxiliary
Input
| > (additional plugin), which you need for recording. The codecs
are free as
| > well.
| >
| > You need to download both the dBpowerAMP Music Converter AND
the Auxiliary
| > Input to be able to record your sound.
| >
| > Go to :
| > http://www.dbpoweramp.com/dmc.htm
| > The links to the downloads are in the bottom half of the
page.
| > Download dBpowerAMP Music Converter Release 10.1 , then
download Auxiliary
| > Input Release 3 .
| >
| > I recommend to also download more codecs from Codec Central,
if you want to
| > try different codecs like Ogg or others. (If you don't know,
what codecs
| > are, disregard this part).
| >
| > I deliberately didn't give you the direct links, for one,
because some are a
| > bit long and might cause word wrap, and secondly, because you
might want to
| > read through what you're downloading.
| >
| > btw. there are no limitations in the present offering. It's a
nice program,
| > and it's free.
| > You can also rip songs from CDs and convert from wav > mp3 >
others > and
| > the other way round, if you have more codecs.
| > If you're interested in more info, also have a look here:
| > http://www.dbpoweramp.com/spoons-audio-guide.htm
| > HTHH
| > H.N.
|
| I recommend Super Mp3 Recorder at
http://www.supermp3recorder.com. It's helpful.

Bill,

Thanks for this. However, I've been involved with audio for a lot
of my life. MP3 is a "lossy" medium (to put it politely). The
thought of degrading reproduction, even if slight or "clever" is
opposite my standards. MP3 is OK for some rock music that's
almost totally electronic to begin with, and it runs circles
around Real Networks for talk radio content. But for live
instruments and to catch the nuances in classical vocal material
and acoustic jazz, the full capabilities of CD-grade digital
audio are my minimum.

The CD standard is a compromise; that's why many audiophiles
prefer the LP (analog sound is open-ended, mostly). I find the CD
acceptable for most music. But to give up any more than this is a
downer to people who _concentrate intently_ on music. So,
although I wasn't clear earlier, I'm looking for a tool that
maintains the full CD standard.

Thanks again.

Richard
 
Richard said:
Thanks for this. However, I've been involved with audio for a lot
of my life. MP3 is a "lossy" medium (to put it politely). The
thought of degrading reproduction, even if slight or "clever" is
opposite my standards. MP3 is OK for some rock music that's
almost totally electronic to begin with, and it runs circles
around Real Networks for talk radio content. But for live
instruments and to catch the nuances in classical vocal material
and acoustic jazz, the full capabilities of CD-grade digital
audio are my minimum.

The CD standard is a compromise; that's why many audiophiles
prefer the LP (analog sound is open-ended, mostly). I find the CD
acceptable for most music. But to give up any more than this is a
downer to people who _concentrate intently_ on music. So,
although I wasn't clear earlier, I'm looking for a tool that
maintains the full CD standard.
Click to expand...

In that case, you should avoid all computer sound cards, since their
noise floor is well above 16 bits. You'll need some kind of out-board
analog-to-digital hardware to accomplish "full CD standard". So any of
the software mentioned in this thread won't do you any good, since it
is concerned with recording from the computer sound card.

And what are you recording *from*? Does it have that
fidelity/accuracy?

Terry
 
| >Thanks for this. However, I've been involved with audio for a
lot
| >of my life. MP3 is a "lossy" medium (to put it politely). The
| >thought of degrading reproduction, even if slight or "clever"
is
| >opposite my standards. MP3 is OK for some rock music that's
| >almost totally electronic to begin with, and it runs circles
| >around Real Networks for talk radio content. But for live
| >instruments and to catch the nuances in classical vocal
material
| >and acoustic jazz, the full capabilities of CD-grade digital
| >audio are my minimum.
| >
| >The CD standard is a compromise; that's why many audiophiles
| >prefer the LP (analog sound is open-ended, mostly). I find the
CD
| >acceptable for most music. But to give up any more than this
is a
| >downer to people who _concentrate intently_ on music. So,
| >although I wasn't clear earlier, I'm looking for a tool that
| >maintains the full CD standard.
|
| In that case, you should avoid all computer sound cards, since
their
| noise floor is well above 16 bits. You'll need some kind of
out-board
| analog-to-digital hardware to accomplish "full CD standard". So
any of
| the software mentioned in this thread won't do you any good,
since it
| is concerned with recording from the computer sound card.
|
| And what are you recording *from*? Does it have that
| fidelity/accuracy?
|
| Terry

I'm not set up yet. I'm restoring a few turntables at this point
to deliver the source side of the deal. I've finished acquiring
the neccessary phono cartridges and styli. As far as the original
recordings are concerned, most records were defective in some
way, or were limited in their high frequencies. This is only
detrimental some times because if the music itself doesn't
contain meaningful harmonics, let's say, above 8,000hz, you don't
need to resolve the highs avove that point for that recording. I
have worked in recording studios that had a high frequency limit
of 15khz. The real-world upper limit of cassette tape is 12khz,
regardless of quality. I'm just throwing in some criteria that
may be familiar here. The issue for me is that since most records
were defective right off the press, or have been damaged by
faulty needles and careless handling, how can we get the most
pleasing sound off those same disks? The answer is not always to
render them with perfect faithfulness. There's an art to this.

What I was referring to in my prior post was the lossy method
that MP3 uses to compress music. This actually throws away some
of the material. For me, that doesn't cut it: I'm not talking
about frequency response here in the conventional sense: MP3 is a
dynamic medium that keeps changing its parameters according to
the musical content "right now," with the decisions made by a
robot, not a musician. When people are played an A-B comparison
between a digital original and the same sound processed by the
best rendition of MP3, they hear the quality drop.

There's a very extensive body of recorded music, performances
too, on vinyl that has never been dubbed onto CD (and won't be
either). That's where my interest lies.

Thanks for the tip. As I said, I'm not at that point yet. That
stage will come later.

Richard
 
Richard said:
What I was referring to in my prior post was the lossy method
that MP3 uses to compress music. This actually throws away some
of the material. For me, that doesn't cut it: I'm not talking
about frequency response here in the conventional sense: MP3 is a
dynamic medium that keeps changing its parameters according to
the musical content "right now," with the decisions made by a
robot, not a musician. When people are played an A-B comparison
between a digital original and the same sound processed by the
best rendition of MP3, they hear the quality drop.
Click to expand...

I disagree. It's fine by me if you don't want to use MP3s. But for
others who read this, I would point out that it depends on the level
of MP3 compression selected. I assume the "best rendition of MP3"
means using 320 kbs mp3 encoding, using a high quality encoder. All
the blind tests I have seen show that even at 256 kbs (lower than
320), even highly trained listeners can rarely tell the difference,
and if they can, they choose the mp3 over the cd as often as the other
way around.

Terry
 
| I disagree. It's fine by me if you don't want to use MP3s. But
| for others who read this, I would point out that it depends on
| the level of MP3 compression selected. I assume the "best
| rendition of MP3" means using 320 kbs mp3 encoding, using a
| high quality encoder. All the blind tests I have seen show
| that even at 256 kbs (lower than 320), even highly trained
| listeners can rarely tell the difference, and if they can,
| they choose the mp3 over the cd as often as the other way
| around.
|
| Terry

Terry, what was the musical material used in the tests? And what
do you mean by "highly trained?"

Richard
 
Richard said:
| I disagree. It's fine by me if you don't want to use MP3s. But
| for others who read this, I would point out that it depends on
| the level of MP3 compression selected. I assume the "best
| rendition of MP3" means using 320 kbs mp3 encoding, using a
| high quality encoder. All the blind tests I have seen show
| that even at 256 kbs (lower than 320), even highly trained
| listeners can rarely tell the difference, and if they can,
| they choose the mp3 over the cd as often as the other way
| around.
|
| Terry

Terry, what was the musical material used in the tests? And what
do you mean by "highly trained?"
Click to expand...

The material varies all over. This issue is discussed at length in the
audio and mp3 newsgroups (with lots of strong opinions!), you may want
to do some lurking there. Google will turn up lots of blind tests (of
various quality, of course). You might also check out:

<http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?showforum=15>
<http://ff123.net/>
<http://www.geocities.com/altbinariessoundsmusicclassical/mp3test.html>

Terry
 
Back
Top