[bct] Re: Recorders for the blind

  • From: "Don Barrett" <donter@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 21:12:51 -0500

That brings up another issue; will the new NLS books work on the bookport,
or is it still too early to know?

Don
 

-----Original Message-----
From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Keith Creasy
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 8:42 PM
To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bct] Re: Recorders for the blind

Hi, just a word about this.
 
NLS is considering formats other than MP3 that provide better compression
for spoken-word recordings so future NLS books willbe be on flash cards, but
may not be MP3.
 
K
 
 

        ----- Original Message ----- 
        From: Phil Vlasak <mailto:phil@xxxxxxxxxxxx>  
        To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
        Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 1:39 PM
        Subject: [bct] Re: Recorders for the blind
        
        
        Hi Folks,
        Since the US Government will soon be putting talking books on memory
chips, it would seem that APH is developing something to play them with.
         I would hope they are also developing something that will record
onto those chips in the same format which I suspect is MP3.
        This is what they did with the HandiCassette, in allowing the public
to buy a four track cassette recorder.
        It does not take too much speculation that the Bookport could be
adapted to do these things easier than developing a totally new device.
         

                ----- Original Message ----- 
                From: Kai <mailto:kaixiong@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>  
                To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
                Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 12:32 PM
                Subject: -=Spam=- [bct] Re: Recorders for the blind
                
                
                Greetings Neal et al.
                 
                Recording in wav is really nice, but I think being able to
record with mp3-encoding on the fly would be awesome. What would be nice
would be the ability to alter the compression rates.
                If you're doing a bunch of sound seeing tours, choose
128KBPS compression. You'll be able to fit quite a lot of recordings into
one card. That means you can cover an entire vacation with one, possibly two
2GB/4GB CF cards.
                Recording a bunch of orchestral environments? Set the unit
to compress its recordings at a 192/224/256KBPS rate, which will preserve
all those important nuances.
                 
                Kai
                 
                -----Original Message-----
                From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Neal Ewers
                Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 9:22 AM
                To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
                Subject: [bct] Re: Recorders for the blind
                
                
                Sam, recording a wave file at a sampling rate of 44100 and
16 bit on the 4 GB flash card will give you about 6 hours of recording time.
And that is in stereo.  I don't think that is too shabby for a recording
that is totally uncompressed.  In addition, if you dropped the sampling rate
by half, you could still get a better than MP3 quality recording and get
twice the time.  Plus, unlike the Olympus recorders, you can always have
more than one flash card.  Just slip one out and put in another one until
you can get back to your computer to unload the files.
                 
                 
                Neal
                 
                 

                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sam Bushman
                        Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 10:39 AM
                        To: BlindCoolTech Email List
                        Subject: [bct] Recorders for the blind
                        
                        
                        Hi Guys,
                         
                        Just a few thoughts that may help on the recorder
issue.
                         
                        I agree that there are many different uses for the
recorders and that will detail what brand / feature set is best.
                        But, I think that accessibility is the key thing we
all need.
                        Meaning that if a recorder is accessible but, not
best suited to the job at hand ... I may live with it because at least I can
operate the dang thing.
                        I don't think we can develop a recorder for the
blind because we all have different wants and expectations for the  device
that may conflict.
                        Some have mentioned .wav files but, I personally
don't think that will work well.
                        First they are large and you will lose lots of
record time.
                        But, this is not about my personal opinion on a
feature set for a digital recorder for the blind.
                         
                        I think that Larry has done is best to identify a
recorder that is the best all around for the blind at this time.
                        Meaning that it's accessible and has the main basic
feature set we all need.
                        Olympus has shown over time to have the beeps we
need to at least run the things in the first place.
                        I think that if we try to work with Olympus to
either create a version for us or add a few more accessibility details that
would help us that would be great.
                        I also suggest that we all spend more time finding
out why the hum on the 320.
                        Is it the mics that are being used, is it other
devices that are close by causing interference, is it truly the recorder?
                        I don't have these answers yet but, if we could
eliminate the hum that would go a long way.
                        Reviewing other devices and trying to work with
other device  makers also is a great idea.
                        If we develop our own recorder I fear that it will
cost an arm and a leg and be very hard to repair.
                         
                        Thanks for listening ... all ideas welcome.
                        Sam
                         



Other related posts: