[bct] Re: Recorders for the blind

  • From: "Keith Creasy" <keith537@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 20:41:41 -0500

MessageHi, 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.


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Phil Vlasak 
  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 
    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 


    -----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.


      -----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 
      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 
      I also suggest that we all spend more time finding out why the hum on the 
      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.

Other related posts: