Re: OTSDJ?, and digital mixers

  • From: "Darrell Shandrow" <nu7i@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2007 11:52:23 -0700

Hi Stephen,

----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Guerra" <stephen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 11:44 AM
Subject: RE: OTSDJ?, and digital mixers

Where did you get it

Stephen A. Guerra
Assistive Technology Specialist
Independent Living Aids

200 Robbins Lane
Building A, Suite 100
Jericho, NY 11753
Phone: (516) 937-1848
 Fax: (516) 937-3906

-----Original Message-----
From: blindcasting-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blindcasting-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jerry Mader
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 1:22 PM
To: blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: OTSDJ?, and digital mixers

I use station playlist creator and studio.
Seems to work great for me.
I couldn't afford  the one you mention, so i went with a better priced
one. Payed 212 dollars here in the U.S Verry jaws friendly and it don't
take a long time to use either. Jerry
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Berrier" <jerry.berrier@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 10:14 AM
Subject: RE: OTSDJ?, and digital mixers

What's wrong with paying for something that is useful and that required a lot of hard work and time to produce? Sometimes I'm amazed at people's unwillingness to pay for software. If you
just cannot afford it, then that's understandable, but this sentiment
anger because somebody chooses to make a living producing good
therefore charges for it, I just don't understand it.
I'm assuming there's anger, based on the thinly veiled juvenile
the message I'm responding to.

Jerry Berrier
Shrewsbury, MA

-----Original Message-----
From: blindcasting-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:blindcasting-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richard Claypool
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 8:40 AM
To: blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: OTSDJ?, and digital mixers

f**k paying 100 bucks for otsdju.  But it is  nice piece of software.

If it  were like 30 or 40 bucks I might pay for it.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Shannon Reece" <bookworm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 10:29 PM
Subject: Re: OTSDJ?, and digital mixers

Peter, OTS DJ is a phenomenal, fantastic, brilliant, wonderful, hard,

frustrating, fabulous, irritating, lovely program! The learning curve is tough, I almost yanked out my hair learning it, but trust me, in my very very very humble opinion, if you're going to do a live

broadcast, Ots is the only way to go.
Several broadcasters on ACBRI, including me, use Ots, and again in my
extremely humble opinion, it sounds better than any other
program, unless that is, you're Bob Kanish, who can make Winamp do
because he's so good.
Now as to some other info re Ots, The Snowman has written some
Ots and they do help.  I understand there are also set files for
The address on the Web for info about and to purchase Ots is
You can be upset because rosebushes have thorns,
Or you can rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.
- Author Unknown

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Donahue" <pdonahue1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 6:51 PM
Subject: OTSDJ?, and digital mixers

Hello Richard and listers,

Sorry for asking so many questions, but I need to ask what is OTSDJ? I should also mention that I'm collecting this information for another one
my Web projects which will contain information about audio streaming

and which hardware and software blind people are using for live streaming and recording various events.

While I'm at it I'd be curious to know which digital mixers folks have used successfully for doing what I want to do. Is this bringing us back to
Boss and Roland, or are there other digital mixers blind folks can
successfully. Thanks again for the feedback.

Peter Donahue

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Claypool" <bellevue.bat@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: screen reader speech during streaming


You could pay around a hundred bucks and get otsdj, but that's about
only option.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Donahue" <pdonahue1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 06:23 PM
Subject: screen reader speech during streaming

> Hello Kevin and listers,
> This question is for those who do live streaming of programs > and
> events to the Web. I'm curious to know the best way to prevent > screen reader speech from going out over an audio stream when one > is in progress. One
> way
> I've heard to do this is to use a PC with two sound cards. One
> serves as a synthesizer for your screen reader an the other is > used to handle the audio stream. Is there another way to stream > events using a laptop while being able to answer e-mail messages > from listeners without the
> audio from your screen reader being heard by them, and without the

> need
> for
> an additional laptop for handling the e-mail correspondence or an
> additional
> sound card in your PC? I'm still exploring my options in search of
> best
> fit for me and my budget. Thanks again for your thoughts.
> Peter Donahue
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kevin Reeves" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 4:37 PM
> Subject: Re: mixers and workstations
> I really think the laptop is the best bet with a digital or analog

> mixer because it will give you speech feedback all the way and > there's no chance
> for error due to having no speech feedback.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cameron Strife" <cameron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 4:33 PM
> Subject: RE: mixers and workstations
>> You'd be much better off using a laptop with sonar. Use that >> along
>> something like the Alesis multi mix 12 USB.  It's an analog mixer

>> but allows you to stream up to 12 independent channels of audio >> to sonar. Once you've recorded in sonar, you can do all your >> editing and mixing etc then burn to CD.
>> I have the alesis multi mix 16 firewire and ti's very accessible.
>> If you want more info, write me off list.
>> Thanks,
>> Cameron.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: blindcasting-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> [mailto:blindcasting-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Peter >> Donahue
>> Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 10:21 PM
>> To: blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: mixers and workstations
>> Good evening everyone,
>> In the next few months I plan to purchase a mixer/digital >> workstation to permit me to digitally record meeting and other >> live events for posting
>> to
>> various Web sites I'm responsible for maintaining. Some of these
>> actual events and others will be digitizing past meetings and >> functions originally recorded on audio cassette. Going the PC >> with an analog
>> is
>> one route, but if I can find an accessible workstation that would

>> allow me
>> to do this without the need for a PC except when I live stream
>> convention
>> events for various groups being able to use one device for
>> editing, and burning them to a CD, or saving them on a compact
>> card
>> for further editing with a digital-audio editor, and eventual
>> archiving
>> or
>> posting to a Web site or a podcast.
>> Several blind people I know who do this recommended the >> Bharenger analog mixer for connecting multiple devices to a >> single input source in order
>> to
>> send audio to a PC for further processing. In the digital
>> department so far I've tried the Boss BR-900  which is a very
>> unit; especially if you're a musician. I plan to further >> test-drive
>> unit to be sure it's accessible and to confirm that this would be

>> a right fit for me and that it will meet my needs. The other unit

>> in consideration
>> is the RolandCD-2 digital workstation.
>>    Interestingly enough both the BR-900 and the CD-2 sell for the
>> same
>> price through our local Roland and Boss dealer here in town, but
>> music production capability and the other does not. Fortunately
>> Roland
>> does
>> not lock their .PDF User documentation so I was able to download
>> successfully convert the owners manuals for both devices to text.
>> Guess
>> I
>> need to read through each one and see which one has the exact >> features
>> need. For example I'm impress with the on-board music production >> capabilities of the BR-900, but will gladly trade it for a higher
>> of
>> audio processing capabilities such as noise reduction, accoustic
>> miror
>> functions, effects, etc. I'd be curious to hear if anyone has
>> the
>> above-mentioned units and how usable by a blind person they are
>> recording and processing digital audio. Any other suggestions for
>> mixers and workstations will also be much appreciated.   I'll
>> feedback. Best wishes for a great new year.
>> Peter Donahue
>> --
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.1/611 - Release Date: >> 12/31/2006 12:47 PM

__________ NOD32 1949 (20061230) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.

__________ NOD32 1950 (20061231) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.

Other related posts: