Instead of removing VHQ from the choices, why not test the latest version of
the LAME encoder to see if they've possibly addressed and fixed the problem
since the problem is within the encoder, and not SR? The huge amount of
time that particular LAME version takes with VHQ even happens when using
SR's version with CDEX and other programs.
Blessings,
Brian
I would skip Very High Quality; it really is a waist of time. I should probably remove it from the choices; all it does is frustrate people. Just use high quality, and you should get comparable performance.
David.Tanner@xxxxxxxxxxx 06/16/06 12:42PM >>>My guess is that for saving a WAV file the saving time will be close to the same. However, if you are talking about exporting to MP3 I would say that SR is considerably slower.
David Tanner Rehabilitation Program Specialist 3 Assistive Technology Specialist Assistive Technology Department MN State Services f/t Blind Office- 651-642-0795 Cell- 651-270-2233 Skype name: dtat100
neal.ewers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 6/16/2006 11:24 AM >>>Rob, you said, "I wonder what else we do that people need that they don't realize they have."
Well, as Brian pointed out to me yesterday and I can certainly verify it, SR opens in a mere fraction of the time it takes Sound Forge to open. I know, it's not a real big issue unless you do as much editing as I do, but it can really save some time.
I'm also just about to do another speed test between SF and SR. I always used to save my MP3 files in SF because I could use their high quality save. Well, SR has the same thing. So, here goes the test. An hour long file sampled at 44100 and 16 bits saved in MP3 in both SF and SR. And I'll pick something whose quality is quite high and see if I can tell any difference in that as well. Of course, file size might tell me something too. I wonder if they will be the same? Sure, and I didn't have anything else to do today?
Neal
-----Original Message----- From: studiorecorder-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:studiorecorder-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ROB MEREDITH Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 10:54 AM To: studiorecorder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [studiorecorder] Re: Wow! I didn't know I could do that
You know Neal, we have never disallowed undo after saves. I can't imagine doing it any other way. Yeah, saves take longer because of this in some situations. But with background saves, this is much less of an issue. You can work on a document all day, and as long as you don't close it, you can undo all at the end of the day, save the original somewhere else, redo all, and keep right on working!
I wonder what else we do that people need that they don't realize they have.
Rob Meredith
neal.ewers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 06/16/06 10:59AM >>>I know, I'm breaking my rule about not properly naming the subject.
I didn't realize until yesterday that even after I save a file, I can go back and undo changes I have made as long as the file is still open. I've been complaining that Sound Forge took this out of version 8. Well, it would appear that this is yet another reason to use SR. Can Direct X plug in support be far behind.
Oh, was that just a bit too subtle?
Thanks Rob.
Neal Ewers Ravenswood Productions Local phone: 608-277-1995 Toll Free: 888-544-8332 Email: neal.ewers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.ravenswood.org <http://www.ravenswood.org/>
