Are there simple line-powered MP3 recorders?

[Michael A. Terrell]

Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Tue, 04 Nov 2008 10:52:56 -0800) it happened Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in
lS0Qk.3807$hc1.2980@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com>:

This is becoming the obvious embedded RTLinux PC project. Select your
PC104 form factor stuff, stir in the right Linux stuff and boom, it
just works.


Well, we just ordered a top-of-the-line Marantz recorder. Even easier:
Plug it in, turn it on, press "REC" -> works.

Yes, but where is the challenge?

Remembering WHEN to press "REC". ;-)


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm


There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy.

 

[Charlie E.]

On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 20:52:11 -0800, JosephKK <quiettechblue@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 09:26:29 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Charlie E. wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 14:31:21 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

For our church we are looking for mains-powered (no batteries) MP3
recorders that can record up to 1.5hrs, preferably onto a USB stick. As
simple as possible, like on/off, record, stop.

I have looked around the web and only found gear from Roland which had
mixing functions and stuff that makes it too complicated, or Intempo
which is more geared towards recording from radio channels and would
probably need some hack to connect to our mixer. If this costs a few
hundred Dollars that's ok but it cannot be complicated with teeny LCD
screens and menus. In essence I'd have to be able to call someone and
say "Turns this dark gray gizmo in the left corner on and hit the red
record button", not explain a lengthy menu tree where they need a
magnifier just to see it.

IOW what we need is a cassette recorder sans cassettes, that records
onto USB. Any ideas?

Jeorge,
We used a pro gear Tascam recorder for our last project, but it used
compact flash, not USB flash, and is in the $900 range. I like your
idea, though, and would like to buy it as well. Maybe it is time to
design one!


Do you remember the Tascam model? Flash isn't ideal but a lot better
than CD or having to plug the whole device into a PC. That is because a
church member does the spooling onto the web from home and would then
have to drive back to church to return the unit.

This is becoming the obvious embedded RTLinux PC project. Select your
PC104 form factor stuff, stir in the right Linux stuff and boom, it
just works.

No, too complicated. Instead, it is a USB enabled PIC project, with
an MP3 encoder/decoder chip to do the heavy lifting, and a decent
front end with mike/line inputs and line outputs (balanced and
unbalanced...)

Charlie

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Tue, 04 Nov 2008 12:54:10 -0800) it happened Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in
<%D2Qk.6335$ZP4.6267@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com>:

Besides a few client projects I am trying to migrate to gEDA. Got it
running but the symbol editing turns out to be a real bear.

Wow I admire you.
In spite of all the related posting here about geda, and I even downloaded
a complete CD some years ago with a distro + geda, I never got it to work...

Plus
learning all the Linux-speak.

Many years ago, say 15 or so, kernel 0.9X, I had a command prompt,
and the only help was a book I bought about Unix in the eighties.

Then the file structure... X11, but it was so much better then DOS
with win3.1 on top, and it had a free compiler, great.
And no memory limits like DOS, and great networking.

But Unix, or Linux, is a never ending learning process.

I do use the 'PCB' program sometimes, very neat thing.

 

[Rich Grise]

On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 12:52:14 -0800, Joerg wrote:

Joel Koltner wrote:
"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:lS0Qk.3807$hc1.2980@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
Well, we just ordered a top-of-the-line Marantz recorder. Even easier:
Plug it in, turn it on, press "REC" -> works.

When can we expect to hear the results of the new recorder on the web
site?


A few weeks maybe. Some wiring will have to be re-done and I as well as
our IT pro must to do that after work. Also, the old rack needs to be
re-built and so on. Not exactly a piece of cake.

Maybe not, but think of the satisfaction you'll get from a job well done.



Cheers!
Rich

 

[Joerg]

Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Tue, 04 Nov 2008 12:54:10 -0800) it happened Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in
%D2Qk.6335$ZP4.6267@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com>:

Besides a few client projects I am trying to migrate to gEDA. Got it
running but the symbol editing turns out to be a real bear.

Wow I admire you.
In spite of all the related posting here about geda, and I even downloaded
a complete CD some years ago with a distro + geda, I never got it to work...

Well, it does work. But a CAD program lives or dies with symbol editing
and that's where it gets a bit hokey. That is what I am working on now.
I have to migrate away from Eagle because they decided to not include a
hierarchical sheet structure in V5. So I am not going to upgrade. If
OrCad still had the robustness of SDT I'd go back there. But IME it
doesn't anymore.

I just hope this is going to be my last CAD system switch before I kick
the bucket. Because you start from zero every time, all new symbols to
edit, none of the old schematics are compatible, etc.

Plus
learning all the Linux-speak.

Many years ago, say 15 or so, kernel 0.9X, I had a command prompt,
and the only help was a book I bought about Unix in the eighties.

Then the file structure... X11, but it was so much better then DOS
with win3.1 on top, and it had a free compiler, great.
And no memory limits like DOS, and great networking.

I found the DOS file system to be much better and easier. And I ran my
last DOS in 5MB, with a multi-tasker roached onto it, mostly having
OrCad SDT, MS-Word, MS-Works, sometimes SPICE and some other stuff open
at the same time. Pretty much the same productivity as today sans the
Internet. Well, that was added later in the form of the Mosaic browser.

Today, for a similar productivity, I need >500MB.

But Unix, or Linux, is a never ending learning process.

I do use the 'PCB' program sometimes, very neat thing.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Joerg]

Rich Grise wrote:

On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 12:52:14 -0800, Joerg wrote:
Joel Koltner wrote:
"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:lS0Qk.3807$hc1.2980@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
Well, we just ordered a top-of-the-line Marantz recorder. Even easier:
Plug it in, turn it on, press "REC" -> works.
When can we expect to hear the results of the new recorder on the web
site?


A few weeks maybe. Some wiring will have to be re-done and I as well as
our IT pro must to do that after work. Also, the old rack needs to be
re-built and so on. Not exactly a piece of cake.

Maybe not, but think of the satisfaction you'll get from a job well done.

This is at church so we aren't after worldly recognition or self-pride

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Joel Koltner]

Say Joerg,

Did you take a look a Kicad? If so, what did you think?

---Joel

 

[Joerg]

Joel Koltner wrote:

Say Joerg,

Did you take a look a Kicad? If so, what did you think?

No, I haven't. One reason I tried gEDA is because it seems to have a
larger group of followers. I am not totally convinced yet because it
leans heavily on quite intricate command line action. But I want to give
it a shot. Ran into a few serious limitations already, like with
multi-section parts (U1A, U1B, etc). It does not seem to handle those
very well. So who knows ...

Have you tried it?

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Joerg]

Joel Koltner wrote:

Say Joerg,

Did you take a look a Kicad? If so, what did you think?

Forgot to mention, the other reason why I tried gEDA first was that I
read about KiCad netlist problems with the PADS format and my layouter
uses PADS. Don't want to take chances there, but it may have been fixed
by now.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:05:29 -0800) it happened Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in
<Yn5Qk.4739$D32.2636@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com>:

Rich Grise wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 12:52:14 -0800, Joerg wrote:
Joel Koltner wrote:
"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:lS0Qk.3807$hc1.2980@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
Well, we just ordered a top-of-the-line Marantz recorder. Even easier:
Plug it in, turn it on, press "REC" -> works.
When can we expect to hear the results of the new recorder on the web
site?


A few weeks maybe. Some wiring will have to be re-done and I as well as
our IT pro must to do that after work. Also, the old rack needs to be
re-built and so on. Not exactly a piece of cake.

Maybe not, but think of the satisfaction you'll get from a job well done.




This is at church so we aren't after worldly recognition or self-pride

When you get to heaven's gate, and Petrus says:
'God is looking for somebody who knows how to do this audio thingy in 368 board',
then there is a possibility they send you back if you do not have the experience...

 

[Joel Koltner]

Hi Joerg,

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:Be9Qk.5621$x%.2893@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...

Have you tried it?

No, I haven't, although I keep meaning to one of these days. From what I can
tell, although it might not be as powerful as gEDA overall, it's somewhat more
finished/polished at this point (although perhaps not with PADS netlists!).
Both definitely seem mature enough that people are making real boards with
them.

---Joel

 

[Joerg]

Joel Koltner wrote:

Hi Joerg,

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:Be9Qk.5621$x%.2893@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
Have you tried it?

No, I haven't, although I keep meaning to one of these days. From what I can
tell, although it might not be as powerful as gEDA overall, it's somewhat more
finished/polished at this point (although perhaps not with PADS netlists!).
Both definitely seem mature enough that people are making real boards with
them.

Yes, but meantime I ran into some hard snags with gEDA so I am going to
try KiCad as well. Plus I don't like having to close everything and run
the command line for proper renumbering, adding a sheet etc.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Joerg]

Joel Koltner wrote:

Hi Joerg,

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:Be9Qk.5621$x%.2893@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
Have you tried it?

No, I haven't, although I keep meaning to one of these days. From what I can
tell, although it might not be as powerful as gEDA overall, it's somewhat more
finished/polished at this point (although perhaps not with PADS netlists!).
Both definitely seem mature enough that people are making real boards with
them.

So, now I did try KiCad and I must say I like it a lot. It's like
driving a big old Chevy, all the time you discover a new button or
feature. Handles nicely from the GUI console, although it's a bit
overloaded with hard-to-remember pictograms or icons. Some menus are a
bit far down like that to change a part value but I guess keyoard
shortcuts are possible. So I'll check that CAD program out some more.

Someone even wrote a converter for Eagle schematics but that blew up on
me. Ok, it can't all be paradise and when switching CAD programs nothing
is usually going to cross that road along with you. But at least some
libraries could be converted. Needing heavy clean-up, but still. That's
why I really want to make this switch stick, don't want to do it again.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Joel Koltner]

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:LLrQk.6961$be.6214@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...

So, now I did try KiCad and I must say I like it a lot.

Cool, thanks for the update/review.

Someone even wrote a converter for Eagle schematics but that blew up on me.

Schematic converters being 100% usable/correct seems notoroiously uncommon...
presumably due to the lack of documentation (of the file format to be
imported), in many cases, combined with the relatively small market demand.

---Joel

 

[Joerg]

Joel Koltner wrote:

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:LLrQk.6961$be.6214@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
So, now I did try KiCad and I must say I like it a lot.

Cool, thanks for the update/review.

Someone even wrote a converter for Eagle schematics but that blew up on me.

Another upside is it's Windows-based so you don't have that dreaded "you
are not authorized to write to this folder" behavior of Linux. Meaning I
can place my libs where they belong, in the lib directory.

Schematic converters being 100% usable/correct seems notoroiously uncommon...
presumably due to the lack of documentation (of the file format to be
imported), in many cases, combined with the relatively small market demand.

I'll try that again if I have my custom libs converted. Problem is:
Every schematic editor names files *.sch. So it's hard to decipher which
file was from which CAD system. Only if you go by date, and even then
sometimes not because you may have to massage an old file with the old CAD.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Phil Hobbs]

Joerg wrote:

Joel Koltner wrote:
"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:LLrQk.6961$be.6214@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
So, now I did try KiCad and I must say I like it a lot.

Cool, thanks for the update/review.

Someone even wrote a converter for Eagle schematics but that blew up
on me.


Another upside is it's Windows-based so you don't have that dreaded "you
are not authorized to write to this folder" behavior of Linux. Meaning I
can place my libs where they belong, in the lib directory.

I have much worse problems with Windows in this regard. In Linux, I can
always say 'sudo' and do whatever I need to, whereas the Windows
security model is complicated and (to me) almost entirely opaque.
Unix-style OSes are good at doing what they're told--they know that root
is The Boss.

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs

 

[JosephKK]

On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 10:52:56 -0800, Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

JosephKK wrote:
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 09:26:29 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Charlie E. wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 14:31:21 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

For our church we are looking for mains-powered (no batteries) MP3
recorders that can record up to 1.5hrs, preferably onto a USB stick. As
simple as possible, like on/off, record, stop.

I have looked around the web and only found gear from Roland which had
mixing functions and stuff that makes it too complicated, or Intempo
which is more geared towards recording from radio channels and would
probably need some hack to connect to our mixer. If this costs a few
hundred Dollars that's ok but it cannot be complicated with teeny LCD
screens and menus. In essence I'd have to be able to call someone and
say "Turns this dark gray gizmo in the left corner on and hit the red
record button", not explain a lengthy menu tree where they need a
magnifier just to see it.

IOW what we need is a cassette recorder sans cassettes, that records
onto USB. Any ideas?
Jeorge,
We used a pro gear Tascam recorder for our last project, but it used
compact flash, not USB flash, and is in the $900 range. I like your
idea, though, and would like to buy it as well. Maybe it is time to
design one!

Do you remember the Tascam model? Flash isn't ideal but a lot better
than CD or having to plug the whole device into a PC. That is because a
church member does the spooling onto the web from home and would then
have to drive back to church to return the unit.

This is becoming the obvious embedded RTLinux PC project. Select your
PC104 form factor stuff, stir in the right Linux stuff and boom, it
just works.


Well, we just ordered a top-of-the-line Marantz recorder. Even easier:
Plug it in, turn it on, press "REC" -> works.

And i had thought that Marantz had gone out of business long ago.
Maybe this is a "logo / brand name" resurrection.

 

[JosephKK]

On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:05:29 -0800, Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 12:52:14 -0800, Joerg wrote:
Joel Koltner wrote:
"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:lS0Qk.3807$hc1.2980@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
Well, we just ordered a top-of-the-line Marantz recorder. Even easier:
Plug it in, turn it on, press "REC" -> works.
When can we expect to hear the results of the new recorder on the web
site?


A few weeks maybe. Some wiring will have to be re-done and I as well as
our IT pro must to do that after work. Also, the old rack needs to be
re-built and so on. Not exactly a piece of cake.

Maybe not, but think of the satisfaction you'll get from a job well done.




This is at church so we aren't after worldly recognition or self-pride

So where did the money come from for the top of the line Marantz?

 

[JosephKK]

On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 12:54:10 -0800, Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Tue, 04 Nov 2008 10:52:56 -0800) it happened Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in
lS0Qk.3807$hc1.2980@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com>:

This is becoming the obvious embedded RTLinux PC project. Select your
PC104 form factor stuff, stir in the right Linux stuff and boom, it
just works.

Well, we just ordered a top-of-the-line Marantz recorder. Even easier:
Plug it in, turn it on, press "REC" -> works.

Yes, but where is the challenge?


Right now I don't need any more challenges

Besides a few client projects I am trying to migrate to gEDA. Got it
running but the symbol editing turns out to be a real bear. Plus
learning all the Linux-speak.

You are in exactly the right place to help me. I have yet to get gEDA
running enough to even begin schematic entry. How did you do it? On
what underlying variant? Oh hell, you can read headers, talk to me.

 

[Joel Koltner]

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:m0tQk.3071$8_3.2418@flpi147.ffdc.sbc.com...

Another upside is it's Windows-based so you don't have that dreaded "you are
not authorized to write to this folder" behavior of Linux.

Hey, go join a big company and you can have that problem on Windows too.

Meaning I can place my libs where they belong, in the lib directory.

You probably know this, but the Linux philosophy is that you place all "your
own" stuff somewhere in your home directory (e.g., ~joerg) where you do have
full read/write/execute permissions by default... and they figure that if
you're trying to do something "system wide" (e.g., make a /lib), you should
spend the time to "chmod" the result to set the read/write permissions as the
the "system administrator" -- you! -- prefers.

I'll try that again if I have my custom libs converted. Problem is: Every
schematic editor names files *.sch. So it's hard to decipher which file was
from which CAD system. Only if you go by date, and even then sometimes not
because you may have to massage an old file with the old CAD.

Agreed, that is a bit of a pain. If you open up the files in a text editor
(possibly set to binary mode), is it readily obvious where each file came
from? If so, it wouldn't be too difficult to write a small script to loop
through the files, take a look inside, and then rename them as, e.g.,
*.eagle_sch or *.kicad_sch or whatever.

SI-Metrix names schematics something like *.sxsh (more-than-three-letters
extension), but unfortunately the old DOS three-letter limitation seems like
it's never going to go away with most software.

---Joel