Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Johannes Kroll <jkroll@...>, len@ovenwerks.net <len@...>
Cc: linux audio users <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 - 1:16 pm

--Alternative__boundary__1357650989716
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

WRT use cases:

I am a record-all-rehearsals guy. A hackable/extendable box would fuel my=
urge to solder and help me get rid of the lengthy setup routine I go throu=
gh before every rehearsal.

No, wait, I actually tend to forget recording because of the hassle...

I'd love to build something like the time machine jack client, only in hard=
ware. 

- Burkhard

-- please excuse top posting from my crappy old Palm Pre
Johannes Kroll <jkroll@lavabit.com> schrieb am 07.01.2013 18:42:=20

On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 08:48:35 -0800

"Len Ovens" <len@ovenwerks.net> wrote:

>=20

> On Sun, January 6, 2013 5:57 am, Johannes Kroll wrote:

> > Hi all!

> >

> > This is kind of off-topic here but I thought if there is such a=
thing,

> > some of you guys might know.

> >

> > I'm looking for an audio recorder where the firmware and/or the

> > hardware is hackable. Ideally, this would be similar to the Tascam

> > DR-05 in price and features, but with free/libre firmware and har=
dware.

> > Maybe someone knows of such a project?

> >

> > Alternatively, is any of the "closed" devices such as the Tascam=
DR-XX

> > known to have modifiable firmware?

>=20

> The price point would be the hard part. Any of the open hardware proje=
cts

> I have seen are more expensive than the closed projects, just because=
they

> are small and don't have the price cuts of large scale manufacture. The

> Open Moco is a great example in the smart phone world (one of the few=
that

> got to a usable/buyable product). And may actually work for you... tho=
ugh

> I don't know that it has stereo in.

>=20

> What I would suggest is to take something like the dr ($60 is cheap)=
for

> the case, mics and display and add one of the small open general purpo=
se

> mother boards that are around. The gumstix or something similar would=
fit

> the case... there may even be an atom based board that would fit....=
or

> would fit in a box not much bigger. The question would be how much tim=
e do

> you personally want to send hacking? (hardware hacking) How much can=
you

> spend? The computer swapout alone would more than double the price.

>=20

> As for hacking the unit itself, the first question is why. Not so much=
why

> you want to, but why would others want to. Before something gets the

> firm/software hacked there generally needs to be a reason at least a=
few

> people want to do so. Some extra functionality that is obvious (the sm=
art

> phone has so much locked functionality it is frustrating so there are=
lots

> of hacks). The dr already seems to me to anything I would think of usi=
ng

> it for,

As to why, I can think of a few things:

- triggering recording at fixed time intervals, or based on some audio

event like raised volume, or based on some external event, e. g. for

syncing to a video camera

- implementing USB audio so the device can be used as an external

microphone. The recorders I've seen only output an analog signal.

- changing recording parameters like custom sampling rates or different

encodings. Commercial ones mostly do uncompressed WAV or MP3, but no

lossless compression like FLAC for example.

Other people probably have other ideas...

Last not least, I simply like the idea of being in control of hardware

I buy.

As to price: the DSO nano is a free/open source oscilloscope which

isn't expensive at all, so building free and inexpensive hardware is

possible. Actually, using the DSO nano as a base could be a good

start for a recorder, it has A/D converters, mass storage and

everything... Just no mics.

_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-user mailing list

Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user

--Alternative__boundary__1357650989716
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

WRT use cases:I am a record-all-rehearsals guy. A hackable/extendab=
le box would fuel my urge to solder and help me get rid of the lengthy setu=
p routine I go through before every rehearsal.No, wait, I actually=
tend to forget recording because of the hassle...I'd love to build=
something like the time machine jack client, only in hardware. - Burkhard-- please excuse top posting from=
my crappy old Palm PreJ=
ohannes Kroll <jkroll@lavabit.com> schrieb am 07.01.2013 18:42: <=
br>On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 08:48:35 -0800
"Len Ovens" <len@ovenwerks.net> wrote:

>=20

a thing,
the
Tascam
hardware.
cam DR-XX
projects
use they
=2E The
few that
though
p) for
purpose
uld fit
=2E. or
time do
can you
much why
the
a few
e smart
are lots
using

As to why, I can think of a few things:

- triggering recording at fixed time intervals, or based on some audio
event like raised volume, or based on some external event, e. g. for
syncing to a video camera
- implementing USB audio so the device can be used as an external
microphone. The recorders I've seen only output an analog signal.
- changing recording parameters like custom sampling rates or different
encodings. Commercial ones mostly do uncompressed WAV or MP3, but no
lossless compression like FLAC for example.

Other people probably have other ideas...

Last not least, I simply like the idea of being in control of hardware
I buy.

As to price: the DSO nano is a free/open source oscilloscope which
isn't expensive at all, so building free and inexpensive hardware is
possible. Actually, using the DSO nano as a base could be a good
start for a recorder, it has A/D converters, mass storage and
everything... Just no mics.

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user

--Alternative__boundary__1357650989716--

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Johannes Kroll, (Sun Jan 6, 1:58 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Johannes Kroll, (Wed Jan 9, 8:47 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Karl Hammar, (Thu Jan 10, 12:29 am)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Len Ovens, (Sun Jan 6, 4:48 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Johannes Kroll, (Mon Jan 7, 5:42 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Len Ovens, (Wed Jan 9, 4:46 am)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Alf Haakon Lund, (Wed Jan 9, 5:39 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Len Ovens, (Wed Jan 9, 9:24 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, david, (Thu Jan 10, 6:51 am)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Burkhard Woelfel, (Tue Jan 8, 1:16 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, wes schreiner, (Tue Jan 8, 9:36 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Burkhard Woelfel, (Wed Jan 9, 8:27 am)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Folderol, (Tue Jan 8, 9:54 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, wes schreiner, (Tue Jan 8, 10:10 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Folderol, (Tue Jan 8, 10:30 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Len Ovens, (Mon Jan 7, 10:14 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, mark hadman, (Mon Jan 7, 11:33 pm)
Re: [LAU] [OT] Open Source Portable Recorder?, Alf Haakon Lund, (Tue Jan 8, 5:22 pm)