How many tracks can be recorded on One Wave File

[Ringmaster]

I have many six hour reel to reel tapes, that I would like to process for my Media Center.

What is the maximum number of tracks (or length of time) that can be transferred to one Wave file for processing.

I prefer not to break the files down, into Song Lists, until I finish processing each track, of each Wave File.

The tapes were recorded, using Dolby "DBX" Professional Noise Reduction; also, some of the tapes were recorded on special tapes made for "EE" ('m not really sure what "EE" means, other than it stood for "Extra Efficency"); however, I did not do too many of these, because with the (special) TDK tapes, I experienced too many "drop-outs".

I suspect that I should use the same "Play-back" settings that was used to make the original recordings.

Do you have any suggestions as to which Filters I should use either during the transfer; or after the tapes are transferred to "DC6-Live"

This will be my Winter time job.

[Dan McDonald]

Hey Ringmaster -

I am pretty certain Windows file limitations are by size, not length of time, so the length is determined by the quality of the transfer.

I am recording everything at 24-bit, 96 kHz at this time. Which results in big files. I think the manual has a size/time chart in it.

I always prefer not to do any filtering until it is all recorded. Of course, if you can do things ahead of time to reduce noise, that will work out better (e.g., proper grounding, etc.).

I think that anytime you can play back with the same settings as recording, you are much better off than trying to reproduce the settings through software.

Dan

[Ringmaster]

I pretty much do the same as you; however, I did not know that Windows limited the file size, I thought DC6 had file limitations; guess I'll have to get the book out.

I don't usually do any processing, until I get the file recorded; because, I still have the original wave file if I screw up.

The only thing I did, when these were recorded to tape, was to tweak the eq.; I think I can do corrections with the 30-band eq. if necessary.

I still have the original records (mostly 45's), but I've never got my cataloging "off-the-ground".

[Craig Maier]

DC6 is limited to something like 2 Gbytes per file which is the windows limitation (as I recall). However, DC6 has a feature to automatically open a new file when recording files that will be greater than that limit. There should be something in the users guide about that feature.

[Geebster]

Actually the file size limit with FAT32 is just around 4GB, which some programs can use to it's limit and others can't. It's basically how the program talks to the files. It is not uncommon for many programs to balk at the 2 GB mark, but as Craig mentioned, Diamond Cut has an answer for this.

GB

[DJBohn]

also, some of the tapes were recorded on special tapes made for "EE" ('m not really sure what "EE" means, other than it stood for "Extra Efficency")

Hi Ringmaster.

The EE tapes and their special decks were the Reel-to-Reel version of Chromium Dioxide, but never got popular enough with consumers to continue for more than a couple of years. At that time, I was seriously hoping R2R's would catch up with Cassette technology. I wanted a R2R that would take Pure Metal tape formulations and utilize the Dolby HX-Pro Headroom Extension circuitry! That combination would have given unbelievable treble extension on R2R's even at slow speeds. But thanks to the lack of consumer support, partly because cassettes were so much easier to use, those technical advances never went into that direction. Good luck with your restorations anyway though!

[Ringmaster]

DJBohn,

I had many "drop-outs" using the type "EE" tapes; in fact I returned quite a few to TDK for replacement, and the performance on these was no better; maybe there were problems with the "Chromium Dioxide" adhereing to the backing material.

I know I read somewhere about wave file size limitations, but I still can't find it. These are tapes of 45's, that I will process at 44.1 kHz, 16-bit. I'm a little reluctant to let the system create new files, because I don't know what happens to the track being recorded when the new file is created....does it create create "drop-outs" when a file is created in the middle of a track....how are the new files named; I kind of feel I can have better control, if I create my own file names. I have cataloged my tapes by Hr:Min:Sec at the beginning of each track, along with the song title and artist. Maybe I'm making too much of this, but 6+ hours of music is a lot of work, if I screw up.

Maybe someone can clarify in my mind, what happens when a new file is automtically created, when the capacity of a file is exceeded.

[Geebster]

Your question about the particulars of the naming conventions and recording of large files can be found in the user's manual, starting on page 95.

It really doesn't matter what the theorical file size limitation of wave files are, because the size is totally dependent on the software in which the wavefile is created. Most software packages have a useful limit of around 2 GB, but this figure isn't carved in stone; sometimes it is slightly less. (There is at least one package that claims that their files need not be broken into pieces, even at the 4GB theorical file size limit, but I have not tested their claims)

I guess at this point, the best thing to do is to experiment a bit and see what works best for you. I tend to like to stop and start my recordings on my terms, not the software's, so I can break the file at the spot I want...but that is your call. If you don't stop it before the software's limitation kicks in, it will make the decision for you.

Craig's famous saying seems appropriate here: "One test is worth a thousand speculations"

GB

[Dan McDonald]

I have recorded numerous files over 2 gb and haven't had any problems with dropouts. I don't know what DC6/7 is doing, but whatever it is, it's seamless for the user.

Dan

[Ringmaster]

Geebster,

Thanks, I looked all thru the manual and index, and couldn't find it. I would never have thought of "Extended" Recording (I looked under everything else that I could imagine).

It will take awhile, but I will post my results, after I finish recording.

[Geebster]

Geebster,

Thanks, I looked all thru the manual and index, and couldn't find it. I would never have thought of "Extended" Recording (I looked under everything else that I could imagine).

It will take awhile, but I will post my results, after I finish recording.

Glad to be of help. Keep us posted of your results...

GB

[Ringmaster]

Well....

I finished recording my 6 hour and 20 minutes of tape into DC6. I ran my tape deck at 3-3/4" IPS, which was the recorded speed. After I finished, I realized I could have recorded at 7.5 IPS and converted the file to the correct speed. That would have cut the job almost in half.

The transfer went very well, and DC6 created files "Part 1" and "Part 2"; I thought the length of time would have created more files, than just 2.

It did split one of the Tracks, when "Part 2" was created. I am going to try two things, "copy & paste"; or re-record the track as a separate file, and see if I can remove the silence. I guess I would have to run the "CNF" after sampling the silence, before I can delete the silence (this will be interesting).

I have ordered DC7, and I don't think I will do any processing until I get that program installed.

I notice that some of the tracks contain more and louder "pops & clicks" than others (which is normal); this is going to make it a little difficult to process each "File" as a continuous process. I guess I'll have to play with the settings, to see if I can come up with one that will have the least effect on the better Track. I just thought of something: I wonder if I can process the entire file with higher "Scratch & Crackle" settings (being careful not to have much impact on the musical content), then reduce the settings along with using the EzClean filter, to be able to process complete files that contain various noise levels.

Does anyone have any experience in this area?

[Craig Maier]

Keep in mind that transferring at double speed will half the systems bandwidth at a given sampling rate. In other words, 20 kHz signals on the tape become 40 KHz and so a soundcard sampling at 44.1 KHz will remove anything above 22 KHz. So, when you slow the tape back down with the software, the effective bandwidth will be limited to 11 KHz. I do not know if that is a practical problem with the material that you have, but it is a consideration. If it is of concern and you still want to save time, consider sampling at 96 KHz to reduce the high frequency loss. Of course, that will make longer files (and therere more files) too. Make your speed conversions and restorations at 96 KHz and then you will not loose any audible information.

[Stephen]

Ringmaster,

Just a thought on how to approach the large file . First , if the quality of Sound is more important than the speed of the actual time spent processing , I would recommend taking each song on it's own , by high-lighting , and processing each song individually , one would think , that the results would be Worth the Time Spent.

I still have my Sony 2Track R2R , however , I don't use it much now. Back in the day tho , We made our tapes using a mixing board and TWO Turntables, the songs flowed like a Underground FM Station. lol With todays technology , what with play lists and such , Music flows from my computer to my stereo daily , and other peripherals.

A friend of mine hosts foosball tourneys at his house once a month , and I helped him get up and running with his set up , now , after months of ripping his CD collection to his external hard-drive , he simply makes a play list of music in Winamp , and plays it thru his stereo , what's so cool is that The Music flows for hours and hours without a hitch.

Hope this is of some help . . . Stephen

[Ringmaster]

Stephen,

I purchased a 750 Gb drive to use as my music center, and I am going to stay with the actual Wave files. The tape transfered the music as good as if I had recorded the original 45's. If you remember, the original 45's did not reach the same quality, as the LP's. At the time, I even purchased another 45 of the same song, and it too had the same defects. I suspect either the master was cut with too much volume; or, too many pressings were made from the Master.

I already have approx. 1200 CD tracks copied in the .WAV format. I have approximately 1200 songs on my drive, and I've only used 147 Gb. I am excited about getting these 45's processed, and transferred to my new drive. Many of the songs on the tape were never released on CD's. If/when I get all of these processed, I will send you a DVD Audio (might be "Blu-Ray" by then) if you are interested.

I thought I would try using the Impulse filters on the complete file first; if I find any distortion has been introduced, then I will go back to my original wave, and proceed as you suggested. In any event, I will do the individual tracks, for some final processing, like volume adjustment, Eq., etc. This depends on how good the DC7 filters work.

Like you, I have speakers all over the house, including three sets in my back yard. I used Low Voltage Lighting, 12 Ga. cable, for my outdoor speakers, figuring the cable would not be subject to UV degredation.
I have figured out how to connect my main Stereo system to my processor, and my Theatre system, so I can hear them in surround sound; and, I have also connected my Theatre system to my main Stereo, so I can record the music TV channels. You ought to see my basement ceiling, it looks like a cobweb of wires. When I "kick-the-bucket", nobody will ever figure out my wiring.

Based on Greg's post, I will probably stick to the original play-back speed when I transfer my other tapes.

I still use my R2R's, because through the speakers they sound excellent; however, my earphones say they need some additional processing. This tells me that I don't have to be such a Perfectionest when I process my recordings.

Good talking to you.