Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!agate!bionet!apple!rutgers!njin!princeton!phoenix!zimerman From: zimerman@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Jacob Ben-david Zimmerman) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: Lousy input sound Message-ID: <4301@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> Date: 7 Nov 88 19:16:08 GMT References: <25795@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <898@accelerator> <8711@spl1.UUCP> Reply-To: zimerman@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Jacob Ben-david Zimmerman) Organization: Princeton University, NJ Lines: 28 In article <8711@spl1.UUCP> ..!uunet!ircam!mf writes: >In article <898@accelerator> Michael S. Czeiszperger writes: >> (Ok, so the input sound quality is so terrible >>at 8 bits that you'd have to buy an A/D converter anyway, but >>nothings perfect > >This may be a conscious choice of NeXT due to the fact that writing to the disk >is probably *much* slower than reading from it. Hence, >sustaining 44.1Khz of stereo (say) is much more feasible as >output (disk reads) than on input. If this is indeed the case, the limit >is inherent to the disk(s) and buying a good A/D might not help at all. ...okay, ignorant question here...I read earlier on that during writes, the optidrive does TWO passes, one to zero the fields, and one to write in the 'one' state bits. Now, since it has to do two passes and needs to therefore know how big the files is gonna be, can it handle real-time contintuous 16-bit input? Or will its having to go back twice choke it up? Could a rountine be written that used the main RAM as a buffer while it was doing its double write? Would it be fast enough to get everything written to disc AND 'catch up' before the RAM was consumed? -curious -JBZimmerman! DISCLAIMER:The opinions of Princeton University in no way reflect my own. Any resemblance is purely coincidental. -- ___________ | "A flute with no holes is not a flute. A donut || | with no holes is a danish." || ||acob Zimmerman!+> INTERNET === | BITnet