[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: Damon, Why CF ?



Kim Flint (03:02 AM 08.07.2000) wrote:

 >At 10:58 AM -0700 8/6/00, Mark Pulver wrote:
 >>PERILLE (05:27 AM 08.06.2000) wrote:
 >>
 >> >Example : 8 playback + 1 recording stereo channels @ 48khz/16bit
 >> >
 >> >SmartMedia :
 >> >- 32 READ bytes*70nsec + 4 RECORD bytes*660nsec = 4.9Ásec*48khz = 24% 
 >=>
 >> >PASS
 >> >
 >> >CompactFlash :
 >> >- 36 bytes*660nsec = 23.8Ásec*48khz = 114% => CRASH !
 >>
 >>Am I correct in seeing you outline a total of 9 stereo tracks here?
 >>
 >>Repeater is obviously laid out as a 4 track machine which we're 
 >_assuming_
 >>to be 4 stereo tracks. I don't think that Damon has said anything about
 >>sample rate, but I would be more likely to assume 44.1khz over 48khz.
 >
 >remember that a looper needs to be able to read and write simultaneusly 
 >for
 >all of its channels. You need to be able to playback while you
 >record/overdub new stuff. That doubles the bandwidth...

Ummm, given that Repeater only has a single stereo pair in, then I don't 
know that this is even possible in the context of that box. :)

And I don't think that Electrix is trying to corner the multitrack digital 
recorder world with Repeater, so ... ?

But, I did miss the issue of needing to overdub live. Thanks!

So in the context of Repeater and the original question of CF having 
enough 
bandwidth for the task at hand, we're looking at 5 stereo tracks.

Shorthanding my original math babble:

      20 bytes/sample *
        48000 samples per second  = 960000 bytes/second

Which is well within the spec'd bandwidth that PERILLE had posted.


Mark
_______________________________________________________
|_) _  _||\/| _  _ ._          evolutionary electronica
| \(/_(_||  |(_)(_)| |            www.redmoon-music.com
_______________________________________________________