On 10/23/07, Peter Hartmann <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yes, that is what I thought too. But I used the "-f dat" option while recording, which according to arecord's manpage should have given me 48000 Hz sampling rate. Based on this, I had converted au->flac by specifying 48KHz sampling rate.
In audacity I had to reduce the speed (Effects menu) by around 8% to make the audio replay properly ... this corresponds to 44.1 KHz. (If I forced audacity to 44.1 KHz from its GUI (lower left), it wouldn't play the track at all)
So the "-f dat" option of arecord actually recorded at 44.1 KHz and not at 48 KHz !?
Here is the exact command that I used:
$> arecord -D plug:hw:1 --duration=6300 --file-type au --format=dat --nonblock `date +%Y%m%d%H%m%S`.au
thanks,
->HS
Sounds like you recorded at 44.1 and are trying to playback at 48.
Have you tried changing the project sample rate in audacity? (at the
bottom left)
Peter
Yes, that is what I thought too. But I used the "-f dat" option while recording, which according to arecord's manpage should have given me 48000 Hz sampling rate. Based on this, I had converted au->flac by specifying 48KHz sampling rate.
In audacity I had to reduce the speed (Effects menu) by around 8% to make the audio replay properly ... this corresponds to 44.1 KHz. (If I forced audacity to 44.1 KHz from its GUI (lower left), it wouldn't play the track at all)
So the "-f dat" option of arecord actually recorded at 44.1 KHz and not at 48 KHz !?
Here is the exact command that I used:
$> arecord -D plug:hw:1 --duration=6300 --file-type au --format=dat --nonblock `date +%Y%m%d%H%m%S`.au
thanks,
->HS
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
