Without getting too specific I am trying to find a way to record a large number of inputs (10ish) for a long amount of time (2hours-ish). Eventually I run out of memory (this basically goes without saying?) and so I want to find a simple way to record somewhat simultaneously to the hard drive.
During the time frame of the recordings I wont need to play back any of the files I write to the drive.
The only idea I can think of right now would be essentially this:
two buffer~ objects with only one recording at a time. When the first one is basically done, the second one would start and the first one would write. The name of each file would be determined by a counter. They could likely leapfrog like this for quite some time.
If I do this, how long of a buffer between buffer~ objects do you think I would need? 10ms? Trial and error?
If this is a bad idea, how can I improve it?
Are there any externals that exist for this purpose which would save me the time?
Note: someone might say that I should just send the signals into a recording program but to that I say: that isn’t going to happen.
> During the time frame of the recordings I wont need to play back any of the files I write to the drive.
Why not use sfrecord~? (I must say I never used it for long recordings.)
C74 RSS Feed | © Copyright Cycling '74