Martin Spott wrote:
When you take the 'philosophical' route, I agree - in almost _every_
situation it's a big fault to delete detail/resolution from your raw
data.
On the other hand: 8 kHz, 8 bit is not that bad. German ISDN telephony
has this resolution and to my impression the audible quality
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin Spott wrote:
On the other hand: 8 kHz, 8 bit is not that bad. German ISDN telephony
has this resolution and to my impression the audible quality is far
better than usual radio in an aircraft ;-)
ISDN uses the uLaw compression which means,
Jonathan Richards wrote:
On Thursday 12 Feb 2004 5:31 pm, David Luff wrote:
OK, here's some instructions on how to generate new ATC voices for
FlightGear. Hopefully this will make some sense to somebody, ask if it's
unclear.
snip
Two files are required for
snip
Anyone got any wavefile editor recommendations BTW? I used
CoolEdit (Windows) for the ATIS, but the trial period is now
long gone, and when I went to buy it I found the guy had sold
it to Adobe and the price had tripled. No thanks! I'm using
Audacity now, but it's not entirely
On Thursday 12 Feb 2004 5:31 pm, David Luff wrote:
OK, here's some instructions on how to generate new ATC voices for
FlightGear. Hopefully this will make some sense to somebody, ask if it's
unclear.
snip
Two files are required for each voice - a wave file containing the actual
sounds, and
Jonathan Richards writes:
In what units shall the time index be specified? The sampling rate sets a
resolution limit on the timing, so for 8kHz we only need 1/8000 sec = 125
microseconds precision, but if we have an ambition for higher rates, we need
more. [1]
In reality, radio comms
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 21:05:25 +, David Luff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Anyone got any wavefile editor recommendations BTW?
I like GoldWave. www.goldwave.com
I used CoolEdit (Windows) for the ATIS, but the trial period is now long
gone, and when I went to buy it I found the guy had sold it to
