2 Gb max file size...grrrr!

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Using Wavelab5/WindowsXP Pro/Echo Indigo pcm card into my laptop at 24/96 >
direct into 120 Gig external HD last Saturday...all was fine for the first
1hour and 3 mins of a single 90 minute work (no movement breaks or interval
to rename/renumber files)until.......a cute warning came up saying I could
only record files of 2 Gb max. size, and it promptly dropped out of record
mode !! Almost wrecked the recording (fortunately I had DAT backup
running alongside, so I can graft the missing 30 seconds back in from that
source...phew !)
My question....how to increase that file size limit to cope with any
foreseeable live performance scenarios in future ? Thanks for your advice
and guidance,

Ray


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:15:39 +1030, "Ray Thomas" <rthomas@chariot.net.au>
wrote:

>Using Wavelab5/WindowsXP Pro/Echo Indigo pcm card into my laptop at 24/96 >
>direct into 120 Gig external HD last Saturday...all was fine for the first
>1hour and 3 mins of a single 90 minute work (no movement breaks or interval
>to rename/renumber files)until.......a cute warning came up saying I could
>only record files of 2 Gb max. size, and it promptly dropped out of record
>mode !! Almost wrecked the recording (fortunately I had DAT backup
>running alongside, so I can graft the missing 30 seconds back in from that
>source...phew !)
>My question....how to increase that file size limit to cope with any
>foreseeable live performance scenarios in future ? Thanks for your advice
>and guidance,
>
>Ray
>
>
>---
>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004
>

The NTFS filesystem can handle much larger files than that, so unless you're
using a FAT filesystem, the problem lies with the software. Perhaps, there is
an update available for the software that overcomes the limitation.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/Windows/XP/all/reskit/en-us/Default.asp?url=/resources/documentation/Windows/XP/all/reskit/en-us/prkc_fil_tdrn.asp

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Ray Thomas" <rthomas@chariot.net.au> wrote in message
news:41aad3a4_3@news.chariot.net.au

> Using Wavelab5/WindowsXP Pro/Echo Indigo pcm card into my laptop at
> 24/96 > direct into 120 Gig external HD last Saturday...all was fine
> for the first 1 hour and 3 mins of a single 90 minute work (no
> movement breaks or interval to rename/renumber files)until.......a
> cute warning came up saying I could only record files of 2 Gb max.

This warning came from Wavelab?

This exchange dating from 2001, discusses this problem:

http://forum.cubase.net/forum/Forum3/HTML/007182.html

Apparently, it is well-known.

> size, and it promptly dropped out of record mode !!

I'll bet.

> Almost wrecked
> the recording (fortunately I had DAT backup running alongside, so I
> can graft the missing 30 seconds back in from that source...phew !)

Begs the question why waste disk space using such a high sample rate? Odds
are good that you are going to burn these files to a CD. CD is limited to
24/96. There is no known advantage to recording at such a vastly higher
sample rate then you would be distributing the music at. There are also no
known advantages to distributing music at 24/96, given the limitations of
human ears and most audio gear.

> My question....how to increase that file size limit to cope with any
> foreseeable live performance scenarios in future ?

> Thanks for your advice and guidance,

Seems like you should either change your procedures or your software.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Ray Thomas" <rthomas@chariot.net.au> wrote in
news:41aad3a4_3@news.chariot.net.au:

> Using Wavelab5/WindowsXP Pro/Echo Indigo pcm card into my laptop at
> 24/96 > direct into 120 Gig external HD last Saturday...all was fine
> for the first 1hour and 3 mins of a single 90 minute work (no movement
> breaks or interval to rename/renumber files)until.......a cute warning
> came up saying I could only record files of 2 Gb max. size, and it
> promptly dropped out of record mode !! Almost wrecked the recording
> (fortunately I had DAT backup running alongside, so I can graft the
> missing 30 seconds back in from that source...phew !)
> My question....how to increase that file size limit to cope with any
> foreseeable live performance scenarios in future ? Thanks for your
> advice and guidance,
>
> Ray
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004
>
>



Just record using split file record mode.
Thsi is a well known Wavelab limit, and the author
Philippe Gautier has said it will be addressed in an
update soon....

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

> to rename/renumber files)until.......a cute warning came up saying I could
> only record files of 2 Gb max. size, and it promptly dropped out of record

The 2Gbyte limit comes from the fact that the size of a WAV file is
represented by a 32 bit number at the beginning of the file. When the
file size exceeds 2Gbytes, that number becomes negative when
interpreted as a signed integer. If the number is properly
interpreted you wind up with a 4Gbyte file size limitation.

FAT32 files (of any type) and WAV files both have an inherent files
size limitation of 4Gbytes.

If you were using NTFS or UDF as you file system, you could actually
make WAV files that are more than 4Gbytes long if the sound program
you are using just ignored the DataSize field in the WAV header and
used the operating system's file size info to acquire the actual size
of the WAV file.

This is going to become more of a problem as people try to record more
tracks at higher bitrates. We make a portable hard disk recorder that
can genetrate 192kHz/24bit/10track WAV files which hit the 4Gbyte
limit after only 12 minutes of recording!

Hard disk recorders are getting around this problem by starting a new
seamless WAV file when a user-selected file size limit has been
reached.

So your software could do this if enough users complained about it.

-howy

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

howy <howard@zaxcom.com> wrote:

>Hard disk recorders are getting around this problem by starting a new
>seamless WAV file when a user-selected file size limit has been
>reached.

Gidluck Mastering does this in their Live2496 recording application for
our PDAudio handheld 24/96 recorder. It can seamlessly chain up to five
4GB files together to give up to 10 hours of continuous 24/96 recording.

The latest feature they've added is to seamlessly chain between media
changes, so you can use cheap 1 GB CF or SD cards to record many hours
of 24/96 without any breaks. You don't have to buy the expensive 4 GB
(or larger) cards.

--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <e137a0a0.0411290830.14584630@posting.google.com> howard@zaxcom.com writes:

> Hard disk recorders are getting around this problem by starting a new
> seamless WAV file when a user-selected file size limit has been
> reached.

Where those people are running into problems is when they want to
"flatten" the file (put all of those pieces, as well as punch-ins,
edits, volume changes, etc.) into a continguous file to transfer it
to a workstation or store it for posterity. If the file is broken up
every fifteen minutes (the unalterable defalut for the Mackie
recorders) while you can record for eight hours straight (well, I
couldn't record for eight hours if I had to be straight for the whole
time) if you stitch all of that together, you end up with a file that
would exceed the 4GB limit.

In the case of the Mackie HDR24/96, it chugs along, appearing to work,
for a long time, comes to what appears as a normal finish, and then
crashes when you try to access the file that it tried to create.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:sqidnVP9XPUrjzbcRVn-uQ@comcast.com

Correction:

> Begs the question why waste disk space using such a high sample rate?
> Odds are good that you are going to burn these files to a CD. CD is
> limited to 16/44. There is no known advantage to recording at such a
> vastly higher sample rate then you would be distributing the music
> at. There are also no known advantages to distributing music at
> 24/96, given the limitations of human ears and most audio gear.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

The standard WAV file format only allows DWORD (4 byte) variable to save the
file size and data length in the file -- the maximum value for a DWORD
(unsigned long integer) is 4,294,967,295 - so a stereo file maximum length
would be half that.

Rail
--
Recording Engineer/Software Developer
Rail Jon Rogut Software
http://www.railjonrogut.com
mailto:rail@railjonrogut.com

"Steve Jorgensen" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:44plq0pgmcn7fdg5cv9e05h4m0qdm91ejg@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:15:39 +1030, "Ray Thomas" <rthomas@chariot.net.au>
> wrote:
>
>>Using Wavelab5/WindowsXP Pro/Echo Indigo pcm card into my laptop at 24/96
>> >
>>direct into 120 Gig external HD last Saturday...all was fine for the first
>>1hour and 3 mins of a single 90 minute work (no movement breaks or
>>interval
>>to rename/renumber files)until.......a cute warning came up saying I could
>>only record files of 2 Gb max. size, and it promptly dropped out of record
>>mode !! Almost wrecked the recording (fortunately I had DAT backup
>>running alongside, so I can graft the missing 30 seconds back in from that
>>source...phew !)
>>My question....how to increase that file size limit to cope with any
>>foreseeable live performance scenarios in future ? Thanks for your
>>advice
>>and guidance,
>>
>>Ray
>>
>>
>>---
>>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>>Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004
>>
>
> The NTFS filesystem can handle much larger files than that, so unless
> you're
> using a FAT filesystem, the problem lies with the software. Perhaps,
> there is
> an update available for the software that overcomes the limitation.
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/Windows/XP/all/reskit/en-us/Default.asp?url=/resources/documentation/Windows/XP/all/reskit/en-us/prkc_fil_tdrn.asp

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Rail Jon Rogut wrote:
> The standard WAV file format only allows DWORD (4 byte) variable to save the
> file size and data length in the file -- the maximum value for a DWORD
> (unsigned long integer) is 4,294,967,295 - so a stereo file maximum length
> would be half that.

And 16-bit half that, 24-bit 1/3 that.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I'm talking about the data chunk length and the file length value... the
sample rate and bit depth won't matter.. but the conversion from bytes to
time will differ.

Rail
--
Recording Engineer/Software Developer
Rail Jon Rogut Software
http://www.railjonrogut.com
mailto:rail@railjonrogut.com

"S O'Neill" <nopsam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:MomdnWozDZeM4jbcRVn-vQ@omsoft.com...
> Rail Jon Rogut wrote:
>> The standard WAV file format only allows DWORD (4 byte) variable to save
>> the file size and data length in the file -- the maximum value for a
>> DWORD (unsigned long integer) is 4,294,967,295 - so a stereo file maximum
>> length would be half that.
>
> And 16-bit half that, 24-bit 1/3 that.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:

>Where those people are running into problems is when they want to
>"flatten" the file (put all of those pieces, as well as punch-ins,
>edits, volume changes, etc.) into a continguous file to transfer it
>to a workstation or store it for posterity. If the file is broken up
>every fifteen minutes (the unalterable defalut for the Mackie
>recorders) while you can record for eight hours straight (well, I
>couldn't record for eight hours if I had to be straight for the whole
>time) if you stitch all of that together, you end up with a file that
>would exceed the 4GB limit.
>
>In the case of the Mackie HDR24/96, it chugs along, appearing to work,
>for a long time, comes to what appears as a normal finish, and then
>crashes when you try to access the file that it tried to create.

PDAudio, using Gidluck Mastering's Live2496 recording software has
fsolved this by allowing for seamless chaining between up to five 4 GB
files, allowing for continuous 24/96 recording for up to ten hours.

No other high-res recorder (home or field) can do this.





--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <cogt4s$ruk$1@panix2.panix.com> moskowit@panix.com writes:

> >In the case of the Mackie HDR24/96, it chugs along, appearing to work,
> >for a long time, comes to what appears as a normal finish, and then
> >crashes when you try to access the file that it tried to create.
>
> PDAudio, using Gidluck Mastering's Live2496 recording software has
> fsolved this by allowing for seamless chaining between up to five 4 GB
> files, allowing for continuous 24/96 recording for up to ten hours.

So how's the 24-track version coming along? <g>

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <znr1101824008k@trad>, Mike Rivers <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:

>> PDAudio, using Gidluck Mastering's Live2496 recording software has
>> fsolved this by allowing for seamless chaining between up to five 4 GB
>> files, allowing for continuous 24/96 recording for up to ten hours.
>
>So how's the 24-track version coming along? <g>

Golly, could you imagine a 24-channel snake hooked up to a PDA?

--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 2004-11-29, S O'Neill <nopsam@nospam.net> wrote:

> And 16-bit half that, 24-bit 1/3 that.

Forgive me if I'm misinformed, but aren't 24-bit WAV's actually stored
on 32-bit word boundaries?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arny Krueger wrote:

> Begs the question why waste disk space using such a high
> sample rate?

Arny, I don't like that kind of "flat rate assertions", generally the AD
converters I am familiar with sound cleaner the higher the sample rate.

> Odds are good that you are going to burn these files to a CD.
> CD is limited to 24/96. [Yes, you meant to type 16/44.1 ..)
> There is no known advantage to recording at such a vastly higher
> sample rate then you would be distributing the music at.

First of all there was an AES recommendation quite some time ago,
someone may remember the details better than I, to the effect that one
should record at 48 or a clean multiple thereof for optimum quality with
future means of distribution. DVD Audio is just a few feet of track away
and recording with it in mind is obviously relevant.

> There are also no known advantages to distributing music at 24/96,
> given the limitations of human ears and most audio gear.

Assuming minimal - or none - processing of the audio the main quality
degradation is in conversion (transducers not considered) from analog to
digital and back. My experience - subjectively evaluated - suggest that
the cleanest possible AD conversion and a high quality sample rate
conversion gives the cleanest possible sound from the final CD.

>> My question....how to increase that file size limit to cope
>> with any foreseeable live performance scenarios in future ?

This is non-simple, but if the question is whether you can increase the
possible file size of the software you have the answer is: not at all
likely. An updated version may be able to help you, toss a support email
in the general direction of support@software-vendor.com.

There is software out there that will do single files of size 4 GB, and
you can probably also double your recording time by recording two mono
tracks as discrete files in multitrack mode rather than one stereo track
if the application in question permits that strategy.

>> Thanks for your advice and guidance,

> Seems like you should either change your procedures or your
> software.

I can't recall if the OS was mentioned, however software that allows
only 2 GB file size is plain broken, 4 GB files are possible on FAT32
running Win9x and using Cool Edit. Changing the file system to NTFS,
usually that necessitates selecting an NT family OS, will increase max
file size to 64 terabytes. My understanding is that this is because the
file system uses 64 bit math. My understanding is also that it is unwise
to try to record files larger than 4 GB's in Audition, it was probably
version 1.0 I had falling over the edge of the cliff of wrapping.

For some reason software limitations are less well explained than
software virtues, it could be useful to all to check how the actual
software on the actual OS behaves as filesize increases beyond 2 and 4
GB.

Considering the risk of a totally corrupted file it is btw. quite benign
that the software in question simply drops out of recording and explains
why, but it is indeed puzzling that it abandons ship at 2 GB instead of
doing it at 4 GB ...


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

james of tucson wrote:

> On 2004-11-29, S O'Neill <nopsam@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>
>>And 16-bit half that, 24-bit 1/3 that.
>
>
> Forgive me if I'm misinformed, but aren't 24-bit WAV's actually stored
> on 32-bit word boundaries?

According to http://www.borg.com/~jglatt/tech/wave.htm (which
isn't exactly authoritative, but does contain lots of info about
wav files that looks like it must've come from experience),
they aren't.

Apparently they are stored with samples rounded up to the nearest
multiple of 8 bits in little-endian format (least significant
byte first). So, a left channel sample of 0x123456 and a right
channel sample of 0xABCDEF would be stored as the byte sequence
{ 0x56, 0x34, 0x12, 0xEF, 0xCD, 0xAB }. They are signed integers,
though, so my hex notation doesn't make that clear, but that's
another issue.

- Logan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Logan Shaw wrote:
> james of tucson wrote:
>
>
>>On 2004-11-29, S O'Neill <nopsam@nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>And 16-bit half that, 24-bit 1/3 that.
>>
>>
>>Forgive me if I'm misinformed, but aren't 24-bit WAV's actually stored
>>on 32-bit word boundaries?
>
>
> According to http://www.borg.com/~jglatt/tech/wave.htm (which
> isn't exactly authoritative, but does contain lots of info about
> wav files that looks like it must've come from experience),
> they aren't.
>
> Apparently they are stored with samples rounded up to the nearest
> multiple of 8 bits in little-endian format (least significant
> byte first). So, a left channel sample of 0x123456 and a right
> channel sample of 0xABCDEF would be stored as the byte sequence
> { 0x56, 0x34, 0x12, 0xEF, 0xCD, 0xAB }. They are signed integers,
> though, so my hex notation doesn't make that clear, but that's
> another issue.


And your example shows 24-bit alignment, not 32.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Logan Shaw <lshaw-usenet@austin.rr.com> wrote:

>> Forgive me if I'm misinformed, but aren't 24-bit WAV's actually stored
>> on 32-bit word boundaries?
>
>Apparently they are stored with samples rounded up to the nearest
>multiple of 8 bits in little-endian format (least significant
>byte first). So, a left channel sample of 0x123456 and a right
>channel sample of 0xABCDEF would be stored as the byte sequence
>{ 0x56, 0x34, 0x12, 0xEF, 0xCD, 0xAB }. They are signed integers,
>though, so my hex notation doesn't make that clear, but that's
>another issue.

Adobe Audition and other desktop/laptop DAW applications allow you to
read and write 24-bit audio files in both 3-byte and 4-byte formats.

On PDAs, in the interest of saving space and reducing data write time,
all of the PDAudio applications use 3-byte format.

--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Len Moskowitz" <moskowit@panix.com> wrote in message
news:coi875$90f$1@panix3.panix.com

> Golly, could you imagine a 24-channel snake hooked up to a PDA?

While we are OT, heres how bizarrely Audition/CE handles large files. The
file can grow until its about 4 GB, at which time the software spontaneously
strips off the first 4 GB leaving a stub of what is ever left over. I don't
know if they've fixed this in later releases.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <coi875$90f$1@panix3.panix.com> moskowit@panix.com writes:

> Golly, could you imagine a 24-channel snake hooked up to a PDA?

Well, I guess you'd have to think of it as a PDA hooked up to a
24-channel snake. What's the accessory here anyway? <g>


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arny Krueger <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:

>While we are OT, heres how bizarrely Audition/CE handles large files. The
>file can grow until its about 4 GB, at which time the software spontaneously
>strips off the first 4 GB leaving a stub of what is ever left over. I don't
>know if they've fixed this in later releases.

Have you reported it to Adobe? If not, please do!

--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Len Moskowitz" <moskowit@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cokp30$j64$1@panix2.panix.com
> Arny Krueger <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:
>
>> While we are OT, heres how bizarrely Audition/CE handles large
>> files. The file can grow until its about 4 GB, at which time the
>> software spontaneously strips off the first 4 GB leaving a stub of
>> what is ever left over. I don't know if they've fixed this in later
>> releases.
>
> Have you reported it to Adobe? If not, please do!

It's been mentioned on their forum, even again recently. However, lots of
RAPers don't go there so I thought I'd provide a helpful caveat.

The adobeforums server name is adobeforums.com. Adobe's tech support will
give out the password to just about anybody.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) wrote in news:znr1101855993k@trad:

>
> In article <coi875$90f$1@panix3.panix.com> moskowit@panix.com writes:
>
>> Golly, could you imagine a 24-channel snake hooked up to a PDA?
>
> Well, I guess you'd have to think of it as a PDA hooked up to a
> 24-channel snake. What's the accessory here anyway? <g>

Who needs a snake? Just tuck it in the breakout box and forget the cable.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Len Moskowitz <moskowit@panix.com> wrote:

> Golly, could you imagine a 24-channel snake hooked up to a PDA?

Yeah, by a gigabit Ethernet cable? Cat 5 or something?

--
ha