Hi Folks, Unlike desktop sound cards, which usually have a "Line In" socket for headphone/speaker output (aka "Line Out") from audio devices, most laptops seem to have only microphone input (though they do have "Line Out").
Now one can of course simply plug a mike into the laptop, play the audio device through speakers with the mike near the speakers, and record to the laptop that way. But it's not fully satisfactory, and one may need to experiment a bit before it's acceptable. (And you will need to move around silently, avoid slurping coffee or saying "b****r" when you spill it, and above all don't flush the loo ... ).
So it would be nice to have a means of putting a cable between the "Line Out" and the mike input on the laptop, but I've not managed to work out a way of doing this!
Does anyone have a good solution?
With thanks, Ted.
PS: I have just heard that the Good Lord has finally finished marking your exam papers (He has been having a lot of intray crashes, which tend to happen at times of high prayer input -- He shouldn't leave His admin to Archangel Gabriel, who seems to spend a lot of time just flapping around).
Anyway, the result is that you have all got 10/10/10, on this date.
Congratulations!
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) ted.harding@wlandres.net Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 10-Oct-10 Time: 19:02:51 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
On 10 October 2010 19:02, Ted Harding ted.harding@wlandres.net wrote:
Hi Folks, Unlike desktop sound cards, which usually have a "Line In" socket for headphone/speaker output (aka "Line Out") from audio devices, most laptops seem to have only microphone input (though they do have "Line Out").
How about USB? Various USB sound adapters are available.
Tim.
On 10-Oct-10 18:34:33, Tim Green wrote:
On 10 October 2010 19:02, Ted Harding ted.harding@wlandres.net wrote:
Hi Folks, Unlike desktop sound cards, which usually have a "Line In" socket for headphone/speaker output (aka "Line Out") from audio devices, most laptops seem to have only microphone input (though they do have "Line Out").
How about USB? Various USB sound adapters are available. Tim.
Hmm, hadn't thought of that (and hadn't heard of it)! Any suggestions? (Including where to look -- I couldn't find anything apparently relevant in the Maplin website).
Thanks, Ted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) ted.harding@wlandres.net Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 10-Oct-10 Time: 20:25:13 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
(Ted Harding) wrote:
On 10-Oct-10 18:34:33, Tim Green wrote:
How about USB? Various USB sound adapters are available.
Hmm, hadn't thought of that (and hadn't heard of it)! Any suggestions? (Including where to look -- I couldn't find anything apparently relevant in the Maplin website).
http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=97120 looks like it might be what you're looking for.
Simon
- -- - --------------------------------------------------------------------- Simon Ransome http://nosher.net
Photography RSS feed - http://nosher.net/images/images.rss
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
(Ted Harding) wrote:
On 10-Oct-10 18:34:33, Tim Green wrote:
How about USB? Various USB sound adapters are available.
Hmm, hadn't thought of that (and hadn't heard of it)! Any suggestions? (Including where to look -- I couldn't find anything apparently relevant in the Maplin website).
http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=97120
Ooops - then I read the bit where it says "not supported on Mac or Linux". Sigh.
However, that's sometimes a get-out as it probably works but they don't want the support hassle. Still, it might give a clue as to where to look next.
Cheers, Simon
- -- - --------------------------------------------------------------------- Simon Ransome http://nosher.net
Photography RSS feed - http://nosher.net/images/images.rss
I'm confused by your original post, do you mean you want to record the sound coming out of your laptop? I.e. what ever is playing out of your speakers, out of your master L/R output you want to record that?
If so, some sound cards have this option when selecting a recording source there is an option to pick the main L/R Mix, or main stereo out etc..(but I'm guessing yours doesn't?)...You could invest in another sound card as suggested, or the only thing I can think of is investigate piping your sound buffer into a record buffer. Can this maybe be done with pulse audio? (pulse n00b here so I don't know!)
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 20:25:16 +0100 (BST) (Ted Harding) ted.harding@wlandres.net allegedly wrote:
How about USB? Various USB sound adapters are available. Tim.
Hmm, hadn't thought of that (and hadn't heard of it)! Any suggestions? (Including where to look -- I couldn't find anything apparently relevant in the Maplin website).
Do you mean something like this:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Griffin-IMIC-GC1603-Audio-Interface-Adaptor/dp/B002...
Mick ---------------------------------------------------------------------
The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this?
Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------
On 10-Oct-10 20:10:42, mick wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 20:25:16 +0100 (BST) (Ted Harding) ted.harding@wlandres.net allegedly wrote:
How about USB? Various USB sound adapters are available. Tim.
Hmm, hadn't thought of that (and hadn't heard of it)! Any suggestions? (Including where to look -- I couldn't find anything apparently relevant in the Maplin website).
Do you mean something like this:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Griffin-IMIC-GC1603-Audio-Interface-Adaptor/dp/ B002ZBDVZ8
Mick
Well, the suggestions are pouring in! Thanks everyone!
To clarify, in reponse to James's comment, I have audio output emerging on the headphone/speaker socket from an audio device, which might be radio, cassette recorder, record player, whatever of such a kind, and I want to input it to my laptop to convert it into a sound file. (Part of the purpose is to archive some old audio cassette recordings I have).
The various suggestions look interesting, but there will be a potential issue of Linux compatibility! E.g. Simon later found that his suggestion was "Not supported on Mac or Linux" (though you never know your luck -- sometimes Linux can unexpectedly recognise "unsupported" thingies). Then there's Ian's suggetion of the Alesis Linelink, for which I read:
"LineLink connects plug-and-play to your Mac or PC for an all-in-one USB audio solution. [...] LineLink is a plug-and-play device, so there are no drivers to install. The first time you connect it to your computer, it will automatically install all the necessary drivers and be ready to use immediately."
Hmmm!!! However:
"You can use LineLink with any kind of recording software that supports USB audio devices."
SO, if one can sidestep auto-installation of something inappropriate, there may be a chance that Linux would recognise it!
These suggested devices look as thnough they are designed for what I want to do. Ian's suggestion of the Numerk looks interesting.
Keep them coming! Many thanks, Ted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) ted.harding@wlandres.net Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 10-Oct-10 Time: 21:35:47 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
(Ted Harding) wrote:
On 10-Oct-10 20:10:42, mick wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 20:25:16 +0100 (BST) (Ted Harding)ted.harding@wlandres.net allegedly wrote:
How about USB? Various USB sound adapters are available. Tim.
Hmm, hadn't thought of that (and hadn't heard of it)! Any suggestions? (Including where to look -- I couldn't find anything apparently relevant in the Maplin website).
Do you mean something like this:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Griffin-IMIC-GC1603-Audio-Interface-Adaptor/dp/ B002ZBDVZ8
Mick
Well, the suggestions are pouring in! Thanks everyone!
To clarify, in reponse to James's comment, I have audio output emerging on the headphone/speaker socket from an audio device, which might be radio, cassette recorder, record player, whatever of such a kind, and I want to input it to my laptop to convert it into a sound file. (Part of the purpose is to archive some old audio cassette recordings I have).
The various suggestions look interesting, but there will be a potential issue of Linux compatibility! E.g. Simon later found that his suggestion was "Not supported on Mac or Linux" (though you never know your luck -- sometimes Linux can unexpectedly recognise "unsupported" thingies). Then there's Ian's suggetion of the Alesis Linelink, for which I read:
"LineLink connects plug-and-play to your Mac or PC for an all-in-one USB audio solution. [...] LineLink is a plug-and-play device, so there are no drivers to install. The first time you connect it to your computer, it will automatically install all the necessary drivers and be ready to use immediately."
Hmmm!!! However:
"You can use LineLink with any kind of recording software that supports USB audio devices."
SO, if one can sidestep auto-installation of something inappropriate, there may be a chance that Linux would recognise it!
These suggested devices look as thnough they are designed for what I want to do. Ian's suggestion of the Numerk looks interesting.
Keep them coming! Many thanks, Ted.
If you really want to save some money and are handy with a soldering iron then you may be able to get away with using a simple attenuator on the existing mic input. This will not achieve the ultimate in quality but given the types of sources you are thinking of recording then this may not be an issue.
Oh, and by the way, I keep forgetting to do reply all and delete the original poster in order to reply to the group. This is unlike every other group I belong to. is it not about time we followed suit?
Cheers
Ian
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 09:54:47PM +0100, Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
Oh, and by the way, I keep forgetting to do reply all and delete the original poster in order to reply to the group. This is unlike every other group I belong to. is it not about time we followed suit?
No. :)
Slightly longer answer is we've had this conversation many times before it's very unlikely to get changed.
Adam
On 11 Oct 00:41, Adam Bower wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 09:54:47PM +0100, Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
Oh, and by the way, I keep forgetting to do reply all and delete the original poster in order to reply to the group. This is unlike every other group I belong to. is it not about time we followed suit?
No. :)
Slightly longer answer is we've had this conversation many times before it's very unlikely to get changed.
Also, it works the same for every technical group that I'm on... default is reply to user, I use mutt so for lists I do a reply-to-list. It's been the same for many, many years.
Google groups is taking everything back to the broken state that it started in. And that appears to be where most people are shifting lists to. It sucks. As does the way that google will randomly drop mail in to /dev/null and not tell anyone.
Grr.
Adam Bower wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 09:54:47PM +0100, Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
Oh, and by the way, I keep forgetting to do reply all and delete the original poster in order to reply to the group. This is unlike every other group I belong to. is it not about time we followed suit?
No. :)
Slightly longer answer is we've had this conversation many times before it's very unlikely to get changed.
Adam
Yes, the Luddites are still in control.
Cheers
Ian
Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
Adam Bower wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 09:54:47PM +0100, Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
Oh, and by the way, I keep forgetting to do reply all and delete the original poster in order to reply to the group. This is unlike every other group I belong to. is it not about time we followed suit?
No. :)
Slightly longer answer is we've had this conversation many times before it's very unlikely to get changed.
Adam
Yes, the Luddites are still in control.
In control of one email client, perhaps? Why not upgrade to something which supports the July 1998 mailing list headers RFC 2369, so a reply command can work properly?
It's over 12 years old. Soon it'll be learning to drive.
Amazed,
MJ Ray wrote:
Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
Adam Bower wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 09:54:47PM +0100, Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
Oh, and by the way, I keep forgetting to do reply all and delete the original poster in order to reply to the group. This is unlike every other group I belong to. is it not about time we followed suit?
No. :)
Slightly longer answer is we've had this conversation many times before it's very unlikely to get changed.
Adam
Yes, the Luddites are still in control.
In control of one email client, perhaps? Why not upgrade to something which supports the July 1998 mailing list headers RFC 2369, so a reply command can work properly?
It's over 12 years old. Soon it'll be learning to drive.
Amazed,
Ah, a reply from the chief Luddite no less.
Why don't We change to reflect what the rest of the world is doing instead of sticking out head in the sand.
Bored.
On 12 Oct 09:58, Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
MJ Ray wrote:
Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
Adam Bower wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 09:54:47PM +0100, Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
Oh, and by the way, I keep forgetting to do reply all and delete the original poster in order to reply to the group. This is unlike every other group I belong to. is it not about time we followed suit?
No. :)
Slightly longer answer is we've had this conversation many times before it's very unlikely to get changed.
Adam
Yes, the Luddites are still in control.
In control of one email client, perhaps? Why not upgrade to something which supports the July 1998 mailing list headers RFC 2369, so a reply command can work properly?
It's over 12 years old. Soon it'll be learning to drive.
Amazed,
Ah, a reply from the chief Luddite no less.
Why don't We change to reflect what the rest of the world is doing instead of sticking out head in the sand.
Because the rest of the world is *NOT* doing what you are saying. You apparently aren't on as many lists as me. The debian lists work in the same way, most technical lists (not hosted on google groups) that I'm on work the same way.
Correct is "List Reply", "Reply" and "Reply All", being seperate functions, with "Reply" being *sensibly* set to *only* go to the original poster.
I'd rather by default my mail went to a single recipient when I hit reply than it going to the list, it makes more sense... otherwise how do you do an offlist reply without a whole lot of hassle?
We're not luddites, we're respecting headers that have been available for more years than I bother to remember and that mail clients that don't suck as much have been respecting for a while.
If you *really* want it to have that behaviour why don't *you* modify the mail to have the headers *you* want as it gets to you. Or haven't you got access to your MTA? MUA doesn't support being able to DTRT?
Accuse not us of being luddites, unless you actually bloody understand the meaning of the word. We use technology. We use it correctly. You appear to have a misunderstanding in the form of "I WANTS IT THIS WAY AND I DON'T CARE ABOUT ANYONE ELSE IT WOULD MAKE MY LIFE EASIER YOU'RE ALL C**TS AND I HATE YOU".
This is not rocket science, it has been discussed numerous times before, and there's only *one* list I'm on that actually does it the way you suggest, and that particular list is one that we see a "shitload" (technical term) of accidental reply to the lists *with* a subject line edit to say "Offlist" because the list doesn't behave as everyone is used to.
Now, please stop accusing others of being luddites because you can't be arsed to configure your own mail client.
Thanks,
Ian Thompson-Bell wrote:
Ah, a reply from the chief Luddite no less.
Yeah, chief in the "gave up almost all power years ago" sense.
Why don't We change to reflect what the rest of the world is doing instead of sticking out head in the sand.
I don't know, why don't you? There's no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 12 of your Earth years, so you've had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it's far too late to start making a fuss about it now. What do you mean you've never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heavens sake mankind, it's only four light years away, you know. I'm sorry, but if you can't be bothered to take an interest in local affairs that's your own lookout. Energise the demolition beams.
The good thing is Ian's mail client claims to be SeaMonkey/2.0.8 so maybe the next SeaMonkey will have the same fix as Thunderbird 3 and these boring exchanges will stop.
Regards,
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 09:58:57 +0100 Ian Thompson-Bell ianbell@ukfsn.org allegedly wrote:
Why don't We change to reflect what the rest of the world is doing instead of sticking out head in the sand.
If we did that, then we would all be using proprietary "standards" such as microsoft's document format. Fortunately, some people choose to do otherwise.
Mick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this?
Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi All,
On 12 October 2010 20:49, mick mbm@rlogin.net wrote:
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 09:58:57 +0100 Ian Thompson-Bell ianbell@ukfsn.org allegedly wrote:
Why don't We change to reflect what the rest of the world is doing instead of sticking out head in the sand.
If we did that, then we would all be using proprietary "standards" such as microsoft's document format. Fortunately, some people choose to do otherwise.
1) What has Microsoft got to do with the email list etiquette on this list?
2) Why all this infatuation with Microsoft? I thought we (the collective open source community) were better than that.
3) There are lists that follow different conventions - there is no One-Size-Must-Fit-All. Surely that's the beauty of open systems, open source, and the Internet in general? We can pick and choose and not get bogged down in silly flamewars.
4) Can't we just accept that the etiquette on *this* list is to reply to the list, and skip out all other recipients? (is there a FAQ? shall I start one on the wiki?)
5) Why do we even care what other lists such as Debian use? This is out of scope for this list. The Debian etiquette is irrelevant here (with all due respect to Debian, their list and all the ALUG members that are/may be involved with Debian).
6) Brett's email, while understandably seeming a little enraged, only inadvertently functions to fuel the debate. "Because the rest of the world is *NOT* doing what you are saying." There is possibly no definitive proof of this and also it brings in my point number 5, above. - What other lists do is irrelevant. What Brett thinks is the best way to do this, is irrelevant. What only matters is that everyone follows the ALUG mailing list etiquette.
If the ALUG mailing list etiquette happens to be exactly what Brett says, then so be it - but at least then we can say that this is the ALUG way, and leave out the inflamed personal emails.
I feel a bit sorry for Ian - it would have been better for people to have responded with the ALUG mailing list rules as a matter of fact. A simple "This is the way ALUG operates. These decisions were taken by experienced members and we see no reason to change it. If you feel we should change it, give us your very carefully reasoned point of view and try to convince us that your idea is superior." would have worked better.
I do want to point out though, that I do completely agree with Brett's reply regarding luddites. This is one thing we are not.
Regards, Srdjan [hoping to not get LARTed at the upcoming pub meet in response to my email ;-) ]
On 12 Oct 21:17, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
Hi All,
On 12 October 2010 20:49, mick mbm@rlogin.net wrote:
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 09:58:57 +0100 Ian Thompson-Bell ianbell@ukfsn.org allegedly wrote:
Why don't We change to reflect what the rest of the world is doing instead of sticking out head in the sand.
If we did that, then we would all be using proprietary "standards" such as microsoft's document format. Fortunately, some people choose to do otherwise.
- What has Microsoft got to do with the email list etiquette on this list?
It's all their fault! The graphical mail clients have been copying the evil that is outlook for far too long. Outlook doesn't even do threading, let alone deal with any non-MS headers, everyones obviously used to Outlook... ergo - blah blah blah.
(Basically, I haven't a clue what MS have to do with anything, and I'll never understand how they manage to make money from selling an OS that makes anyone that actually needs to do any systems management want to swear in long continuous streams...)
- Why all this infatuation with Microsoft? I thought we (the
collective open source community) were better than that.
I have no idea, I never brought them up. If I was going to bring up a current pet hate closed source company of over-priced evil I'd probably be talking about a company that's headed by the same guy that headed PIXAR until he sold out and got Disney shares and PIXAR become part of the Evil Empire that is Disney.
- There are lists that follow different conventions - there is no
One-Size-Must-Fit-All. Surely that's the beauty of open systems, open source, and the Internet in general? We can pick and choose and not get bogged down in silly flamewars.
We can.
- Can't we just accept that the etiquette on *this* list is to reply
to the list, and skip out all other recipients? (is there a FAQ? shall I start one on the wiki?)
The etiquette basically follows the same rules as the debian list etiquette, hence mentioning that comparison previously.
- Why do we even care what other lists such as Debian use? This is
out of scope for this list. The Debian etiquette is irrelevant here (with all due respect to Debian, their list and all the ALUG members that are/may be involved with Debian).
I'd bundle this list and the debian lists in to the "technical" bracket. The comparison is purely that.
- Brett's email, while understandably seeming a little enraged, only
inadvertently functions to fuel the debate. "Because the rest of the world is *NOT* doing what you are saying." There is possibly no definitive proof of this and also it brings in my point number 5, above.
- What other lists do is irrelevant. What Brett thinks is the best
way to do this, is irrelevant. What only matters is that everyone follows the ALUG mailing list etiquette.
There are always, and will always, be more than one way to skin a cat (I prefer a sharp flint and a lot of time, obviously...). Changing what has been in place for many years, and is the most sane standards compliant method of using a list to something that overrides users/posters preferences is, erm, not right.
If the ALUG mailing list etiquette happens to be exactly what Brett says, then so be it - but at least then we can say that this is the ALUG way, and leave out the inflamed personal emails.
Mailing list software messing with user defined headers is never going to be good. That's one of my biggest underlying reasons for completely agreeing with the current (and historical) set up of this list.
Anyone can add a Reply-To header. If you want replys to a post to go to the list, you can always set that header, anyone hitting reply will pick up that value.
I feel a bit sorry for Ian - it would have been better for people to have responded with the ALUG mailing list rules as a matter of fact. A simple "This is the way ALUG operates. These decisions were taken by experienced members and we see no reason to change it. If you feel we should change it, give us your very carefully reasoned point of view and try to convince us that your idea is superior." would have worked better.
It was stated, in the first response from MJR that this had been discussed many times... he could have done some research and looked in the archives... But if you on list manage to call the list a bunch of luddites, then, frankly, you're going to deserve everything you get.
I do want to point out though, that I do completely agree with Brett's reply regarding luddites. This is one thing we are not.
I wouldn't admit to agreeing me on anything if I were you, it won't do you any good ;)
Outlook doesn't even do threading,
Not exactly on-topic or indeed of interest to anyone here, but Outlook 2010 actually does come with a new conversation view (it's been rolled out at my workplace). Not that I particularly like the way they've implemented it, tho.
This is, coincidentally, at the same time that Google have said they'll finally provide an option to disable their own conversation view in GMail - something they've been unwilling to do for several years, despite user requests.
Peter.
On 12-Oct-10 21:33:53, samwise wrote:
Outlook doesn't even do threading,
Not exactly on-topic or indeed of interest to anyone here, but Outlook 2010 actually does come with a new conversation view (it's been rolled out at my workplace). Not that I particularly like the way they've implemented it, tho.
This is, coincidentally, at the same time that Google have said they'll finally provide an option to disable their own conversation view in GMail - something they've been unwilling to do for several years, despite user requests.
Peter.
Google seem summat weird lately ... On a few Google Groups which I use, which have areas called "Files" and "Pages" where users can upload files, I lately found the message [excerpted]:
"Google Groups will no longer be supporting the Pages and Files features. Starting November 1, you won't be able to upload new content, but you will still be able to view and download existing content. See this announcement for more information and other options for storing your content." [...] "If you would like to keep the content currently on the pages and files sections of your group, we highly encourage you to export and migrate it to another product. In February 2011, we will turn off the pages and files features, and you will no longer be able to access that content."
This might seem to be simply a desire to cut back on space usage. But the invitation to place the content elsewhere in the Google system would seem to contradict that ("another product" is elsewhere described as being a choice from amongst several Google resources).
So maybe it is a devious plot to entangle Googler users ever deeper in a Shelob's Web ...
Ted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) ted.harding@wlandres.net Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 12-Oct-10 Time: 22:59:17 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
Srdjan Todorovic wrote: [...]
- What has Microsoft got to do with the email list etiquette on this list?
It was used as an example of another way this list does what is right rather than what may be the most common.
- There are lists that follow different conventions - there is no
One-Size-Must-Fit-All. Surely that's the beauty of open systems, open source, and the Internet in general? We can pick and choose and not get bogged down in silly flamewars.
Yes, indeed, it should be quite within the power of any reader to add a mail filter to set a Reply-To if they really want one. If it's not within their ability, then I expect someone would post a suitable example when told what software is being used.
I feel it would be better to fix the buggy email clients to support the List-Post header (RFC 2369) when present if possible, though.
- Why do we even care what other lists such as Debian use? [...]
It was used as an example that not all the rest of the world abuses Reply-To headers.
- Brett's email, while understandably seeming a little enraged, only
inadvertently functions to fuel the debate. "Because the rest of the world is *NOT* doing what you are saying." There is possibly no definitive proof of this and also it brings in my point number 5, above.
The counter-example of debian lists is a definitive proof of this, no?
- What other lists do is irrelevant. What Brett thinks is the best
way to do this, is irrelevant. What only matters is that everyone follows the ALUG mailing list etiquette.
So criticise the person who started the "rest of the world" argument instead?
[...]
I feel a bit sorry for Ian - it would have been better for people to have responded with the ALUG mailing list rules as a matter of fact. A simple "This is the way ALUG operates. These decisions were taken by experienced members and we see no reason to change it. If you feel we should change it, give us your very carefully reasoned point of view and try to convince us that your idea is superior." would have worked better.
Ian was on this list at least 8 years ago and we seem to go through this discussion about once a year (not always with Ian, of course), so it's not like the lack of Reply-To overriding should have been news to him. That's why you might have detected a little exasperation in some replies.
The List-Post solution has been published for 12 years now. Inviting people to give reasons why we should revisit problems from the mid-90s seems far worse than suggesting that they help fix any remaining buggy mail clients.
Hope that explains,
On 10 October 2010 20:25, Ted Harding ted.harding@wlandres.net wrote:
On 10-Oct-10 18:34:33, Tim Green wrote:
How about USB? Various USB sound adapters are available. Tim.
Hmm, hadn't thought of that (and hadn't heard of it)! Any suggestions? (Including where to look -- I couldn't find anything apparently relevant in the Maplin website).
Even has phono connectors: http://www.everythingusb.com/creative-usb-sound-blaster-x-fi-hd-20478.html
Good luck! Tim.
On 10 Oct 19:02, Ted Harding wrote:
Hi Folks, Unlike desktop sound cards, which usually have a "Line In" socket for headphone/speaker output (aka "Line Out") from audio devices, most laptops seem to have only microphone input (though they do have "Line Out").
Erm, OK, this is going to be a silly question I realise, but why on earth are you recording sound you're generating on the computer in this way? Set the recording device to the mixer and record directly from the soundcard, getting exactly what's being sent to line out to start off with. You can do this with, for example, audacity. If your sound card doesn't have such a device, and the output program supports alsa, then look at the dmix settings for alsa and send the output to that.
Hope that helps,
On 10/10/10 19:02, (Ted Harding) wrote:
Hi Folks, Unlike desktop sound cards, which usually have a "Line In" socket for headphone/speaker output (aka "Line Out") from audio devices, most laptops seem to have only microphone input (though they do have "Line Out").
So it would be nice to have a means of putting a cable between the "Line Out" and the mike input on the laptop, but I've not managed to work out a way of doing this!
Does anyone have a good solution?
So assuming that you want to connect a line-out on one machine (probably not a computer) to the mic-in on the laptop all you need is a simple attenuator.
IIRC, the line out gives 1 volt pp and expects a 100Ω load and the mic in expects 100 mvolt pp from a 10KΩ source.
So a few resistors from the junk box[1] should do the trick.
Well it did for me.
Of course it gets a bit more complex if you're going from a stereo line-out to a mono mic-in. IME most mic-in are mono.
[1] do people still have junk boxes these days?
On 11/10/10 06:11, nev young wrote:
So assuming that you want to connect a line-out on one machine (probably not a computer) to the mic-in on the laptop all you need is a simple attenuator.
IIRC, the line out gives 1 volt pp and expects a 100Ω load and the mic in expects 100 mvolt pp from a 10KΩ source.
So a few resistors from the junk box[1] should do the trick.
ISTR that the mic input on most laptops expects a Electret microphone with a built in preamp FET and therefore has a DC Bias (phantom power) you'd want to decouple your Line input from.
So a more suitable circuit would look something like
Line in ---C1-------R1---+---Mic Output | R2 | Ground-------------------+---Ground
(apologies in advance if mail formatting messes up my fine ascii art)
On 11/10/10 06:11, nev young wrote:
So assuming that you want to connect a line-out on one machine (probably not a computer) to the mic-in on the laptop all you need is a simple attenuator.
IIRC, the line out gives 1 volt pp and expects a 100Ω load and the mic in expects 100 mvolt pp from a 10KΩ source.
So a few resistors from the junk box[1] should do the trick.
ISTR that the mic input on most laptops expects a Electret microphone with a built in preamp FET and therefore has a DC Bias (phantom power) you'd want to decouple your Line input from.
So a more suitable circuit would look something like
Line in ---C1-------R1---+---Mic Output | R2 | Ground-------------------+---Ground
(apologies in advance if mail formatting messes up my fine ascii art)
On 12/10/10 19:26, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
(apologies in advance if mail formatting messes up my fine ascii art)
Ok lets try again, if this doesn't work then R2 should be across the two + signs not between C1 and R1
Line in ---C1-------R1---+---Mic Output | R2 | Ground-------------------+---Ground
On 12/10/10 19:26, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
On 11/10/10 06:11, nev young wrote:
So assuming that you want to connect a line-out on one machine (probably not a computer) to the mic-in on the laptop all you need is a simple attenuator.
IIRC, the line out gives 1 volt pp and expects a 100Ω load and the mic in expects 100 mvolt pp from a 10KΩ source.
So a few resistors from the junk box[1] should do the trick.
ISTR that the mic input on most laptops expects a Electret microphone with a built in preamp FET and therefore has a DC Bias (phantom power) you'd want to decouple your Line input from.
This is correct. But. The power is (usually) supplied via the third line. That is to say the mic signal connects between the tip and the body of the 3.5mm jack. The power connects to the centre ring and body of the jack. So as long as you leave the centre ring alone there's not going to be a problem.
see http://www.hobby-hour.com/electronics/computer_microphone.php for pretty pictures (not mine).
So a more suitable circuit would look something like
Line in ---C1-------R1---+---Mic Output | R2 | Ground-------------------+---Ground
I would have gone with:
line source Mic input on laptop
-----C1------+----90KΩ-----+------ | | 100Ω 10kΩ | | ground ---------------------------
OK so it's not perfect impedance matching but probably as good as you can get taking into account the tolerance of the resistors.
If you're paranoid about DC levels then a cap C1 can be included but personally I've never needed one. YMMV.
-
Adam Bower -
Brett Parker -
Ian Thompson-Bell -
James Bensley -
mick -
MJ Ray -
nev young -
samwise -
simon ransome -
Srdjan Todorovic -
ted.harding＠wlandres.net -
Tim Green -
Wayne Stallwood -
Wayne Stallwood