Converting audio tapes into mp3 files

[Guest wsxedcrfv]

Anyone know of a shareware app designed to take an audio stream from a tape deck and generate a sequence of mp3 files from the stream?

Ideally, the software would detect the silence between songs and use that to know when one song ends and the next one begins.

It would take some minimal input from the user (like asking for the name or label of the tape that's being played, and if it's side A or B.) and generate numerical track names for the file output.

Something that I could just put in a tape, hit play, and walk away while the software records and generates the mp3 files without needed any other input from the user, and that I can repeat until all the tapes have been recorded.

Edited February 20, 2011 by wsxedcrfv

[gUiTaR_mIkE]

I'm not sure if an app exists that will cut at the correct spot, name tracks etc without a cue file or some sort of index. Also, most users want an opprtunity to edit so in many cases capturing to wav is ideal but...

Check out Audacity and Total Recorder Pro, if for nothing more than excellent tips on recording. The eval version of TRP you may not like, I wouldn't bother. I've used both methods and they work great, I wanted wav files to edit, you may be able to export directly to .mps with Audacity - not sure, TRP yes, but costs.

[Glenn9999]

Anyone know of a shareware app designed to take an audio stream from a tape deck and generate a sequence of mp3 files from the stream?

Ideally, the software would detect the silence between songs and use that to know when one song ends and the next one begins.

Actually there's no such thing. How would something know that silence denotes the end of a song and not a pause within the song? Or how would something know that there wasn't ever meant to be silence (like a live thing).

In having done this with numerous tapes, the previous poster's suggestion is what you want - you want something that will capture to WAV. In addition to those suggestions, I'll add Cooledit to the mix if you can still find a copy of it. Works relatively well (much better than Audacity, IMO).

Besides that, you don't want anything automated because you'll want to be able to monitor the input from the tape deck into the computer so you don't overload the sound card on input (got to have it good sounding), isolate and reduce any audible clicks or pops, and be able to control normalization of the recording in addition to splitting up the recording. But be prepared to know that the sound quality won't be the same as if you ripped it from CD. That's just how the tapes are (about 96Kbps MP3 equivalent if I remember right).

The best thing to do (again experience) after you check the sound level is capture each side of the tape to WAV, post-process using your editor and then convert the pieces to MP3 and then ID3 tag it if desired (there's software to do that). This shouldn't be a concern with modern systems, but you'll want at least 3-5GB of hard drive space free while you do this (per tape).

But you aren't going to get out of doing the work.

[gUiTaR_mIkE]

you may be able to export directly to .mps with Audacity

Sorry, typo, meant mp3.

But you aren't going to get out of doing the work.

Agreed! This is a time consuming task, the more you care about the result the more you want to get it right the first time, during the capture and edit phases. Set it and forget it isn't in the vocabulary of an audio editor, or engineer - which is what you will be acting as

There are many 'for fee' tools you can use but really, a decent wav editor should clean up just about any wav file - Wavosaur is one such tool and it runs on 98/XP/Vista, and free.

I would suggest playback and capture at 0db or slighly above (yellow, no red). On your deck, no Dolby, etc buttons activated. Go easy on the 'color' (effects) you apply to the files, if anything add 'color' during the editing process, not while you're recording (capturing) the tape.

Finally, unlike the tape that degrades a bit each and every playback the digital file (still a lossy source though) will remain the same after 1000 playbacks (assuming the file remains intact) - so take your time, you'll be proud of your efforts. Good luck.

[jaclaz]

OBVIOUSLY there are programs capable of detecing a pause and interpret it as a track separation.

A known one is:

http://www.polderbits.com/

Current version is Version 9.0 build 128.

Feature is available since version 1.6:

Version 1.6. Initial release date: October 28, 2000.

What has been new in version 1.6:

Automatic and manual track separation.

Still OBVIOUSLY, your actual mileage may vary .

jaclaz

[Guest wsxedcrfv]

Polderbits is a joke. I downloaded the software (which gives you a free fully functional usage license for 7 days) and it's recorder is just a stupid manual recorder - no auto-gap detection during recording. Every version of windows comes with a stupid audio recording utility like that.

I've come across 2 or 3 so-called "freeware" programs that WILL do auto-gap detect and index-based file naming during recording, but when you want to use those features you're told you have to pay to use them, so they are not really freeware.

And it's somewhat easy for software to detect gaps between songs. They have settings to set the "quiet" level (in db) that the audio signal must reach for it to trigger an end-of-song detection, and a duration of the quiet period (from .1 seconds to several seconds). If both conditions are met, then the software will stop recording the current file and close it, and it will open and start recording the next file when the audio level rises when-ever the next song starts.

The software doesn't have to know what the song names are. You set a seed name (like Tape-100-Side-A) and it adds a file number that gets incremented according to the detection of the silent gaps. Some software will create a file-name based on the current date and time stamp.

I have a bunch of tapes of music I recorded off FM radio about 20 years ago that I don't know the names or even artist so my first step at identifying them is to record them to mp3. I have a lot of junk and partial recordings, test tones and other junk on these tapes that I know will result in mp3 files that I will delete, leaving me with only the content of interest. So I want this recording process to be as automatic as possible with little to no intervention from me.

The most promising software that I found was "Easy Hi-Q Recorder". Early "free" versions of it did not allow gap detection, and later "free" versions did allow gap detection but limited the recording length to 3 minutes.

Audacity looks to be the best free solution, but it does not detect gaps and create separate files during recording. You must record an entire session as one file, and then run a post-processor on it to detect gaps and write them out as separate files. It looks tedious and time-consuming.

Edited February 20, 2011 by wsxedcrfv

[jaclaz]

Polderbits is a joke. I downloaded the software (which gives you a free fully functional usage license for 7 days) and it's recorder is just a stupid manual recorder - no auto-gap detection during recording. Every version of windows comes with a stupid audio recording utility like that.

....

I've come across 2 or 3 so-called "freeware" programs that WILL do auto-gap detect and index-based file naming during recording, but when you want to use those features you're told you have to pay to use them, so they are not really freeware.

....

Audacity looks to be the best free solution, but it does not detect gaps and create separate files during recording. You must record an entire session as one file, and then run a post-processor on it to detect gaps and write them out as separate files. It looks tedious and time-consuming.

You asked for shareware and for gap sensing.

The normal procedure is to record and later post process it.

Sorry I didn't get that you wanted Freeware and "splitting on the fly".

jaclaz

[Guest wsxedcrfv]

You asked for shareware and for gap sensing.

The normal procedure is to record and later post process it.

Sorry I didn't get that you wanted Freeware and "splitting on the fly".

This is what I said:

==============

Something that I could just put in a tape, hit play, and walk away while the software records and generates the mp3 files without needed any other input from the user, and that I can repeat until all the tapes have been recorded.

==============

I would have thought that it was clear in my first post that I was looking for a completely automated solution. I guess I'll have to be way more verbose in the future.

> The normal procedure is to record and later post process it.

I didn't know there was a "normal" when it comes to this activity or task.

[jaclaz]

I didn't know there was a "normal" when it comes to this activity or task.

I will also take back "normal" and replace it with "traditionally used" or "usual", like in "traditionally used ABnormal" or "usual, ABnormal".

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072431/quotes

Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: [to Igor] Now that brain that you gave me. Was it Hans Delbruck's?

Igor: [pause, then] No.

Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: Ah! Very good. Would you mind telling me whose brain I DID put in?

Igor: Then you won't be angry?

Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: I will NOT be angry.

Igor: Abby someone.

Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: [pause, then] Abby someone. Abby who?

Igor: Abby... Normal.

Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: [pause, then] Abby Normal?

Igor: I'm almost sure that was the name.

jaclaz

[Ponch]

and later post process it.

While we are being pedantic, you might rephrase this pleonasme.

[jaclaz]

and later post process it.

While we are being pedantic, you might rephrase this pleonasme.

Sure , you are very right

please read it as either:

...and later post process it

or:

... and later post process it

I may venture in a :

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:

....

a time to record and a time to split; a time to save as single track, and a time to give name to files;

....

a time to play the tapes, and a time to check the mp3's ; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;

....

jaclaz

Edited February 21, 2011 by jaclaz

[Tripredacus]

All the people I know that work with such activities (converting records or tapes to MP3) do it manually. If there was some magic program that could do it for you (oh and hope your tape deck isn't set for continuous auto-reverse) it would probably not be free.

[submix8c]

Agreed!

<--- (note the avatar and member name)

All the people I know that work with such activities (converting records or tapes to MP3) do it manually. If there was some magic program that could do it for you (oh and hope your tape deck isn't set for continuous auto-reverse) it would probably not be free.

Besides being able to eliminate noise/pop/badEQ/levels... BTW, WAV is strictly the way to go (closest to analog you'll get)! If they're MP3's/other ("lossy compression"), convert first.

[Guest wsxedcrfv]

Just for the record, here's a piece of software I found that does exactly what I was looking for:

AudioGrabber:

http://www.audiograbber.org/downloads/agsetup

You'll have to download a separate mp3 codec, which can be found here:

http://www.heinzle.co.at/lame/ag_mp3_plugin_setup.exe

[submix8c]

Thanx for finding that (sounds familiar...). Will give it a try. However the following still stands -

Besides being able to eliminate noise/pop/badEQ/levels... BTW, WAV is strictly the way to go (closest to analog Untouched Analog/Live you'll get)! If they're MP3's/other ("lossy compression"), convert first.

IOW, LP/Tape/Live->WAV first since they're Analog Input. CD's are already pre-mastered Digitally-converted uncompressed WAV then "chop"(edit)/convert to MP3/whatever.

(p.s. Arrggh, matey, I bee Sound Engineer! ) Seriously, look it up....