Topic: How do I Correct Soundcard @ 48, Cool Edit @ 44?

[bhadella]

That's right, bonehead move of the year.  I accidentally had my soundcard set @ 48 and Cool Edit set @ 44 for a transfer.....hence, my recording is faster (10% or whatever that 4.1/48 is) than it should be. Oh yeah, and the dats have already been reused so  I can't retransfer.  Did I also drop samples?  Can I stretch the wave to it's correct size?  Am I screwed?

Thanks
Brian

[Brian Skalinder]

I think you can fix this by just changing the WAV file header sample rate.  I forget where it is in CEP, maybe in the Edit menu?  At any rate, it just changes the header sample rate, it doesn't actually resample.

[caymanreview]

yes you can do that, just change the sample rate (not convert sample rate) and it will play fine

[bhadella]

I had to convert the sample rates  from 44 > 48 and then just adjust the sample rate from 48 > 44 to get the length of the wave to match up w/ that of the dat (end of dat is intact).  I'm going to have to go through that process 20 something times but atleast it's correct.  Thanks for the help!!!

+ T all around, maybe this is archive material for other idiots like me!!!!  
 

Brian

[Brian Skalinder]

I had to convert the sample rates  from 44 > 48 and then just adjust the sample rate from 48 > 44 to get the length of the wave to match up w/ that of the dat (end of dat is intact).

I'm confused why you needed to convert and then change the sample rate instead of simply changing the sample rate?

[bhadella]

44K DAT > Soundcard @ 48K > Cool Edit @ 44K.  I ended up w/ a wave that was @ 44K but was fast (chipmunks).  Once I upsampled to 48K, I could just convert to 44K and the speed was correct again.  I'm an accountant and I'm not sure that I could explain the math....maybe that's why I'm an accountant....fuzzy math.  

Thanks again..

Brian

[Brian Skalinder]

44K DAT > Soundcard @ 48K > Cool Edit @ 44K.  I ended up w/ a wave that was @ 44K but was fast (chipmunks).  Once I upsampled to 48K, I could just convert to 44K and the speed was correct again.  I'm an accountant and I'm not sure that I could explain the math....maybe that's why I'm an accountant....fuzzy math.

I think just changing the sample rate (not converting) would have accomplished the same thing (but I've never done it so I'm not 100% certain).  At any rate, glad you worked it out and have listenable copies of the recordings!

[bhadella]

When I simply just adjusted the sample rate to 48K, it shortened the wave evem more making it even faster!!!!  32K was too slow, so I figured resampling and then adjusting might do the trick.  It did...