Tag Archives: recording

VoIP Call Recorder and Screenpops

Posted on by
119

Asterisk VoIP News gets the call for exposing a new tool for recording your VoIP calls in OS X. The tool is called SoloRecord, and it permits you to get caller ID screenpops when you receive a call. The way it does this is by snooping the SIP packets coming across your network and then creating appropriate responses in software. I’ve explained the exact technique behind SIP snooping and discreet call recording in my book, VoIP Hacks.

There are a few caveats with SoloRecord’s requirements, of course. The only supported signaling protocol is SIP (Ie. no Skype, Skinny, MGCP or H.323 services are supported). Also, if your service utilizes an exotic sound codec, you won’t be able to record calls. Screenpops should still work, though.

Also, the developers want you to use a Neanderthal Ethernet HUB (because a switch would make the snooping very difficult without supervisory port mirroring or some other method of snooping, such as an ARP poison attack). In my mind, that’s a serious limitation. But most low-end switches don’t offer port monitoring, so you might be better off plugging your ATA into Ovolab’s Phlink call recording software if you really need to record calls.

Also, if you’re using a SIP softphone client, such as Gizmo Project, you’re in good shape, because SoloRecord can grab the audio packets right from the local interface. Cool stuff!

Hey–the guys over at Ovolab and Parliant should seriously considering buying the SoloRecord source code. For a long time, I’ve lamented how those products don’t support VoIP yet. SoloRecord would save them an awful lot of work.

Also, if you’re looking for a way to record Skype calls as well, be sure to check out SoundFlower.

Reaction to Indy iTunes

Posted on by
835

Regarding my suggestion that Apple should use iTunes to transform the indy music scene, the reaction was varied, vocal, and very mixed. Alec Saunders likes the idea and provides some good feedback:

Ted’s proposal is just the sort of inspired lunacy, the zig to Microsoft’s DRM zag, that Apple ought to embrace. Let people upload their own music and share the profits from downloads with them. iTunes has more market power than you think, Steve. What would happen if iTunes became the indy “label” of choice?

I never really thought of iTunes being a label, but that’s exactly what it would become. Also, I’d to emphasize the point the iTunes has more market power the most people think. That’s why, despite upstarts like Tamago and Tunecore, iTunes has a better chance at succeeding in the task of enabling indy producers. There’s no question that certain, limited options for indy distribution exist (remember CD Baby?) but I don’t want them to just exist. How many of them embrace the 2.0 community ideal? I want them to have an impact. Imagine the Apple-shaped crater from the impact of a 2.0 iTunes. Om Malik was also digging the idea.

Andy Abramson likes the idea but doubts it will happen. He brings up MP3.com’s Michael Robertson, who has had a similar vision for a long time, citing his experience as evidence that the old guard of record industry powers that be would never allow Apple to truly go indy with the thing. I think the reason MP3.com lost in the end was because they didn’t have the commercial legitimacy iTunes now possesses.

Perhaps most compelling was Michael Robertson’s own response, which he posted in a comment:

MP3.com WAS the Youtube of music. We had lots of firsts:

- Accept every band (major or indie)
- Free band signups
- Free unlimited storage and bandwidth
- Non-exclusive
- Shared ad money (called payback for playback)
- Sold CDs (gave artists 50%)

When MP3.com shutdown a few new sites popped up to take it’s place. Purevolume.com became the biggest initially and then myspace combined band hosting with social networking. Magic happened!

So yes, Steve should sell MP3s. And I have 3 other ideas like publishing the database format for ipods so other software can store files onto them.

MP3.com was a 2.0 company operating in a 1.0 world, and this is unfortunate. MySpace’s arrival on the scene, much to the detriment of a potential indy iTunes, is something I certainly noticed. The problem is, as far as music goes, MySpace doesn’t go far enough. It still doesn’t lower barriers to entry for distribution, which was the crux of my idea. MP3.com did. However, MySpace’s social networking apparatus and community-building capabilities would be a slice of heaven pie for indy producers if their UI was cleaner (a la Apple) and their market posture for music distribution was stronger (a la Apple). Plus, indy music isn’t the main focus of MySpace, so they’ll never cater to indy producers the way iTunes could/should.

Re-read the list Robertson posted–with the exception of selling CDs, that list is a success formula for an indy iTunes. Combine that with easy publishing tools, perhaps in GarageBand or Logic Express, and Apple has a lock on the whole process, as they prefer to.

Commenter Paul writes:

Apple can hardly process the content that is coming in already fast enough and they certainly like to keep (editorial) control over their iTunes stores. What you are describing might be a bit too wild and free for Apple.

If Apple insisted on editorial control over the music content, they would be completely missing the point. Quality Control happens AUTOMATICALLY in a 2.0 world.

Nathan writes:

Apple does have the tools and infrastructure to make this happen. However, its a bit like asking Virgin Megastore to open up a few shelves to local indie bands from the neighborhood. Possible, but highly unlikely.

I agree that it’s unlikely, but then again, so was the iPhone. Apple has a tendency to surprise. And the reason I’m bent on Apple doing it is because I believe they’re the only ones who have the framework for guaranteed success at it. Which reminds me, while I was sleeping last night, several hundred web sites popped up which promise to ‘get your music into the iTunes store’ or otherwise aide indy distribution. Among them–Amiestreet, iJigg, Tunecore, Project Opus, Tamago, and about half-dozen others.

Why the “i” in iTunes should stand for “indy”

Posted on by
1,770

iTunes debuted several years ago, and I continue to be impressed with the simplicity and superiority of Apple’s value chain for music–from the iPod to the Mac/PC all the way up to the store itself. Not so much for video delivery, but that’s a subject for another Sunday. The point is, iPod and iTunes accomplished a far-sighted vision incubated by Jobs and immediately lampooned by lots of naysayers. Of course, Jobs had the last laugh.

But while the last laugh he may’ve had, the last frontier for iTunes isn’t music, and it certainly isn’t merely video. It’s GOT TO BE community-generated content. Look at YouTube. They’ve taken the medium and empowered a collective of independent, usually amateur, video producers by giving an outlet for their art, for their skull-cracking skateboard accidents, and sometimes, for their influence. Isn’t that the heart of Web 2.0?

Steve Jobs’ recent comments dissing Digital Rights Management as a repressor of the greater media industry got me thinking: What would iTunes be like if it were given the 2.0 treatment? Here are my ideas for ya Steve, free of charge:

1. Allow anyone–ANYONE–to submit music to the iTunes site. Then, allow these independent producers to create communities around that music. Free and open user ratings and reviews of the content, just like the commercial stuff that’s in the iTunes Store. The good stuff will be rewarded and bubble to the top, while the crap will languish at the bottom of the bit barrel, just as it should be.
2. Empower Mac users to create superior content–it bolsters the growth of the platform in way that shoddy .Mac cannot. In other words, give Logic Express and GarageBand features which allow pain-free submission of user-generated music by indy producers. Take your cues from MacJams.com, but make it look Apple-pretty and make it stupidly easy for all us musical blockheads.

3. Share revenue with independent producers who submit music–they’re a lot less likely than Warner Bros. or Arista Records to squeeze you for 94% of the revenue generated, or whatever you’re paying now. Paying indy producers for content sold accomplishes three things–(a) it rewards and encourages the community while increasing the influence of Apple in the musical entertainment space (b) it allows a pathetically stagnant indy music business to be scrappy against the payola wagon at Clear Channel and compete with the big record companies, who would rather publish three platinum albums per year than twenty gold albums, and (c) it could create deflationary pressure on the big labels currently participating in the iTunes franchise, lowering prices and increasing thru volume. Everybody wins.

4. Keep community-submitted music DRM-free. Mindshare is the reward for excellent art. In keeping indy submissions free of DRM, you can prove your point to the big labels.

Steve, you acted like you had a pair of rocks when you mouthed off about DRM. Now, it’s time to prove it. Apple is in a unique position to create a whole new arena for democratized indy music. Where MP3.com failed, Apple can succeed, because it already has a captive audience with iTunes.

Recording drums on a budget

Posted on by
1,285

(Note to my VoIP readership: this is an indulgence since I don’t have anywhere to blog about my other passion, amateur recording. So bear with me. After all, this used to be a blog about music.)

I’ve been looking for a good way to record my drum kit, since my home recordings reek of pre-recorded drum loops that scream amateur. This is fine if you spend all day in Reason doing techno music, but not so fine if you like rock and roll. You just need real drums, at least I do, and I needed a good, cheap way of recording my standard setup, a four-piece drum set with ride, two crashes, and of course, hi hats.

So I experimented with a variety of potential setups before settling on something I’m happy with. Keep in mind, I’m using a Macbook without a digital input/preamp device, so I only have two inputs (left and right). The drums, which are recorded using four microphones, are mixed down to the two inputs using a cheapy six-channel mixer, again, with no preamps. Here is the result.
The mic I chose are also cheapies, but I was very pleased with the outcome. A Nady kick drum mic and two phantom-powered condensers. The condensers go overhead, each equidistant from the snare drum. My first couple of takes I tried with just these three mics, and it came out very crisp and clear once I had the levels set right on the mixer. The only problem was, the snare drum wasn’t present enough. I toyed around with moving the overheads closer to the snare, but it just wasn’t good enough. So I ended up close-micing the snare with a trashy 57-style vocal mic, and that gave me just enough volume to bring the snare up to right level of smack I was looking for. The only problem is that the quality of the snare sound suffered when I did this. The overheads were definitely more articulate than the clumsy old mic I put on the snare.

In the end, I came up with a recording that you can listen to by clicking here. Keep in mind, this isn’t a performance, just a quick drum session of several rock beats and rolls designed to evaluate the recording setup. The only post-processing I did was compress the final track a bit and add a hint of verb. There’s no EQ anywhere, not even from the input mixer. This should give a good idea of the frequency range and capability of this particular recording setup. BTW the single stereo track was recorded using GarageBand.
Generally, I’m pretty pleased with the result, considering the mics and cables only set me back less than $200. What do you think about it?

Looks like I’m “It”

Posted on by
75

I got tagged by Ken Camp. So, in keeping with prior posts of this nature, I’ll follow suit:

1. I have two great children, Jacob and Madelyn. Both play in the strings program at their school. Jacob owns a Detroit Lions jersey and KNOWS Ohio State is going to be crowned champion this year.

2. I’m a drummer and bass player. I’ve been in and out of bands since I was a kid, and recently played with a country project. I can occasionally be spotted playing at Jam Night at Rocker’s in Elyria, OH.

3. I used to be a consultant to Amiga Inc. when they were owned by Gateway. I sold my last Amiga on eBay about three years ago. (My first writing gigs were for Amiga Informer and Amazing Computing–remember those?)
4. I personally took a picture of Steve Yzerman hoisting the Stanley Cup in downtown Detroit on parade day a few years ago. Everybody went to work that day, but nobody worked!

5. I’d be happy to give a $50 tip to the first person who can get me a Nintendo Wii for MSRP. Skype me at tedwallingford if you can find one.

Now, who to tag next. I’m going to pick somebody outside the VoIP world and call on John Palmer, another Clevelander who hails from the radio broadcasting industry, and who writes about business.

Talkster

Posted on by
884

Alec has a write-up on Talkster. The service might be of interest to Ken Camp, who doesn’t want to be forced to have more phone numbers, and to others who would sure love to save on LD if only it was practical for them to do so. Alec includes a couple of photos of the service in action–they appear to be web-page-driven user interace elemtents but I could be wrong.

Microsoft: Know Thyne Enemy

Posted on by
73

Russell Shaw has a good point:

Right now, I am cranky. And when bloggers get cranky, ooh boy, better watch out.
Kill switches are NEVER, EVER OK.

Russ is talking about the lock-out “feature” of Vista, which allows Microsoft to basically lock users out of PCs that they consider to be running pirate software. This occurs as Google is gearing up an onslaught of code that, for the first time in a long time, makes me reconsider Microsoft’s position of dominance in the PC industry.

Take Writely/Google Docs for example. Here you have a very basic word processor that’s free, service-based, and works on just about every platform. (Got a 7.0 browser? You’re rockin’.) Add to that Blogger, and now you’ve got the ability to blog from the Google web platform. But it doesn’t end there. Check out Sketchup, which provides 3D modeling capabilities, and Google Talk, which gives you voice and text instant messaging. Not to mention Calendar and Picasa, which let you schedule and share photos, respectively.

And all of this stuff is free. And Mac/Linux compatible. And Firefox-compatible. And very good. So why aren’t all your friends using Writeley and Sketchup? One reason could be that they only cater to the least common denominator of features. Another reason could be that people have such a heavy investment in “the Microsoft way” that they’re experiencing an attitude ritard. Ie, “I paid $300 for Microsoft office, so by golly I’m going to use it!”
Yet somewhere beneath the facade of quiet giant Google is an inability (or timing issue?) that prevents them from really hyping all the goodness they have stored up in their warchest. I say inability because–when was the last time you saw a Google commercial?  Is the word-of-mouth that made Google the dominant power it has become good enough to get the ordinary consumer beyond Google Search and into Writely on a regular basis? Or is Google merely waiting, waiting to meet its enemy for all to see on the field of battle…

The fact is, Microsoft’s approach to software is outmoded. Services now rule the day, and monetizing services in an unconventional fashion is Google’s mode of operation. Look, I want Microsoft to be successful. I want Steve Balmer to be right when he poo-poos Google’s business dealings. But you know what? I don’t think Balmer has half the consumer identification skills Sergei has.

Seriously, I think Microsoft is stuck in 1993. Figuring out how to out-AOL AOL. Figuring out how to out-Apple Apple. Thinking of advertising as advertising instead of realizing and embracing the power of the consumer. Look, I used to run Microsoft click ads on web sites that I’d developed, and my click-thru rates have never been as high as when I ran Google ads. Why? Because Google has developed an understanding of how consumers think of content. Ads are content, and so are applications.

This an idea that was fostered (perhaps 6 years too early) by Fleecy Moss and the boys over at Amiga. It’s too bad they aren’t on the Google team, where their ideas about the ubiquity of content and content-advocacy could be welcomed. It’s also too bad that their revolutionary ideas about content were scandaled by the tarpit of the Classic Amiga community, to whom  they felt beholden, and mired in unfortunate business dealings that landed them as a syndicator of second-rate card games and Arena Football League licensed stuff that runs on Windows Mobile. If Bill McEwen, Fleecy Moss, and the rest of the visionary Amiga gang had been empowered by a true-to-life revenue stream the way Google has been for the last several years, then Amiga might very well be in Google’s position. But ideas only get you so far. At some point, rubber must meet the road.

And this is the great question for Microsoft: is the Google rubber going to meet the road with applications? If it does, then Microsoft may be the next Commodore. It’s time for Microsoft to take it to the next level. Free, service-based applications from Google? Feh. It may be only a matter of time before a fully-functional suite of service-based operating environments appears, perhaps from Google, and Microsoft, with its lethargic retro piracy-checking lockout workstation sillyness, will look like yesterday’s news.

At least that’s what Google is hoping.

Now would be the time Microsoft. Now would be the time.

Posted on by
32

Hmm, this is cool. You can post blog entries from Google Docs AKA Writely. So, this is an experimental post. It still feels weird; let’s see how weird it feels when I put a picture in. OK, since we a VoIP blog, check out these two VoIP phones: the D-link DPH-540 and the UTStarcom F3000G. No, that’s not an illusion. The HP-540 really is THAT BIG.