From alsa-user-owner@alsa.jcu.cz  Fri Jan 15 07:41:34 1999
Received: from smtp1.erols.com (smtp1.erols.com [207.172.3.234])
	by marvin.jcu.cz (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA15047
	for <alsa-user@alsa.jcu.cz>; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 07:39:59 +0100
Received: from oemcomputer (209-122-225-242.s242.tnt1.nyw.erols.com [209.122.225.242])
	by smtp1.erols.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with SMTP id BAA24941
	for <alsa-user@alsa.jcu.cz>; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 01:39:54 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <369EE29E.2E21@erols.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 01:39:26 -0500
From: Paul Winkler <zarmzarm@erols.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: alsa-user@alsa.jcu.cz
Subject: Re: sample editing
References: <199901132220.XAA04285@obelix.vande-pol.demon.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: alsa-user@alsa.jcu.cz
Sender: alsa-user-owner@alsa.jcu.cz
Precedence: list

Frank van de Pol wrote:
 
> Because of intel endianess the WAV format is more efficient.

True; I've used NoTAM's "Mix" software and the wave version ("MixW"),
and there's a very dramatic difference in realtime output when using
.wav files... the aiff version gets bad dropouts on my machine.

> The WAV format
> is basically a rip-off of the AIFF format. Both have comparable features.
> 
> Regarding the loop points in the WAV format: yes these are supported; 

Ah! THanks for the clarification!

--PW

