Splitting up 6gb .wav

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Long story short, I need to split a 6.07 GB 24/96 .wav file into several
smaller files (less than 2GB) so that I can edit them in Cubase SX. My
OS is Win2k. I have tried using the DOS program AudioHack, but the files
it outputs cause an unsupported format error message (even if I change
the extension to .raw). Also tried chopping up the region in Cubase, but
it won't read past 2 GB from the beginning of the .wav. Can anyone
suggest a utility or method to recover the remainder of the file? Thanks!

Jonny Durango
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Sounds like we need a "stream editor" for .wav files... something which
understands how to simply break it up into chunks with appropriate
headers. Should be trivial to write, actually, since .wavs are (I
believe) a relatively simple file format...
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Jonny Durango" <jonnydurango1BUSH_FROM_OFFICE@comcast.net>
wrote in message news:ePOdnetU99peV5PeRVn-jg@comcast.com

> Long story short, I need to split a 6.07 GB 24/96 .wav
> file into several smaller files (less than 2GB) so that I
> can edit them in Cubase SX. My OS is Win2k. I have tried
> using the DOS program AudioHack, but the files it outputs
> cause an unsupported format error message (even if I
> change the extension to .raw). Also tried chopping up the
> region in Cubase, but it won't read past 2 GB from the
> beginning of the .wav. Can anyone suggest a utility or
> method to recover the remainder of the file? Thanks!

Seems like a program like Audition/CE which supports raw
formats, is what you need to deal with the files coming out
of AudioHack.

Raw format is basically .wav file format with no headers. It
looks like Audiohack is literally chopping the files, which
results in a file with no headers.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <-62dncldkOGIl5LeRVn-2Q@comcast.com>,
Joe Kesselman <keshlam-nospam@comcast.net> wrote:
>Sounds like we need a "stream editor" for .wav files... something which
>understands how to simply break it up into chunks with appropriate
>headers. Should be trivial to write, actually, since .wavs are (I
>believe) a relatively simple file format...

There's a set of command line utilities that allow you to extract sections
of .wav files. I know they were written for the SGI and they show up on
Cook's web list of SGI audio utilities, but I am sure they have been ported
to Linux and OSX these days as well.

wav files can be all kinds of things, but the most common format consists
of alternating 16-bit or 32-bit words containing right and left samples,
and a fixed 56-bit header saying what's inside. In fact, all you need to
do is strip the header off, send it to the output, count off to the starting
position, start copying the number of samples desired and copying them to
the output, then ending. You could even do this with sed!
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

If your HDD is formatted as FAT32 you may be having trouble with a 2GB
file-size limit inherent within that file system. If this is the case you
could always try converting the HDD to NTFS which doesn't have this problem
but BACK UP your stuff first! If not then I'd just download demo's of audio
editors until you find one that will allow you to open the file, zoom right
out and chop it up. File splitter apps will generally just chop the file
without worrying about headers as the usual purpose is only to chop it up so
it can be reassembled later. Obviously without the header info your chopped
up wav files will be largely useless.

Good luck

Aidan

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:p8KdnTpoDNHHkZLeRVn-jQ@comcast.com...
> "Jonny Durango" <jonnydurango1BUSH_FROM_OFFICE@comcast.net>
> wrote in message news:ePOdnetU99peV5PeRVn-jg@comcast.com
>
>> Long story short, I need to split a 6.07 GB 24/96 .wav
>> file into several smaller files (less than 2GB) so that I
>> can edit them in Cubase SX. My OS is Win2k. I have tried
>> using the DOS program AudioHack, but the files it outputs
>> cause an unsupported format error message (even if I
>> change the extension to .raw). Also tried chopping up the
>> region in Cubase, but it won't read past 2 GB from the
>> beginning of the .wav. Can anyone suggest a utility or
>> method to recover the remainder of the file? Thanks!
>
> Seems like a program like Audition/CE which supports raw formats, is what
> you need to deal with the files coming out of AudioHack.
>
> Raw format is basically .wav file format with no headers. It looks like
> Audiohack is literally chopping the files, which results in a file with no
> headers.
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

For your information- I just tried generating a 6 giga file with
audition and it crashed brutally. Looks like the limit it can handle is
4 giga.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

A WAV file can only be 4 gig in size - check out the WAV file spec.

Rail
--
Recording Engineer/Software Developer
Rail Jon Rogut Software
http://www.railjonrogut.com
mailto:rail@railjonrogut.com

<kleinebre@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125092635.360361.24330@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> For your information- I just tried generating a 6 giga file with
> audition and it crashed brutally. Looks like the limit it can handle is
> 4 giga.
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Jonny Durango" <jonnydurango1BUSH_FROM_OFFICE@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ePOdnetU99peV5PeRVn-jg@comcast.com...
> Long story short, I need to split a 6.07 GB 24/96 .wav file into several
> smaller files (less than 2GB) so that I can edit them in Cubase SX. My OS
> is Win2k. I have tried using the DOS program AudioHack, but the files it
> outputs cause an unsupported format error message (even if I change the
> extension to .raw). Also tried chopping up the region in Cubase, but it
> won't read past 2 GB from the beginning of the .wav. Can anyone suggest a
> utility or method to recover the remainder of the file? Thanks!
>
> Jonny Durango

Hi Johnny,

What application / system created this huge file in the first place?

--
John L Rice
Drummer@ImJohn.com
 

Doc

Distinguished
Jan 11, 2003
131
0
18,630
0
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Aiden" <Aiden@nospamherecwcom.net> wrote in message
news:den9l4$11e$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
> If your HDD is formatted as FAT32 you may be having trouble with a 2GB
> file-size limit inherent within that file system. If this is the case you
> could always try converting the HDD to NTFS which doesn't have this
problem

I could be wrong, but I don't think Win2000 supports NTFS, I believe that
you have to go to XP.

Btw, a 6 gig single audio file??
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Doc" <docsavage20@xhotmail.com> wrote in
news:OCYPe.2469$9i4.1709@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:

>
> "Aiden" <Aiden@nospamherecwcom.net> wrote in message
> news:den9l4$11e$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
>> If your HDD is formatted as FAT32 you may be having trouble with a
>> 2GB file-size limit inherent within that file system. If this is the
>> case you could always try converting the HDD to NTFS which doesn't
>> have this
> problem
>
> I could be wrong, but I don't think Win2000 supports NTFS, I believe
> that you have to go to XP.

You are.

http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm

NT as in windows NT, which is a lot older than Win2K
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Forty Winks wrote:

>> I could be wrong, but I don't think Win2000 supports NTFS, I believe
>> that you have to go to XP.
>
> You are.
>
> http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm
>
> NT as in windows NT, which is a lot older than Win2K

It's older than NT even, since it was largely taken from OS/2's HPFS
(which is why they both have the same partition ID).

--
JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- jpm@it-he.org
Anti-walkthroughs for Deus Ex, Thief and Ultima http://www.it-he.org
Reign of the Just - An Ultima clone http://rotj.it-he.org
The DMFA radio series project http://dmfa.it-he.org
d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!S'!8!9!KAW u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB----
uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

J. P. Morris wrote:
> Forty Winks wrote:
>
>
>>>I could be wrong, but I don't think Win2000 supports NTFS, I believe
>>>that you have to go to XP.
>>
>>You are.
>>
>>http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm
>>
>>NT as in windows NT, which is a lot older than Win2K
>
>
> It's older than NT even, since it was largely taken from OS/2's HPFS
> (which is why they both have the same partition ID).
>
NT Aint' old

Windows NT usually refers to Windows NT 4.0
Windows NT 5.0 is Windows 2000
Windows NT 5.1 is Windows XP
Windows NT 5.2 is Windows 2003

NT is ever evolving. Those new names are just for marketing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT

Oh and FAT32 is dead:)

CD
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 13:44:05 +0100, J. P. Morris wrote:

> Forty Winks wrote:
>
>>> I could be wrong, but I don't think Win2000 supports NTFS, I believe
>>> that you have to go to XP.
>>
>> You are.
>>
>> http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm
>>
>> NT as in windows NT, which is a lot older than Win2K
>
> It's older than NT even, since it was largely taken from OS/2's HPFS
> (which is why they both have the same partition ID).

NTFS also borrows from the VMS file system, which in turn, was a copy
of an error tolerant file system for papyrus scrolls.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "Codifus" <codifus@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:dm1Qe.318$kS1.9@fe08.lga
>> J. P. Morris wrote:
>>> Forty Winks wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> I could be wrong, but I don't think Win2000 supports
>>>>> NTFS, I believe that you have to go to XP.
>>>>
>>>> You are.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm
>>
>>>> NT as in windows NT, which is a lot older than Win2K
>>> It's older than NT even, since it was largely taken from
>>> OS/2's HPFS (which is why they both have the same
>>> partition ID).
>
> NTFS is definately not HPFS nor was a majority of it taken
> from HPFS. . Yes, the team that designed NTFS knew HPFS
> internals, but they also knew about the internals of a lot
> of other file systems including the VMS file system.

Okay, I may be wrong there. I was under the impression that NTFS was forked
from HPFS. I'm pretty certain that in the beginning both OS/2 and NT could
use each other's filesystems before the relationship soured, but of course
that doesn't mean they both used the same FS.

--
JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- jpm@it-he.org
Anti-walkthroughs for Deus Ex, Thief and Ultima http://www.it-he.org
Reign of the Just - An Ultima clone http://rotj.it-he.org
The DMFA radio series project http://dmfa.it-he.org
d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!S'!8!9!KAW u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB----
uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"J. P. Morris" <jpm@it-he.org> wrote in message
news:4310df36$0$22937$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> "Codifus" <codifus@optonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:dm1Qe.318$kS1.9@fe08.lga
>>> J. P. Morris wrote:
>>>> Forty Winks wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> I could be wrong, but I don't think Win2000 supports
>>>>>> NTFS, I believe that you have to go to XP.
>>>>>
>>>>> You are.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm
>>>
>>>>> NT as in windows NT, which is a lot older than Win2K
>>>> It's older than NT even, since it was largely taken
>>>> from OS/2's HPFS (which is why they both have the same
>>>> partition ID).
>>
>> NTFS is definately not HPFS nor was a majority of it
>> taken from HPFS. . Yes, the team that designed NTFS knew
>> HPFS internals, but they also knew about the internals
>> of a lot of other file systems including the VMS file
>> system.

> Okay, I may be wrong there.


> I was under the impression
> that NTFS was forked from HPFS.

In some sense, just not "largely taken"

> I'm pretty certain that
> in the beginning both OS/2 and NT could use each other's
> filesystems before the relationship soured,

And after. NT could access a HPFS volume through NT 3.x.
HPFS support was removed for NT 4.0.

>but of course that doesn't mean they both used the same
>FS.

Agreed.
 

Doc

Distinguished
Jan 11, 2003
131
0
18,630
0
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Forty Winks" <Yawn@bedtime.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96BF860FC258DYawnbedtime@84.92.1.10...

> You are.
>
> http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm
>
> NT as in windows NT, which is a lot older than Win2K

I guess the reason I thought that was I'd always heard Win2K was really a
revamped version of 98SE. I never had any of the intermediate versions
between 98SE and XP.
 

Doc

Distinguished
Jan 11, 2003
131
0
18,630
0
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"John L Rice" <Drummer@ImJohn.com> wrote in message
news:11h12ub5pasuqd8@corp.supernews.com...
> What application / system created this huge file in the first place?

I was wondering if he has a recording of all of WWII from start to finish or
something.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Doc" <docsavage20@xhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:yi9Qe.3013$_84.0@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net
> "Forty Winks" <Yawn@bedtime.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns96BF860FC258DYawnbedtime@84.92.1.10...
>
>> You are.
>>
>> http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm
>>
>> NT as in windows NT, which is a lot older than Win2K
>
> I guess the reason I thought that was I'd always heard
> Win2K was really a revamped version of 98SE. I never had
> any of the intermediate versions between 98SE and XP.

NT pre-exists Win95!

NT 3.1 was first delivered to the public a few months after
Win 3.1, as I recall.

The original plan was for Win95 to be based on a NT kernal,
but the DOS program compatibility issues were too much.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Doc" <docsavage20@xhotmail.com> wrote in news:yi9Qe.3013$_84.0
@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net:

>
> "Forty Winks" <Yawn@bedtime.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns96BF860FC258DYawnbedtime@84.92.1.10...
>
>> You are.
>>
>> http://www.ntfs.com/ntfs_vs_fat.htm
>>
>> NT as in windows NT, which is a lot older than Win2K
>
> I guess the reason I thought that was I'd always heard Win2K was really a
> revamped version of 98SE. I never had any of the intermediate versions
> between 98SE and XP.
>
I think you may be thinking of Windows ME, which was a bit of a pig in an
poke.
 

johno

Distinguished
May 22, 2004
44
0
18,580
0
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>> NT as in windows NT, which is a lot older than Win2K
>
> I guess the reason I thought that was I'd always heard Win2K was really a
> revamped version of 98SE. I never had any of the intermediate versions
> between 98SE and XP.
>

2K looks like 98, but under the hood it's an *entirely* different animal.

There were two distinct OS paths, the business stuff (NT) and the consumer
stuff (9x). NT4 became 2K with a major rework, including the new "95"
interface and a lot, lot more. It was called NT5 before it was released. XP
then came directly from 2K in 2001.

95 begat 98, which became SE when they fixed a pile of bugs, which begat ME.
ME seemed to be a public beta test of a bunch of eventual XP features. Major
POS system that I wouldn't wish on anyone. The 9x line didn't lead to
anything else, the line dead-ended at ME.

-John O
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
reynoldswrap Audio 0
Drakon_71 Audio 1
B Audio 1
V Audio 2
M Audio 2
X Audio 4
H Audio 5
C Audio 1
A Audio 1
B Audio 2
E Audio 4
D Audio 3
S Audio 2
L Audio 2
N Audio 3
E Audio 1
S Audio 2
G Audio 3
7 Audio 1
V Audio 1

ASK THE COMMUNITY