Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 23:38:07 -0500 (EST)
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at KeithLynch.net>
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Modems (was Re: Email issues...)
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>

"Mike B." <omni at omniphile.com> wrote:
> "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> Actually, KeithLynch.net isn't in Virginia, it's in Minnesota.

> Even better. ;-)

Ironically, Minnesota is one of the few states I've never been to.

> As for the ancient technology you are using, it is getting rare.
> I've been looking for a voice modem (one I can use to dial out, play
> wav files through and read DTMF tones back from) and they are pretty
> rare these days.

I'm not sure what you mean.  You mean an ordinary external modem?  I
know that shell accounts, dialup BBSs, and timesharing services are
getting rare, but those aren't the only things that modems are used
for.  Aren't broadband users still in the minority?  I'd think there
were more modems in use now than ever before, most of them for PPP
Internet accounts.

Or is it just *external* modems that are getting rare?

I have several I'm not using if you want one.  How about a genuine
Hayes 1200 bps Smartmodem?  It cost me over $500 new.  I still have
everything that came with it: the power supply, manual, and box.  The
manual makes fascinating reading, with sections on how to hook the
modem up to a ham radio, et cetera.  I also have faster modems, though
nothing about 28.8.

I'm not sure what you mean by "read DTMF tones back from."  The modems
I'm familiar with can produce DTMF (Touch-Tone) signals, but not
interpret them.

By "wav file," you mean one containing modem tones?  That will work
with the usual 1200 and 2400 bps standards, but the higher speeds
dynamically negotiate with the other modem, so precalculated signals
won't work.

Just don't try to store modem signals as MP3s.  That trick never
works.

Speaking of MP3, I discovered a new audio format at work this week:
DSS.  Eight megs for three hours of speech is a very impressive
number.  But the quality leaves a little something to be desired.
I've never seen the court reporter's digital recorder that produced
it, so I don't know if it's different from our other court reporters'
digital recorders, or if the little switch on the back just
accidentally got switched from "good" to "evil."  Fortunately,
she also recorded on tapes as a backup, so I was able to use those.