Hi,
I would like to have the phone call recording on desktop PC, SUSE or Windows 7. The present recording program can only record the sound frim microphone. Are there some free program can record both the mic and the speaker sound at the same time?
Thanks.
Hi
If your using pulseaudio, it’s pretty simple with parec and sox to dump
it to a file.
–
Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890)
openSUSE 12.2 (x86_64) Kernel 3.4.6-2.10-desktop
up 6:47, 4 users, load average: 0.03, 0.06, 0.10
CPU Intel i5 CPU M520@2.40GHz | Intel Arrandale GPU
Hi
And a script to do it all…
#!/bin/bash
#
# Based on script at http://www.outflux.net/blog/archives/2009/04/19/recording-from-pulseaudio/
#
# Set a date and time
RECDATE=`date +\%m%d%y%H%M%S`
# Output files
SPK_FILE="rec_speaker_$RECDATE.flac"
MIC_FILE="rec_microphone_$RECDATE.flac"
# Get current pulseaudio sink
PA_SINK=$(pactl list | grep -A2 '^Source #' | grep 'Name: .*\.monitor$' | awk '{print $NF}' | tail -n1)
# Start recording speaker and microphone and save as wav files
/usr/bin/parec -d "$PA_SINK" | /usr/bin/sox -t raw -r 44100 -b 16 -e signed -c 2 - "$SPK_FILE" &
/usr/bin/parec -r | /usr/bin/sox -t raw -r 44100 -b 16 -e signed -c 2 - "$MIC_FILE" &
# Add some feedback to user
echo -e "
Recording speaker output to $SPK_FILE ..."
echo -e "Recording microphone input to $MIC_FILE ...
"
read -p "Press any key to halt recording ... " -n1
# Kill off the processes
kill -s SIGTERM `pidof -s /usr/bin/parec`
kill -s SIGTERM `pidof -s /usr/bin/parec`
On 10/04/2012 02:36 AM, freerjw wrote:
> Are there some free program can record both the mic and the
> speaker sound at the same time?
i do not know, but i do know that in some areas of the world it is
against the law to record someone else secretly…
if that is the law where you live then you must be sure and record
them saying it is ok to record the call…
–
dd
i’m not a lawyer–you should ask one to inform you of the local law.
dd@home.dk wrote:
> i do not know, but i do know that in some areas of the world it is
> against the law to record someone else secretly…
That is true in the UK in some circumstances but not in others.
> if that is the law where you live then you must be sure and record
> them saying it is ok to record the call…
That is not generally true in the UK, although consent is necessary in
some particular circumstances. See, for example,
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/oftel/consumer/advice/faqs/prvfaq3.htm
In short, the law in this area is quite complex so you should check what
applies in your own jurisdiction.
Am 04.10.2012 13:02, schrieb Dave Howorth:
> dd@home.dk wrote:
>> i do not know, but i do know that in some areas of the world it is
>> against the law to record someone else secretly…
>
> That is true in the UK in some circumstances but not in others.
>
He said it is true in some areas of the world, that UK has special
laws does not matter, nobody knows where the OP lives.
To give an example where it is explicitly forbidden always expect you
have explicitly the consent from the caller is where I live (Germany),
but of course that also does not matter as long as the OP does not live
here.
So as dd described it it was correct.
The OP has of course to check the laws in the area where he/she lives
(otherwise it can become quite expensive or worse).
–
PC: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i7-2600@3.40GHz | 16GB | KDE 4.8.5 | GeForce GT 420
ThinkPad E320: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i3@2.30GHz | 8GB | KDE 4.9.2 | HD 3000
eCAFE 800: oS 12.2 i586 | AMD Geode LX 800@500MHz | 512MB | KDE 3.5.10
Martin Helm wrote:
> Am 04.10.2012 13:02, schrieb Dave Howorth:
>> dd@home.dk wrote:
>>> i do not know, but i do know that in some areas of the world it is
>>> against the law to record someone else secretly…
>> That is true in the UK in some circumstances but not in others.
>>
> He said it is true in some areas of the world, that UK has special
> laws does not matter, nobody knows where the OP lives.
> To give an example where it is explicitly forbidden always expect you
> have explicitly the consent from the caller is where I live (Germany),
> but of course that also does not matter as long as the OP does not live
> here.
> So as dd described it it was correct.
You misread my point. I did not and do not disagree with DD’s first
statement; I made no comment on it. I simply stated the position in the
UK. So you are trying to draw conclusions from a false premise.
My objection was to his second statement, which is wrong in general. And
I used the UK position as an example, which is why I made my comment
about the first statement. Of course, it is possible that it is true in
some jurisdictions, such as Germany, which is why I made no general
statement, but simply pointed out that it is important to check the
local laws. DD was the one that made a general claim that was not valid.
> The OP has of course to check the laws in the area where he/she lives
> (otherwise it can become quite expensive or worse).
On 10/04/2012 02:42 PM, Dave Howorth wrote:
> DD was the one that made a general claim that was not valid.
its probably not worth another post, but:
Dave is right, the way i phrased my second point can be read to mean
that i said in all locals the recording party must get an audio
statement from the person being recorded agreeing to that…
which of course, would be incorrect in some/many/most areas.
so:
it was not my intent to pretend to know the law in all areas (i
thought i made that clear)
certainly, in some areas the called individual can pre-authorize via
(say) postal mail, or email, or or or . . .
i know in some jurisdictions that only one of the two parties has to
agree to recording–and, that agreeing party can be the one making the
recording (therefore the recording can be done secretly)…
i worked once in a job where recording was routine, and my employer
required we record the verbal agreeing statement of the distant
party…but, if that party said NO, we turned off the recording device
and delayed the conversation until a live monitor could listen in on
what transpired and would later attest to the content of the call, its
conclusions and verbal contracts reached, by a signed memo for record…
i worked in other jobs where both sides of every call were recorded
but the other party was not so informed, and was not legally required to
be…
SO, (as said) the law is complicated and varies widely by country and
political divisions within: so consult a lawyer in your area to learn
the law (but, i already said that)
therefore: freerjw when someone finally gives you a technical answer
to your question, remember that failure to follow the law in your area
could prove to be costly.
–
dd