D
> during a quiet passage in the music! Who really gives a damn. The main
> reason I purchased a MiniDisc was that I could have quality sound at a
> price a lot less that DAT prices. Plus the flexability over CDs, i.e
> moving, combining and deleting of tracks. The other reason was, that I
> can use it in conjunction with my "Mobile Disco", Not for mixing,
> scratching or any of that crap, but just to be able to copy tired 60s
> and 70s vinyl to MD and have instant access to it.
Hi,
I totally agree with you here... Sony has allways targeted MD as a
replacement for normal audio cassettes. Not as a replacement for
DAT or CD. And for portable it is the best compromise. Discmans
sound good but are way to large to fit into any pocket. A
tapewalkman is very cheap, but hasn't got the best soundquality. A
MP3 player has, for PORTABLE use rerasonable soundquality, but
is way to expensive and you need a computer to use them. MD is
not to expensive, small, cheap media, long running times and are
virtually shockproof (my MZ-E33 with 10 secs of shock mem never
lost track when walking or cycling, most portables feature 40 secs
now...).
And I allso like MD very much for in home use. The editing
functions are unsurpassed. No CD-R drive, Tape recorder or DAT
recorder has the same features.
What I am trying to tell is: Stop comparing MD recorders with DAT,
or CD-R drives. To me it is allmost impossible to tell the difference
between a digitally recorded MD and a CD.
MD is a great format and for portable it is the best format and it will
still take some time before MP3 or whatever format can pass MD.
Remco
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
