===================================================
= NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please =
= be more selective when quoting text =
===================================================
Wouldn't an ATRAC-encoded track be double the file size of when it's encoded
in MP3 (around 128kbps)? Correct me if I'm wrong.
The reason that ATRAC3 was invented was to give a compression (all right,
lossy compression) ratio similar to what MP3 could do. If the original
ATRAC could do it, Sony wouldn't create ATRAC3, would it?
Or does quality make sense to broke college kids like me...? :)
Leon
P.S. How about the AAC compression that Panasonic is using on SD (memory
card) players? They claim better quality than MP3 and higher compression
ratio.
P.S.S. A Japanese retailer has listed the Panasonic SJ-MR200 for sale. It
doesn't look like a typo, because it's listed alongside the MR100. No pics
yet; hope to see it soon.
http://www.pasoq.co.jp/shopping/hard/maker/E6F009.html
> Unless I am missing something big time, I still don't think that they
> will be able to get the cost of flash memory low enough to make building
> a library of music on them. In addition, isn't Flash memory really
> meant as a temporary means of storage? Not archival?
>
> I think that it is time for someone to reintroduce the MD. Maybe they
> should even change the name (but of course it would make the claim that
> it is compatible with standard MD players-because it would actually be
> mini discs).
>
> Then they should have an interface on it to make it compatible with
> either serial and or USB. There are two ways that they could turn Mp3s
> into ATRAC. The first would be by having firmware right in the
> recorder.
>
> The other would be a software solution that would convert Mp3s to wave
> files and them spit them out as PCM through one of the ports mentioned
> above. One of the first USB peripherals I saw were speakers. If you
> can go from USB to speakers, I don't see any big deal in going from USB
> to PCM.
>
> Actually there is a third option. This would be a software hardware
> solution. I don't think that what I am about to describe is the best
> way to go because we want to keep it as simple as possible.
>
> You have a computer card that converts mp3s into PCM and has a USB or
> serial. This is too complicated. Besides, I realize that in order for
> this crazy plan of mine ot work, you would have to be able to have
> instant transfer of mp3s to ATRAC. In that way, the recorder would be
> able to create an MD in seconds instead of real time. But today's
> recorders can't input ATRAC.
>
> I realize that this is going to take a new breed of recorder, with high
> speed recording capabilities. But if people are will to put up with CD
> writers that give you 2X real time, if the new MD recorder could make
> the transfer in say 5 time (the compression ratio of ATRAC), I think
> that the majority of the people would be happy with that. If it could
> do it faster, fine.
>
> I thought of yet another way to do it. I guess first of all, they
> should wait until all of this mp3/Napster stuff settles down. If an
> agreement is reached that allows companies such as Napster and Mp3. to
> exist legally, that would be the time to strike.
>
> I don't know anything about mp3 compression. All a do is download songs
> and play them by either converting them to wave files or on my Apex DVD
> player. I know that ATRAC is bit wise reduction. You throw away the
> bits that you don't hear. Couldn't ATRAC be used instead of mp3??
>
> Can't you use ATRAC instead of mp3 to provide you with files small
> enough to download, so you wouldn't need a life time to record just one
> song.
>
> From what I have seen of mp3, it seems to have about a 5:1 ratio like
> ATRAC?? If so, the ATRAC files should take up about the same amount of
> space a mp3 and be able to be downloaded at about the same speed.
>
> I'm getting into areas that I know little about (which is just about
> everywhere <G>), but even if the songs on an MD are the compressed
> equivalent of music tracks on a CD, you should be able to do some of the
> things I have mentioned using a form of digital audio extraction.
>
> I really don't understand it, but I'm told that the tracks on a CD are
> not real files, but rather virtual files. If you take a CD and check it
> with Windows Explorer, each track is listed as only 1KB. Now you know
> that it is actually much larger then that.
>
> I think one problem with the MD is that it was born too early. The MD
> is 21st century technology. At the price of solid state I feel it is
> going to be 21st century plus 10 years or more (maybe never)
> technology. I may be shocked in a year or so, but I just can't see
> 140MB of memory dropping to $3.00 in my life time.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
