> For that matter it may be
> possible to restore the complete sound of Bach
> playing the organ. But
> why make it more difficult that it has to be.
I somehow suspect that there are not alot of
recordings extant of dear Johann playing the organ.
More's the pity.
> In the majority of cases, I cannot tell the
> difference between CD and
> the ATRAC on my MZ-R90. However, I did a recording
> with it of some
> acoustic guitar, where I didn't set the levels
> properly, and I can hear
> a difference between the ATRAC and the DAT version.
I have found that recording acoustic guitar is one of
MDs weak points. The sound is drier...I think because
overtones are being thrown out. These overtones are
an important part of the music.
> I also notice a distinct decrease in quality when I
> start to process the
> ATRAC stuff with EQ or reverb or dynamic
> compression, and the like.
Why would you want to do that? I would want a
recording to sound the way it was originally done.
> The only reason for my first post on this subject
was > the statement that MD is High Quality recording.
I >just don't think so.
People today are so spoiled. Go back 15 years to the
era of LPs and cassettes. Minidisc sure sounds like
high quality to those of us who are old enough to have
been music lovers in the pre-digital age. By the way,
many of my favorite recordings never saw the light of
day in the digital age. The music only exists on LP
(or in some cases cassettes). The important thing is
the music...not the technology!
James
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
http://photos.yahoo.com/
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
