>The 5" MP3 CD player will be very quickly eclipsed by the variant which it
inadvertantly suggests: a 3" MP3 CD player, which has the ability to store two
40-minute hi-fi 256 Kbps MP3 albums. 80 minutes of music per 3" CDR is
*plenty* density. Cramming more on is not a goal at all, compared to making
the player more portable -- that is, smaller.
The above should read "90 minutes of music per 3" CDR is plenty density."
After transferring two standard albums onto a 3" CDR, in 256 Kbps MP3 format,
there was significant space remaining.
By the rule of thumb "2 MB per minute, for 256 Kbps music": 180 MB = 90
minutes of music. That's two standard 40-minute albums plus a solid 10
minutes extra -- like a 90-minute cassette tape but better because it's one
contiguous space rather than having a forced interruption halfway through. So
this format, when recording in MD-quality compression, returns to the old
familar duration: a piece of extremely inexpensive removable media, holding 90
minutes of music -- but with the advantages of MD playback: no midway
interruption, no dropouts, no azimuth alignment treble-loss, no wear or
stretching, no tangling, random access, title display.
MD has increased from 74 to 80 minutes, but going by that value-system, Mini
CDR is better, because it holds even 10 minutes more (perhaps more, with
overburning). Too bad it's only CD-density, not DVD-density. How about 3"
DVD-RW? Of course Dataplay fits even better in the hand. 12" -> 5" ->
MD/3" -> Dataplay... Dataplay is (I suppose) DVD density rather than CD
density. MD is merely CD density and is more compact because of lossy
compression.
There is a remarkable price-per-MB divide that groups together the cheap vs.
expensive media. The cheap media comprises Dataplay, MD, and Mini CDR. The
rest, such as microdrive or memory stick, are vastly more expensive --
especially memory stick, which is astronomically expensive per MB. The only
one that is so cheap it's practically free is Mini CDR ($0.67 for 180 MB, when
buying 10 online in flex-sleeves) -- this is truly disposable, unlike a $2 MD
that feels more like an investment.
My main concern with Mini CDR is not its lack of editability, but its size: it
is as big as MD, which is too big. Like an MD player, it would fill my big
hand a little too full. The sub-Rio sized MP3 players are a more practical
portable size, like a compact FM portable for running. I want more like the
size of the Dataplay media: this potential reduction compared to MD would be
significant, enabling me to keep the player in my pocket all the time, like my
keys or a lighter.
I find 75 minutes to be the perfect length for a looping mix. I never thought
"MD would be better if it weren't limited to 75 minutes". So Mini CDR's 90
minute limit is not a very significant advantage over MD for me.
Actually, I *have* had an issue with the 75-minute MD when trying to copy a
double-album from vinyl. For conventional double-albums, an 80-minute MD
might be long enough... but 90 minutes really is better to ensure the end
won't be cut off. Given that in the early 80s the designers chose such a
huge, 5", unportable (luggable) format, the original CD convention should have
been 85 minutes, not 75 minutes -- to fit a conventional double-album (80
minutes) with some extra space.
With the latest, 80-minute MDs and especially with 256 Kbps MP3 Mini CDR, we
finally achieve that good-old multiple-of-40-minutes duration that made the
90-minute cassette tape so popular a media. The 256 Kbps MP3 Mini CDR is one
sweet-spot, a potential standard island standing out among so many possible
combinations of media and compression rates.
o MD-quality sound
o Longer than MD duration (90 minutes; holds a double-album with extra space)
o Truly MP3 capable: no degradation added during transfer; titling and track
divisions are always preserved
o MD-sized (and weighs even less than MD) - about the same surface area, but
round
o Media costs 1/3 of MD ($0.67 vs. $2)
If you put a 3" and 5" MP3 CD player side by side in the store, it would be
interesting to see which one sells and becomes popular: the more compatible
(5") one, or the portable (3") one. We have returned to the days when people
bought 12" vinyl but when mobile, actually listened to cassette dubs instead.
We'll still buy 5" compact disks but when mobile, actually listen to Mini CDRs
or MiniDiscs instead.
The main achievement of the new, MP3-compatible portable compact disk players
is to turn the word "compact" against itself, revealing the real meaning of
"CD": *non-compact* disk, and thus suggest that people instead ought to look
for a player based on a smaller kind of removable media.
You can thank solid-state MP3 players for opening the door for MD players to
appear more widely. When MD was the only sub-CD portable option, it was so
unusual, it didn't get exposure in ordinary stores.
Now that MP3 solid-state players have gotten noticed (if not purchased and
used happily), people are familiar with a whole new *category*, sub-CD
portable players -- so ordinary stores now suddenly introduce, at the same
time, MD and solid-state MP3 players. Also notice that MD only made it into
ordinary stores by including the word "MP3" or "Internet" on the packaging!
"What will it take", some people at Sony asked themselves, "for MD to finally
appear on the shelves in ordinary stores?" They may have had mixed feelings
upon discovering the answer: the magic word is "MP3".
Why did CD portables gain MP3 capability? Not because it's a good idea and a
useful sweet spot of capabilities. The answer is that MP3 solid-state players
are currently deeply flawed in price/performance, and companies are fishing
around for cheaper-per-MB storage, and CD burners are already popular for MP3
archiving and audio CD cloning. People are copying a lot of music onto CDR
these days, whether CDDA or MP3. And a huge factor driving companies to add
MP3 capability to CD portables is that MP3 is a sexy selling feature, even if
the 5" CD size is about the last thing we need and inherently is unportable,
with portable 5" player being a contradiction in terms.
As a transient stepping stone and transitional format, the time is now for 5"
MP3 CD players. However, unlike MD, that time will not last long, because the
first thing anyone notices about an MP3 CD player is that it is so *huge*
compared to a solid-state MP3 player and the MD players that have suddenly
appeared in ordinary stores together with solid-state MP3 players.
Actually, *three* new portable devices have invaded the ordinary stores and
public consciousness all at once in the past 6 months:
o MP3 solid-state players
o MD portables
o MP3 CD players (5")
These arrived as a triumvirate of solutions, the multiplicity of which only
suggests how unsatisfactory each is:
o MP3 solid-state players: lo-fi/ space-limited/ expensive media
o MD portables: nonstandard; limited computer-compatibility to work with MP3s
in the native computer-oriented MP3 approach
o MP3 CD players: too damn huge to be portable
So these half-solutions suggest other combinations, other possibilities, and
Mini CDR stands out in several ways.
o Inexpensive media/hi-fi/large storage
o Standard MP3 computer-literate
o Much smaller than 5" CD
Assuming a computer-centric value system, for portability and practicality we
can rate from irrelevant to relevant:
o MP3 CD player -- vastly too large
o MP3 solid-state players -- space much too limited
o MD -- almost perfect, but woefully computer-illiterate
o Mini CDR -- fully computer literate, and space-unlimited. Main complaint:
still too big to keep in pocket all the time; why not simply use higher
density format related to DVD-R?
-- Michael Hoffman
http://www.amptone.com/audio
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
