Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
"Psychoceramic-- crackpot. Jim, that joke is older then the invention of the mandolin! Larry Well I thought it was funny, but then I'm a strange sorta guy who obviouslly missed out on a few old jokes :-) PrinceGaz. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === I didn't say it wasn't funny. It was 90 years ago when I heard it for the first time. PrinceGaz wrote: "Psychoceramic-- crackpot. Jim, that joke is older then the invention of the mandolin! Larry Well I thought it was funny, but then I'm a strange sorta guy who obviouslly missed out on a few old jokes :-) PrinceGaz. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
las wrote: I didn't say it wasn't funny. It was 90 years ago when I heard it for the first time. Jeez, how the heck old are you, Larry? G -- Jim Coon Not just another pretty mandolin picker. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If Gibson made cars, would they sound so sweet? My first web page http://www.tir.com/~liteways - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
"J. Coon" wrote: las wrote: I didn't say it wasn't funny. It was 90 years ago when I heard it for the first time. Jeez, how the heck old are you, Larry? G I was born about 10,000 years ago. There ain't nothin in this world that I don't know. I saw Peter, Paul and Mosses playing ring around the roses and I'll whoop the guy what says it isn't so. Now I'm just a lonesome traveler, a great historical bum. Highly educated through history I've become. I built the Rock of Ages it was in the year 01 and that about the biggest thing that man has ever done. I saw Adam and Even a driven from the door. I'm the guy that picked the big leaves that they wore and from behind the bushes peep'n saw the apple they was eaten and I swear that I'm the one the et the core. Now I built the Garden of Eden in was in the year 02. Joined the Apple Picker's Union and I always paid my due. I'm the man what signed the contract to raise the Rising Sun, and that's about the biggest thing that man has ever done. I taught Samson how to use his mighty hand. I showed Columbus to this happy land and for Pharaoh's little kiddies I built all the pyramidies and to the Sahara carried all the sand. Now I was straw boss on the pyramids and the tower of babel too. I opened up the ocean, let the mighty children through. I fought a million battles and never lost a one and that's about the biggest thing that man has ever done. I taught Solomon his little ABCs. I'm the first one that ate limburger cheese and while float'n down the bay with Methuselah one day, I saw his whiskers blowin in the breeze. Now I fought the revolution that sent this country free. It was me and a couple of Indians that dumped the Boston tea. I won the battle of Valley Forge and the battle of Bully Run and that about the biggest thing that man has ever done. Now Queen Elizabeth she fell in love with me. We were married in Milwaukee secretly. But I got tired and shook her and joined up with General Hooker to go shoot'n skeeters down in Tennessee. I was born about 10,000 years a go oh. There ain't nothin in the world that I don't know oh. I took Doctor Freud and Einstein, and introduced them to Diane Fienstine and that's about the biggest thing that man has ever done. I'm the man that taught Billy Gates how to type. I taught him all about the Windows hype and while he worked on a program, I inspired Billyo Graham and that's about the biggest thing that MAN HAS EVER DONE -- Jim Coon Not just another pretty mandolin picker. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If Gibson made cars, would they sound so sweet? My first web page http://www.tir.com/~liteways - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's not quite true, Larry. If you look up "psychosomatic" in a modern dictionary, it has two definitions. The first is medical. The second is "relating to or concerned with the influence of the mind on the body" and can relate to any situation where the mind can influence the body's perception. But what you call the second defination is really a detailed explanation of the medical term. It can be a way of describing the medical usage in "lay" terms, but it is also a more general application that can be applied to any situation where the mind can influence the body's perception (the way something "sounds" or "tastes" or "feels" etc.) Insofar as people "hear" things not because of the audible sound waves produced but because they expect or want to hear those things, the term "psychosomatic" does apply to audio... - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Someone wrote: | That isn't Psychoacoustics! Psychoacoustics is in fact the complete | opposite! I think the other poster might have meant "psychosomatics." You believe something, so your body reacts accordingly. Then there is the psychoceramic too. Isn't that what some of the audiophiles are? Maybe some of us MDer besides! Psychoceramic-- crackpot. -- Jim Coon Not just another pretty mandolin picker. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If Gibson made cars, would they sound so sweet? My first web page http://www.tir.com/~liteways - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
"Psychoceramic-- crackpot. Jim, that joke is older then the invention of the mandolin! Larry - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
I've already verify this... Hi Space and Memorex are not alike... They come both from Europe but Hi-Space is not the same than Memorex for sure... There is a lot of European Minidiscs too... Also there is many from England, Japan, Thailand... I've seen and test a lot of minidisc... I have sell last year some Memorex and used some and experienced problems with shutters and I also noticed that the design is really different in the construction of the minidisc between Memorex and Hi Space minidisc... I never experienced any problem with Hi-Space, especially the brand new Techno Color Collection from Hi Space, they have a killer look and seems like more resistant (particulary from heat). I will have an interview with some guy from MPO (Hi Space France) soon and I will ask him the question even if the guy from Hi-Space Canada already told me that Memorex and Hi-Space are two really distinct company... Honestly, take a Hi-Space minidisc and a Memorex minidisc and, without lying, tell me if you don't see a difference... Of course, there is a difference, easily noticable.. Good Week End ! Peter. -- Pierre Forest Kheops Minidisc - http://www.kheopsminidisc.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of las Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2000 12:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks? Peter Forest wrote: Are you related to the man who owns Hi Space or do you know him. I only know him for e mails and that was a very long time ago. Also, you mentioned Memorex. You said that you didn't care for the quality of the jacket, etc. I have some Memorex MDs that are a few years old. It says, "Made in France" on them. Back then the only company making MDs outside of Japan was Hi Space. So I'm almost 100% sure that they made the discs. Thanks, Larry - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === Peter, we are talking about 2 and a half to 3 years ago. At that time, there was only one company making MDs that were not located in Japan, Hi Space. It said "Made on France" on the disc. Since there were no other companies outside of Japan making MDs at that time, I don't see how it could have been made by anything else. Also, Hi Space must have gotten their act together since I was selling (we never sold Hi Space because we could not come to an agreement on price with the owner of the company) because they didn't have a very good reputation back then. Larry Peter Forest wrote: I've already verify this... Hi Space and Memorex are not alike... They come both from Europe but Hi-Space is not the same than Memorex for sure... There is a lot of European Minidiscs too... Also there is many from England, Japan, Thailand... I've seen and test a lot of minidisc... I have sell last year some Memorex and used some and experienced problems with shutters and I also noticed that the design is really different in the construction of the minidisc between Memorex and Hi Space minidisc... I never experienced any problem with Hi-Space, especially the brand new Techno Color Collection from Hi Space, they have a killer look and seems like more resistant (particulary from heat). I will have an interview with some guy from MPO (Hi Space France) soon and I will ask him the question even if the guy from Hi-Space Canada already told me that Memorex and Hi-Space are two really distinct company... Honestly, take a Hi-Space minidisc and a Memorex minidisc and, without lying, tell me if you don't see a difference... Of course, there is a difference, easily noticable.. Good Week End ! Peter. -- Pierre Forest Kheops Minidisc - http://www.kheopsminidisc.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of las Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2000 12:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks? Peter Forest wrote: Are you related to the man who owns Hi Space or do you know him. I only know him for e mails and that was a very long time ago. Also, you mentioned Memorex. You said that you didn't care for the quality of the jacket, etc. I have some Memorex MDs that are a few years old. It says, "Made in France" on them. Back then the only company making MDs outside of Japan was Hi Space. So I'm almost 100% sure that they made the discs. Thanks, Larry - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
From: "Peter Forest" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Also, sorry for all my english, I'm originally French so I try my best to write what I think and what I've experienced in the best English I can use... Hey Pierre this is the internet, anyone who even thinks of trying to correct someones spelling or grammar, especially if English is not the senders first language, is the one who should be saying sorry. Best Regards, good week-end ! Pierre Forest And you mate, PrinceGaz. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
The start up costs for manufacturing MDs must have come down, because 3 years ago (except for Hi Space) all MDs were made in Japan. MDs were not selling well enough outside of Japan to invest big bucks in an MD manufacturing facility. I dug out a receipt dated Nov '94 for AU$190 being for 10 blank 74 min discs. That was when (if you could find them) they were $22 (or £10) a pop at major stores. Now I can buy blanks for $2 each... GB - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
PrinceGaz wrote: Hey Pierre this is the internet, anyone who even thinks of trying to correct someones spelling or grammar, especially if English is not the senders first language, is the one who should be saying sorry. Being dyslexic, can even be harder than English being a second language. Of course for many of us Americans, I think that English is also a second language, except we don't have a first one. Larry Best Regards, good week-end ! Pierre Forest And you mate, PrinceGaz. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
PS - that's when the (fairly large and low on specs by today's standards) MZR-2 was AU$1499 or a 'cheap' £450 GB I dug out a receipt dated Nov '94 for AU$190 being for 10 blank 74 min discs. That was when (if you could find them) they were $22 (or £10) a pop at major stores. Now I can buy blanks for $2 each... GB - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 18 Aug 2000 | We all agree on that: the only bit of contention is whether the word "psycho- | acoustic" covers that. The word "psychosomatic" certainly does. Not really: psychosomatic adj : used of illness or symptoms resulting from neurosis. Psychosomatics is about emotional distress causing physical illness. Psychoacoustics is the science of hearing and perception of sound in all it's forms. -- Rat [EMAIL PROTECTED]\ Caution: Happy Fun Ball may suddenly Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ accelerate to dangerous speeds. PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
The Ratman is right again. Psychosomatic is strictly a medical term. Sometimes medical terms do end up finding there way into other areas, such as a "virus". But this has not happened to the term psychosomatic yet. The same hold true for the term placebo which Rick W. used. At this point in time the term is not commonly used for things other then the description of a worthless and basically inert treatment of a disease where this treatment produces side effects or improvements in the effects of the ideas. For example giving someone with a really bad headache a glass of water to which a drop of food coloring has been added or the classic "sugar" pill. The placebo effect has always been of of my favorite things to study. I love to read what they are when new drugs come out (made so much more available since the internet). My favorites are the ones were a larger percentage of people show side effects to the placebo. Larry Stainless Steel Rat wrote: * [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 18 Aug 2000 | We all agree on that: the only bit of contention is whether the word "psycho- | acoustic" covers that. The word "psychosomatic" certainly does. Not really: psychosomatic adj : used of illness or symptoms resulting from neurosis. Psychosomatics is about emotional distress causing physical illness. Psychoacoustics is the science of hearing and perception of sound in all it's forms. -- Rat [EMAIL PROTECTED]\ Caution: Happy Fun Ball may suddenly Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ accelerate to dangerous speeds. PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Larry wrote, | Psychosomatic is strictly a medical term. Sometimes | medical terms do end up finding there way into other areas, such as a | "virus". But this has not happened to the term psychosomatic yet. Yes, Larry, it has; perhaps you personally refuse to use it any other way and I can't fault you if you do (just as I won't use "celibate" for "abstinent" nor "nauseous" for "nauseated"), but the term is commonly applied to any sit- uation where beliefs or expectations affect bodily sensations, not solely the case of reading a medical book and then showing symptoms of the disease one just read about. The broader usage would include the placebo effect. Rick has brought up that psychoacoustics is physiology rather than psycho- logy: it is the study of how perception of sound is affected equally among all humans by our ears and brains rather than individually by our minds, so thinking one MD brand sounds better than another is not psychoacoustic at all by that definition. David - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Rick has brought up that psychoacoustics is physiology rather than psycho- logy: it is the study of how perception of sound is affected equally among all humans by our ears and brains rather than individually by our minds, so thinking one MD brand sounds better than another is not psychoacoustic at all by that definition. Rick's definition of psychoacoustic, may not be correct or may be partially correct. If you were to look at it as purely physiological then any suffix with the prefix psycho in front of it would also apply as long as the effect is not limited to a single individual. If you really want to get a scientific discussion of the term psycho, it could be argued that anything affecting the mind (and therefore the brain) is physiological. This is really an area that people have tended to mistakenly take for granted. "Psycho is not real" so to speak. But that isn't necessarily true. When you start to get into parapsychology the waters become even more muddy. And para normal. Does that term really make any sense? What is para normal? Just because something hasn't been proven or is not commonly accepted, doesn't necessarily make it less then normal. or the term quasi? There is no real answers here because we are dealing in semantics and man made definitions. Larry David - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Larry wrote, | This is really an area that people have tended to mistakenly take for | granted. "Psycho is not real" so to speak. Yes, there are other uses for the prefix "psycho" that muddy the issue further. | There is no real answers here because we are dealing in semantics ... That's the point. This thread is stuck on the terminology. Most of us agree that, if they are recorded on the same equipment, played on the same equip- ment, and heard through the same equipment, perceived differences in sound quality between brands of MDs are in the realms of belief and imagination. | ... and man-made definitions. In my experience, woman-made definitions are not any more objective. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
On Sat, 19 Aug 2000 10:56:21 -0400, las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Ratman is right again. Psychosomatic is strictly a medical term. Sometimes medical terms do end up finding there way into other areas, such as a "virus". But this has not happened to the term psychosomatic yet. That's not quite true, Larry. If you look up "psychosomatic" in a modern dictionary, it has two definitions. The first is medical. The second is "relating to or concerned with the influence of the mind on the body" and can relate to any situation where the mind can influence the body's perception. Not that we're still on-topic or anything ;-) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === Dan Frakes wrote: On Sat, 19 Aug 2000 10:56:21 -0400, las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Ratman is right again. Psychosomatic is strictly a medical term. Sometimes medical terms do end up finding there way into other areas, such as a "virus". But this has not happened to the term psychosomatic yet. That's not quite true, Larry. If you look up "psychosomatic" in a modern dictionary, it has two definitions. The first is medical. The second is"relating to or concerned with the influence of the mind on the body" and can relate to any situation where the mind can influence the body's perception. But what you call the second defination is really a detailed explanation of the medical term. Larry Not that we're still on-topic or anything ;-) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
* "David W. Tamkin" [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 19 Aug 2000 | Rick has brought up that psychoacoustics is physiology rather than psycho- | logy: it is the study of how perception of sound is affected equally among | all humans by our ears and brains rather than individually by our minds, No, I believe it is you and Rick who are confused. Psychoacoustics is the science of the perception of sounds. What you are talking about is perceptive encoding algorithms, such as ATRAC, which strive to achieve equal perceptive results among the majority of humans. | so thinking one MD brand sounds better than another is not psychoacoustic | at all by that definition. But the belief that such a distinction exists causing one to perceive a difference *is* within the field of psychoacoustics. -- Rat [EMAIL PROTECTED]\ Caution: Happy Fun Ball may suddenly Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ accelerate to dangerous speeds. PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Try the TDK Gold, they are better than Maxell Gold... Pierre Forest http://www.kheopsminidisc.com - Kheops Minidisc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Davini, Mark Sent: Friday, August 18, 2000 12:56 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: MD: sound quality difference in blanks? Hi everyone: I'm a total "newbie" not only to this list, but also to Minidiscs in general, just having purchased a Sony MDS-JB920. I love it! It sounds great. I read the "Myths" within the Minidisc.org page, and everything Mr. Woudenberg writes makes perfect sense to me, BUT - - - - Could someone please tell me WHY I REALLY DO hear a difference between discs then? I was using the regular Sony Color collection discs, but then bought some Maxell GOLD, and I was amazed by the sonic difference. I recorded through the analog ins, direct from the CD player, same tune, and never changed anything (input levels) and could sense exactly what those "audiophiles" were saying - more clarity in the highs, lows had a nice roundness... Okay, okay! I know, and since I'm 41, I figured I must be deaf, and REALLY wanting to hear a difference. So I played the same test for a twenty five year old friend of mine, who doesn't have any preconceived notions about MD, (and didn't kick the extra money for the GOLD blanks) and HE could tell instantly! So I guess I need to know if anyone else out there is going through the same thing, or are you all going to tell me I'm crazy? Mark S. Davini Media Production Specialist Western Wisconsin Technical College LaCrosse, WI. 54601-0908 (608)785-9229 "If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten..." - George Carlin - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Hi there, Glad you're enjoying your 920. I think this is pretty much a taboo issue. Scientifically, all blanks should give you the same results. Some suggest a blind test to clear things up. But firstly, I believe some things exist but can't be proven. Secondly, when I listen to music, my eyes are usually open - does blind test matter? In the end, either you believe blanks do make a difference, or you don't. It's the same for a number of other issues. Either you believe it, or you don't. It's like a religion, because audio is such an objective, touchy issue. Personally, I do what I think is useful. Personally, I use TDK XA-PRO blanks. When I record with my portable recorder, I keep it free of all connections, except the input. I always power it on battery, and I turn volume all the way down. There are other, far more rational things that I do, but these seem to work for me. Enjoy :) Leon Hi everyone: I'm a total "newbie" not only to this list, but also to Minidiscs in general, just having purchased a Sony MDS-JB920. I love it! It sounds great. I read the "Myths" within the Minidisc.org page, and everything Mr. Woudenberg writes makes perfect sense to me, BUT - - - - Could someone please tell me WHY I REALLY DO hear a difference between discs then? I was using the regular Sony Color collection discs, but then bought some Maxell GOLD, and I was amazed by the sonic difference. I recorded through the analog ins, direct from the CD player, same tune, and never changed anything (input levels) and could sense exactly what those "audiophiles" were saying - more clarity in the highs, lows had a nice roundness... Okay, okay! I know, and since I'm 41, I figured I must be deaf, and REALLY wanting to hear a difference. So I played the same test for a twenty five year old friend of mine, who doesn't have any preconceived notions about MD, (and didn't kick the extra money for the GOLD blanks) and HE could tell instantly! So I guess I need to know if anyone else out there is going through the same thing, or are you all going to tell me I'm crazy? - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Your crazy!! Nathan White [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Davini, Mark Sent: Friday, August 18, 2000 12:56 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: MD: sound quality difference in blanks? Hi everyone: I'm a total "newbie" not only to this list, but also to Minidiscs in general, just having purchased a Sony MDS-JB920. I love it! It sounds great. I read the "Myths" within the Minidisc.org page, and everything Mr. Woudenberg writes makes perfect sense to me, BUT - - - - Could someone please tell me WHY I REALLY DO hear a difference between discs then? I was using the regular Sony Color collection discs, but then bought some Maxell GOLD, and I was amazed by the sonic difference. I recorded through the analog ins, direct from the CD player, same tune, and never changed anything (input levels) and could sense exactly what those "audiophiles" were saying - more clarity in the highs, lows had a nice roundness... Okay, okay! I know, and since I'm 41, I figured I must be deaf, and REALLY wanting to hear a difference. So I played the same test for a twenty five year old friend of mine, who doesn't have any preconceived notions about MD, (and didn't kick the extra money for the GOLD blanks) and HE could tell instantly! So I guess I need to know if anyone else out there is going through the same thing, or are you all going to tell me I'm crazy? Mark S. Davini Media Production Specialist Western Wisconsin Technical College LaCrosse, WI. 54601-0908 (608)785-9229 "If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten..." - George Carlin - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
From: "Davini, Mark" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi everyone: I'm a total "newbie" not only to this list, but also to Minidiscs in general, just having purchased a Sony MDS-JB920. I love it! It sounds great. Excellent, always good to have another Minidisc enthusiast. I read the "Myths" within the Minidisc.org page, and everything Mr. Woudenberg writes makes perfect sense to me, BUT - - - - Could someone please tell me WHY I REALLY DO hear a difference between discs then? I was using the regular Sony Color collection discs, but then bought some Maxell GOLD, and I was amazed by the sonic difference. I recorded through the analog ins, direct from the CD player, same tune, and never changed anything (input levels) and could sense exactly what those "audiophiles" were saying - more clarity in the highs, lows had a nice roundness... Okay, okay! I know, and since I'm 41, I figured I must be deaf, and REALLY wanting to hear a difference. So I played the same test for a twenty five year old friend of mine, who doesn't have any preconceived notions about MD, (and didn't kick the extra money for the GOLD blanks) and HE could tell instantly! So I guess I need to know if anyone else out there is going through the same thing, or are you all going to tell me I'm crazy? Mark S. Davini Media Production Specialist Western Wisconsin Technical College LaCrosse, WI. 54601-0908 (608)785-9229 "If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten..." - George Carlin Hmmm, whats the nicest way to put this. I don't really want to just say "you're crazy!". First off did you and your friend do blind listening tests, that is you didn't know which disc was which while listening (so you put a disc in and your friend listens, and vice versa)-- also just to make it more interesting, sometimes use the same disc for both of the tests and see if a difference is still as noticeable [I bet it probably would be]. Still it's good to have another MD convert, and you did provide me with a good five minutes of helpless laughter which can't be bad :-) Yours, PrinceGaz. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Nathan White wrote: Your crazy!! Nate. I'm very disappointed in you. I would never expect such a response from a fine gentle man like you (I'm dyslexic and almost typed gentile-God would that have it the fan if I didn't catch my typoROTFLMAO. While I agree with you that he should not be hearing any difference, that doesn't mean he is crazy. But something is obviously wrong with his testing methods. The only way to verify his statements would be to use a double blind study. And also not to point out to anyone that they should expect to hear any difference in sound quality. I have a feeling that he violated both of his testing rules here. The placebo effect can be very potent. My undergraduate degree is in Pharmacology so I am constantly checking up on new media. Especially any that I may have to take. Sometimes the listed side effects from the placebo will actually show a larger number of responses then the real medication! It is too bad that Mark lives so far from me. I would love to hear this (in at least a blind study if not double blind). If he wants to send me copies of his discs let him e mail me personally and I will conduct at least a blind study-but there are people on the list with far superior systems then mine and that might make for sense. I have been trying to factor in the analog matter since I almost always record only digitally. But I don't think that should make a difference. The signal delivered to the MD is digital no matter what. Different CD players and MD recorders, and specifically DACs and ADCs can make a difference. But he claims that his only variable is the discs. The signal from a CD using the analog line out goes into the recorder as an analog signal and is converted to a digital ATRAC signal. This is in turn converted to an analog signal again. I don't see anywhere in the loop with all things being equal except the disc that could make a difference there. It doesn't matter whether you feed in an analog signal or PCM, the format delivered to the MD is still going to be the same (of course the analog has more potential for distortion-but that is a whole other topic.) I really don't believe that in a true double blind study anyone could hear the difference. Larry - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
* "Davini, Mark" [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 18 Aug 2000 | I read the "Myths" within the Minidisc.org page, and everything Mr. | Woudenberg writes makes perfect sense to me, BUT - - - - | Could someone please tell me WHY I REALLY DO hear a difference between discs | then? Psychoaccoustics. You believe that there is a difference, therefore you hear a difference even when there is none. Either that, or you didn't make an "exact" copy. Something changed between recordings. -- Rat [EMAIL PROTECTED]\ Happy Fun Ball contains a liquid core, Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ which, if exposed due to rupture, should PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ not be touched, inhaled, or looked at. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === well as it says in the "Myths" section of your grocer's minidisc.org, the actual storage of data is digital only - therefore the disk really doesn't have anything to do with it. All of the digital to analog conversion, and error correction takes place BEFORE OR AFTER the data is stored, so the media shouldn't really have anything to do with it. It's a dog gone good read, that. I highly recommend it. But as I said earlier, I've gotten two people that think akin to me, so we'll just keep buying the TDKs and everyone will be pretty happy with the whole business. -- From: Charles Redell Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 18, 2000 7:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks? "Davini, Mark" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I read the "Myths" within the Minidisc.org page, and everything Mr. Woudenberg writes makes perfect sense to me, BUT - - - - Could someone please tell me WHY I REALLY DO hear a difference between discs then? I don't understand why there isn't a differnece in sound quality between blanks (If that is really the case)? I mean, why are some more expensive tha others? Are some not made better/easier for the laser to read/smoother inoperation or something akin to all of that? Cassettes definitely have higher qualities amongst them... Why not MDs? Thanks, c - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
From: "Charles Redell" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't understand why there isn't a differnece in sound quality between blanks (If that is really the case)? I mean, why are some more expensive tha others? Are some not made better/easier for the laser to read/smoother inoperation or something akin to all of that? Cassettes definitely have higher qualities amongst them... Why not MDs? Thanks, c Where do I start? Cassettes are analogue and MD are digital, with digital recording you either read the data or you get garbage, garbage shows up wuite clearly when listening as snap, crackle and pop sounds. Dodgy tapes will more likely give a more muffled playback, which will get steadily worse as the recording detiriorates. Unlike the digital media, even a really poor analogue recording will resemble the original, but a digital one where half the bits are unreadable is ready for the bin. However, unless you have a faulty disc, or MD equipment, you should never encounter digital errors that exceed the error-correction information included on a minidisc. PrinceGaz. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
I don't understand why there isn't a differnece in sound quality between blanks (If that is really the case)? I mean, why are some more expensive tha others? Are some not made better/easier for the laser to read/smoother inoperation or something akin to all of that? Cassettes definitely have different grads.. Why not MDs? Because cassettes are recording analog signals that are very sensitive to differences in the arrangement, and quality of the magnetic material on the tape. Unfortunately there is often no relationship between price and quality here either. MD's record ones and zeros. There is almost no variation with all other things being equal. Tape has dropouts do to varying quality. But except for the quality of the case (which has nothing to do with the quality of the sound, but the durability of the MD), each little disc inside is very close to identical. Most are manufactured on the same exact machines. The manufacture of these machines states that the first thousand discs will be the best quality, but is quick to add that you will never be able to hear the difference. There is something know as error correction built into into MD and CD players. As long as the quality control is maintained all discs fall way below the error correction limits) What the difference in price? Some discs have cases that are constructed better. But the main reason is profit and fooling the general public. Sony's expensive "high end" ES discs contain the same disc as their least expensive ones (just fancy white packaging. 20 20 exposed a contact lens manufacture for selling different grades of lenses. Supposedly, they were selling three types. One had to be changed weekly, one monthly and one after several months (something like that). Of course the ones that you could use the longest were a lot more expensive. But it turned out that all of the boxes contained the EXACT same lens!!! This was just another attempt of large manufactures to cheat the public. Larry Thanks, c - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Hello With over 22 years of experience in electronics as both a technician and audio enthusiast your story is totally believable ONLY with analog equipment. As I have stated many times you need test equipment costing 10k or more to even measure a difference from CD to MD much less the difference between one blank and another. I have yet to find one single customer as a mobile DJ who can tell me if I am playing the same tune via CD or MD (regardless of which brand blank it may be). If your test is truly repeatable then there is something wrong with your gear or something went wrong while recording. If there were truly ANY difference I would use ONLY the best for mobile DJ use; as it is I stick with HiSpace for price. I make almost the same argument for CD blanks except that we have compatibility issues to deal with on those; unlike MD.. Speaking of HiSpace; the 80 minute month at musicmixers is now over half gone. If you have not checked out the special deals yet, do so before they are gone.. Welcome to MD! Les Lee www.musicmixers.com/mall - Original Message - From: "PrinceGaz" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 18, 2000 10:41 AM Subject: Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks? From: "Davini, Mark" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi everyone: I'm a total "newbie" not only to this list, but also to Minidiscs in general, just having purchased a Sony MDS-JB920. I love it! It sounds great. Excellent, always good to have another Minidisc enthusiast. I read the "Myths" within the Minidisc.org page, and everything Mr. Woudenberg writes makes perfect sense to me, BUT - - - - Could someone please tell me WHY I REALLY DO hear a difference between discs then? I was using the regular Sony Color collection discs, but then bought some Maxell GOLD, and I was amazed by the sonic difference. I recorded through the analog ins, direct from the CD player, same tune, and never changed anything (input levels) and could sense exactly what those "audiophiles" were saying - more clarity in the highs, lows had a nice roundness... Okay, okay! I know, and since I'm 41, I figured I must be deaf, and REALLY wanting to hear a difference. So I played the same test for a twenty five year old friend of mine, who doesn't have any preconceived notions about MD, (and didn't kick the extra money for the GOLD blanks) and HE could tell instantly! So I guess I need to know if anyone else out there is going through the same thing, or are you all going to tell me I'm crazy? Mark S. Davini Media Production Specialist Western Wisconsin Technical College LaCrosse, WI. 54601-0908 (608)785-9229 "If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten..." - George Carlin Hmmm, whats the nicest way to put this. I don't really want to just say "you're crazy!". First off did you and your friend do blind listening tests, that is you didn't know which disc was which while listening (so you put a disc in and your friend listens, and vice versa)-- also just to make it more interesting, sometimes use the same disc for both of the tests and see if a difference is still as noticeable [I bet it probably would be]. Still it's good to have another MD convert, and you did provide me with a good five minutes of helpless laughter which can't be bad :-) Yours, PrinceGaz. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Dave Kimmel wrote: Think of it this way... A MiniDisc is a digital medium, just like a hard drive. When you install a program on a Fujitsu drive, is the program any different than when you install it on a Maxtor drive? Do MP3s sound better if you download them to a SCSI hard drive instead of an IDE one? Are any family photos that you might have saved on one hard drive more vibrant when saved on another? My digital camera is so much better when I store my pictures on my Western Digital hard drive. When I store them on TDK floppy disks they take much longer to read. They don't near as good printed on a black and white dot matrix printer, either. G -- Jim Coon Not just another pretty mandolin picker. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If Gibson made cars, would they sound so sweet? My first web page http://www.tir.com/~liteways - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Peter Forest wrote: Try the TDK Gold, they are better than Maxell Gold... Pierre Forest I'm not sure what you are saying here. What do you mean by "better"??? Nicer packaging? Stronger plastic used in the jacket? Or are you saying that they will produce music that has a better sound quality then other mini discs?? Please clarify. Thanks, Larry - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
- Original Message - From: "Charles Redell" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 18, 2000 8:23 PM Subject: Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks? I don't understand why there isn't a differnece in sound quality between blanks (If that is really the case)? I mean, why are some more expensive tha others? Are some not made better/easier for the laser to read/smoother inoperation or something akin to all of that? Yes ... Smoother in operation means better for your MiniDisc player - I guess a cheap badly-made MiniDisc could present unnecessary resistance to the motor or cause the head to scrape or scratch on something and your MiniDisc player to break down. Easier for the laser to read simply means the laser won't 'fail' to read the disk as often The laser failing to read the disc is simply a bit error which the ECC (error correcting code) used by the MiniDisc can recover. I can't remember the exact figures but the ECC used can allow something like 1 bit out of every 200 to be corrupted with no (literally ZERO) difference in audio quality So - if you ARE hearing differences in audio quality between two different makes of MD blanks then the worse sounding one must have a SHOCKINGLY high bit error rate ... as a simple analogy, imagine buying a batch of 1.44MB Floppy Disks and formatting them in your PC and subsequently discovering that they give you 7.5KB worth of bad sectors... FAULTY DISK! Cassettes definitely have higher qualities amongst them... Why not MDs? Cassettes are analogue in that they record music as patterns of waves (literally encoding the pressure waves as patterns of magnetic fields on the tape). The sound waves can be measured to any arbitrary accuracy, and it is the ability of the tape recorder to coax the magnetic tape into storing sufficiently accurate patterns of magnetic fields that determines the resulting sound quality. In MiniDisc and other digital media, the patterns recorded are (essentially) far more simple. The recording device simply needs to only store a 'zero' pattern or a 'one' pattern at a time. Just like a hard drive. Analogy - imagine recording a .WAV file using Sound Recorder on your PC and then saving the file to the hard drive. You don't worry about the .WAV file stored on your hard drive sounding muffled and dull because you have a low-quality generic hard drive instead of a Seagate Barracuda do you? You don't think about upgrading your hard drive to the latest IBM 14,000 rpm model because it will make all your .GIFs and .JPEGs sharper and improve the color contrast of web pages? It's more or less exactly the same with MiniDisc. As long as the media is usable and not faulty, then any data - the actual sound or music stored on the disk - will always be the same recorded on any two pieces of working media. Thanks, c Dave - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
- Original Message - Psychoaccoustics. You believe that there is a difference, therefore you hear a difference even when there is none. That isn't Psychoacoustics! Psychoacoustics is in fact the complete opposite! Psychoacoustics is used to trick the human ear into think that there ISN'T a difference even when there IS a difference and is one of the major principles of digital music encoding (e.g. ATRAC for minidisc, or MP3, or Ogg Vorbis, or whatever) I guess it's just straightforward psychology and the human temperament. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Dave Hooper quoted someone, not saying who it was, Psychoaccoustics. You believe that there is a difference, therefore you hear a difference even when there is none. and Dave responded. | That isn't Psychoacoustics! Psychoacoustics is in fact the complete | opposite! I think the other poster might have meant "psychosomatics." You believe something, so your body reacts accordingly. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Dave Kimmel explained to Charles Redell and Mark Davini: | When you install a program on a Fujitsu drive, is the program any | different than when you install it on a Maxtor drive? Do MP3s sound | better if you download them to a SCSI hard drive instead of an IDE one? | Are any family photos that you might have saved on one hard drive more | vibrant when saved on another? Back on March 3, 1997, on the predecessor to this list, Daniel MacKay and Rick Woudenberg posted in the vein of Dave's explanation when others were commenting on audiophiles' beliefs that some MD brands sounded better than others. If the old md-l archives at nstn.ca still exist, the subjects of the posts were "Re: Audiophiles" and "Re: Re: Audiophiles" respectively. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === Dave Hooper wrote: - Original Message - From: "Charles Redell" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 18, 2000 8:23 PM Subject: Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks? I don't understand why there isn't a differnece in sound quality between blanks (If that is really the case)? I mean, why are some more expensive tha others? Are some not made better/easier for the laser to read/smoother inoperation or something akin to all of that? Yes ... Smoother in operation means better for your MiniDisc player - I guess a cheap badly-made MiniDisc could present unnecessary resistance to the motor or cause the head to scrape or scratch on something and your MiniDisc player to break down. Easier for the laser to read simply means the laser won't 'fail' to read the disk as often The laser failing to read the disc is simply a bit error which the ECC (error correcting code) used by the MiniDisc can recover. I can't remember the exact figures but the ECC used can allow something like 1 bit out of every 200 to be corrupted with no (literally ZERO) difference in audio quality I have sold MD gear. It is as close as impossible as you can get to receive a defective disc that will deliver an error count in excess of 200. Even if that was the problem, it would not be the sound quality that would be effected, you would either get a disc that would not play at all or skip and drop out. Larry - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Honestly, every MD (regular MD, not INDUSTRIAL or DATA MINIDISC) have the same disc or mostly inside... What is different is the shelf, the cover and the shutter. I can't hardly believe that some minidisc have better sound than other. I have try a lot of minidisc : Hi-Space, Sony, TDK, Maxell, Denon, Xita and I'm reputed for my perfection in sound... I always record digitally all my minidisc and I didn't notice a difference between 2 different kind of MD. There is however a big difference, for me, between the original CD and the MD copy and also, a huge difference between the CD, The digital copy of a CD on a MD and MP3 files. MP3 files are good to hear in a room or in a radio when working but I hate this when I exercice cause I hear the loss in sound and all the imperfection. Anyway, before I went to far outside the subject, the difference between minidisc is the outside, the plastic, cover, shuter and case. Personally, I prefer Sony Minidisc for design, TDK Gold and Techno Color Hi-Space Minidisc. I use a lot of regular clear, red and colored Hi-Space minidisc but, French don't have the best marketing ever. It's a great quality product but the design is not the best. However, the price is really good. The worst MD for me are the Memorex, not for the disc itself but for the weakness of the shutter and the plastic shelf. I used to sell Memorex minidisc and I had to reimburse so many customers for defect minidisc that I stop it very fast ! Also, the second worst minidisc are the Maxell color with plastic shutter. A lot of time, customers (and myself too) had problem when the disc is insert in the minidisc recorder... It's annoying. Maxell are not so good for marketing and design too... Really the best minidisc (I like them equally I must say...) are : Sony Shock Absorbant Mechanism 5 colors - TDK Gold Minidisc - Techno Color Hi-Space Minidisc and Clear Crystal Hi-Space Minidisc... The only problem with Hi-Space minidisc is the clear label supplied... But I get rid of this because I do my own label with Avery Label... What I love the most with Hi Space minidisc is the flip case, very useful when you do a party ! So, I hope this will help... Just to tell you, I have over 500 minidiscs and on these 500, 350 are Hi-Space minidisc and I had never experienced problem with those ! All the other are Sony, Denon, TDK and a few Maxell... (No, I don't have any Memorex !) Good Evening ! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of las Sent: Friday, August 18, 2000 9:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks? Peter Forest wrote: Try the TDK Gold, they are better than Maxell Gold... Pierre Forest I'm not sure what you are saying here. What do you mean by "better"??? Nicer packaging? Stronger plastic used in the jacket? Or are you saying that they will produce music that has a better sound quality then other mini discs?? Please clarify. Thanks, Larry - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
* "Dave Hooper" [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 18 Aug 2000 | That isn't Psychoacoustics! Psycho (mind) accoustics (sound) is all about perception. That's why it is called "perceptual encoding". -- Rat [EMAIL PROTECTED]\ If Happy Fun Ball begins to smoke, get Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ away immediately. Seek shelter and cover PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ head. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David W. Tamkin) on Fri, 18 Aug 2000 | I think the other poster might have meant "psychosomatics." You believe | something, so your body reacts accordingly. No, I meant psychoacoustic, the subjective experience of audio vs. the scientific measurement of sound by various devices (definition courtesy of URL:http://www.sfu.ca/sca/Manuals/ZAAPf/p/psychoacoustic.html). I stand by my statement: you believe that you will hear a difference, therefore you hear a difference, even when there is none. -- Rat [EMAIL PROTECTED]\ Happy Fun Ball may stick to certain types Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ of skin. PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Well I'm glad that in your original statement when you said that TDKs were even better. That you were not talking about the sound quality. That would have totally destroyed your credibility. What you state about the shell (I was calling it a jacket, because I couldn't think of the name, mind just went blank) I agree with 100%. But I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this statement: "I have try a lot of minidisc : Hi-Space, Sony, TDK, Maxell, Denon, Xita and I'm reputed for my perfection in sound... I always record digitally all my minidisc and I didn't notice a difference between 2 different kind of MD. There is however a big difference, for me, between the original CD and the MD copy So you are saying that when you make a copy of a CD digitally transferred to an MD, you hear a loss in sound quality or increase in distortion?? In plain English, you think that the MD does not sound nearly as good as the CD. Is that what you are saying? If it is, there are so many factors that are involved in what you are saying. But lets keep it simple. A good quality portable MD recorder makes a digital copy of a CD that is very noticeably (you used the term "big") inferior in sound quality to your ears. If that is what you are saying, I'd love to try a double blind experiment. I'll' bet that you would be surprised by the results. For one thing, all of our senses, with the exception of pain, fatigue as time passes. So by the end of the test it would be much more difficult to determine no matter how good your selections were in the beginning. "There is however a big difference, for me, between the original CD and the MD copy and also, [a huge difference between the CD, The digital copy of a CD on a MD and MP3 files.] I'm not quite sure what you mean by the section that I have placed in brackets. Please clarify. I think it may just be a typo or it could be my incredible stupidity-that certainly doesn't help me understand things any better. MP3 files are good to hear in a room or in a radio when working but I hate this when I exercice cause I hear the loss in sound and all the imperfection." There was an e mail from someone claiming that MP3 sounded better then MDs. I think he is grossly mistaken. Does what you say above support my opinion? Regards, Larry - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === Stainless Steel Rat wrote: No, I meant psychoacoustic, the subjective experience of audio vs. the scientific measurement of sound by various devices (definition courtesy of URL:http://www.sfu.ca/sca/Manuals/ZAAPf/p/psychoacoustic.html). I stand by my statement: you believe that you will hear a difference, therefore you hear a difference, even when there is none. Well, I gotta agree with the Ratman on this one but I couldn't get the URL to work. I really wanted to read it. But once again, I say the Ratman is right Larry -- Rat [EMAIL PROTECTED]\ Happy Fun Ball may stick to certain types Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ of skin. PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
Rat reiterated, | I stand by my statement: you believe that you will hear a difference, | therefore you hear a difference, even when there is none. We all agree on that: the only bit of contention is whether the word "psycho- acoustic" covers that. The word "psychosomatic" certainly does. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
I will have an interview with some guy from MPO (Hi Space France) soon and I will ask him the question even if the guy from Hi-Space Canada already told me that Memorex and Hi-Space are two really distinct company... The man I dealt with told us he was the owner. He said that he was from Canada, but he was French (which is not to say that he wasn't born in France and moved to Canada). I don't think that anyone in the company will admit having made Memorex even if they did. The start up costs for manufacturing MDs must have come down, because 3 years ago (except for Hi Space) all MDs were made in Japan. MDs were not selling well enough outside of Japan to invest big bucks in an MD manufacturing facility. It didn't pay to make discs outside of Japan if you were going to sell most of them to Japan. The shipping charges would make it too costly. I am surprised to here that there are so many new manufacturing facilities in Europe now. Frankly I don't understand it. Sales of MD have not shown growth outside of Japan. When a big chain like Best Buy, who was probably the largest carrier of MD gear in the past drops the line almost completely, that isn't good. They really pushed MD. They carried a verity of MD stuff. Probably one of the only places that you could walk in and walk out with an MD boom box. But I guess it never made it for Best Buy. Circuit City is also a huge chain. They never went after MD in a big way. Their sales people knew nothing about MD. It's hard to sell something when you know nothing about it. But that's typical of these chains. I may be making one of the stupidest statements I have ever said, but I really believe that more MD stuff is sold through the internet then in stores (in the US). If you read the FTC complaint about MiniDisc Now, look at the company they were in. Macys. Macys!!! Toys R US!!! These are multi multi million dollar corporations. It's late and I'm too tired to proof read my dyslexic e mail. Please excuse anything that makes no sense. Larry Larry - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sound quality difference in blanks?
"Davini, Mark" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I read the "Myths" within the Minidisc.org page, and everything Mr. Woudenberg writes makes perfect sense to me, BUT - - - - Could someone please tell me WHY I REALLY DO hear a difference between discs then? I don't understand why there isn't a differnece in sound quality between blanks (If that is really the case)? I mean, why are some more expensive tha others? Are some not made better/easier for the laser to read/smoother inoperation or something akin to all of that? Cassettes definitely have higher qualities amongst them... Why not MDs? Thanks, c - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
