Re: MD: Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 03:55:37 +1100
* "Tony Antoniou" [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 11 Nov 2000 | Portables don't have a digital output, only digital in, with the exception | of a few recent model Sharp units. And very old Sony units (the MZ-1). -- 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: Re[2]: MP3 to CDR
* Javier Marcet [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 11 Nov 2000 | Yes, there is. Nero (www.ahead.de) Nero, which I happen to use myself, is a program, not a CD-R burner. -- 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: MP3 to CDR
* "JT" [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 10 Nov 2000 | MP3s, if you want the best quality (although I've never figured out | why someone would want to burn an Audio CD from MP3s) I do it for several reasons: None of my sound cards have optical output jacks. And they really aren't all that spectacular, anyway. Since I already have the equipment for other purposes, CD-R and CD-RW are relatively inexpensive. CD-DA on CD-R gives me quick access to music. It takes 5 minutes for my PC to start up; it takes less than 30 seconds to power up my A/V system. And my A/V system sounds much better than my computers. -- 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: MD for recording sound for film?
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === "Dave Hooper" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: when I began to notice that the MDs I'd recorded on my Sharp didn't actually sound very good at all. You know about MP3 encoding, right? It sounded like a 96kbps MP3 file, or perhaps a badly encoded 128kbps MP3 file (like you get with the "8HZ" encoder). I was kinda expecting MD to sound 'as good as' (note the apostrophes) CD, and I had already experienced MP3 and surmised that low bitrate MP3 files don't actually hold their own against CDs very well. When I discovered that the MDs recorded on the Sharp didn't sound much better than (substandard quality) MP3 files I began to investigate further. Like I already said. You have other problems then. There is simply no way that digital MDs off a Sharp unit will sound as bad as "substandard quality MP3" files. If they do, you have a problem somewhere in the recording process. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD for recording sound for film?
* "Dave Hooper" [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 10 Nov 2000 | Yes, that is precisely what I am saying. I thought it was pretty obvious | what I was comparing: | 1) The original CD Played on what? Sony equipment? | 2) MD recorded on my Sharp 831 | - obvious because I was commenting on CLEARLY audible artifacts in the MD | audio that weren't in the original. Feh. The only time I've heard "CLEARLY audible" aritifacts on a Sharp MD recorder was when I had a defective CD to begin with, and in that case both Sharp *AND* Sony recorders exhibited those artifacts. This is on both a 702 and 722, w/ Koss headphones and an AirHead amp. Similar goes for the half-dozen other Sharp owners I know. You are blowing smoke out your derrier, Mr. Hooper. -- 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: MD for recording sound for film?
From: "Stainless Steel Rat" [EMAIL PROTECTED]: * "Dave Hooper" [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 10 Nov 2000 | I am not! This is the only piece of Sony equipment which I own ... which I | have EVER owned! Huh? Are you saying that the Sharp recorder was the very first MD recorder you ever listened to? If so, then what were you comparing it against to say that it "sounds like shit"? Yes, that is precisely what I am saying. I thought it was pretty obvious what I was comparing: 1) The original CD 2) MD recorded on my Sharp 831 - obvious because I was commenting on CLEARLY audible artifacts in the MD audio that weren't in the original. I later added into the comparison 3) MDs recorded on a friends Sony deck when I began to notice that the MDs I'd recorded on my Sharp didn't actually sound very good at all. You know about MP3 encoding, right? It sounded like a 96kbps MP3 file, or perhaps a badly encoded 128kbps MP3 file (like you get with the "8HZ" encoder). I was kinda expecting MD to sound 'as good as' (note the apostrophes) CD, and I had already experienced MP3 and surmised that low bitrate MP3 files don't actually hold their own against CDs very well. When I discovered that the MDs recorded on the Sharp didn't sound much better than (substandard quality) MP3 files I began to investigate further. Like I already said. dave - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD for recording sound for film?
| 1) The original CD Played on what? Sony equipment? G... are you trying to wind me up now, or what? "I DON'T OWN ANY SONY EQUIPMENT EXCEPT MY NEW MZR90", which bit of that sentence don't you understand? The original CD was played through a digital output (I have used both a CD-ROM to SBLive via SPDIF and then optical SPDIF out of the LiveDriveII, and a Marantz CD6000OSE with optical SPDIF out) and then I LISTENED to this through the minidisc itself WHILST I recorded onto the minidisc. I then played back the track and it sounded noticeably worse. I can hear artifacts. Let me rephrase that, **I** can hear artifacts. So I suspect that Sharp's psychoacoustic model used in their ATRAC encoder isn't quite as generous as Sony's, in that Sharp ATRAC throws away stuff that is actually important to my ear/brain combination. Let me rephrase that, **my** ear/brain combination. Feh. The only time I've heard "CLEARLY audible" aritifacts on a Sharp MD recorder was when I had a defective CD to begin with, and in that case both Sharp *AND* Sony recorders exhibited those artifacts. Then they aren't ATRAC artifacts, are they. If you have a defective CD, then the artifacts are on the CD, aren't they. And the whole point of psychoacoustics relies on an averaged impirical model of human sound responses, so it's perfectly possible that I would be able to hear the artifiacts I was talking about and you couldn't if the model wasn't quite right for me. "Feh" right back at you. I am not alone, I did a search at altavista and found a couple complaints about Sharp ATRAC just like mine. I already *KNOW* that some people can hear the artifacts and some people can't. I suspect some of the people that can't are the sort of people who don't really see (well, hear...) the advantage of 160kbps MP3s over 96kbps MP3s. This is on both a 702 and 722, w/ Koss headphones and an AirHead amp. Similar goes for the half-dozen other Sharp owners I know. You are blowing smoke out your derrier, Mr. Hooper. So, let me get this straight: I report some observations backed up by some experimental details, you report that you know 7 people (yourself included) who listen to tracks recorded on Sharp MiniDisc portables and none of you have yet observed anything similar, and therefore I AM WRONG and making it up? What's up with you? It's not like I have a personal vendetta against Sharp, because I happen to very much like Sharp equipment (just not their ATRAC encoder). For everyone else who still cares about this thread at all, I will close it with a couple of simple statements that ought to shut everyone up and end it now: Some people don't like Sharp ATRAC recordings because they sound artificial and 'compressed', whereas some people don't like Sony ATRAC recordings for whatever other personal reasons they may have. This is a completely different issue to playing back those recordings. If you're going to use MD for master recordings take a few try outs on various manufacturer's equipment before settling on what you're going to use for recording and playback. dave - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MP3 to CDR
On 11 Nov 2000, at 12:32, Joseph Mariano Esperanza Mitr wrote: Free music. I've gotten so many mp3s of entire albums months before they came out. So have I, but why would you burn it to a CD? It's substandard quality, and at least I buy the CD when it comes out anyway. JT -- JT - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
