RE: MD: Head Cleaners (were Lens Cleaners)
Actually, that may not be the case dude. I checked out the Australian website and they've got the head cleaner there, but not the lens cleaner. That was actually on the US website, but no head cleaner listed up there. So I wouldn't draw the conclusion that if it isn't on the web, it's not in the respective country. Just ask your local Sony dealer, rather than the corner shop, that's all 3#-) Adios, LarZ --- TAMA - The Strongest Name in Drums --- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David W. Tamkin Sent: Tuesday, 5 December 2000 3:43 Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:Re: MD: Head Cleaners (were Lens Cleaners) A They do make a head cleaner too dude - MD-8HCL Thank you both for the information. I note that Richard is in New Zealand and Tony in Australia, while I'm in the U.S., so it might very well be that Sony's lens and head cleaners are marketed there but not here, or they weren't marketed here back when I was looking for such. My lens cleaner, purchased off the rack at Best Buy, is from Maxell; my head cleaner, bought from the late unlamented Minidisc Now, is by TDK. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: disc quality was :Re: Lens Cleaners
Dan Frakes wrote: I have heard nothing but good things about Hi-Space discs, from both retailers and reviewers. Do you have any evidence to your claim that they are inferior, and should not be used for "important" recordings? I've been examining some of my Hi-Space discs compared to some of my Sony and TDK discs, and I can't see any of the "patchy bits" you describe. Are you saying that we shouldn't use Hi-Space discs for "important" recordings because they are less expensive? Hi-Space would love you. theres a sales manager job going if interested... (dont think Id get the job after my last post) http://www.hi-space.com/eng/pages/general/jobs1.html The only problems I have ever had with blanks are from Maxell and Hi-space. Several times Making a recording with a new disc freshly unwraped from the plastic only to find it wont play correctly. Also lots of UTOC errors. It was not my equipment as on the occasions where this did happen I tried a Sony MZR-30 a Sony S38 and a Sony MZR-90 to make sure, and I gave a disc to a friend with an MD build into a hi-fi and she got errors too. I use Hi-space discs all the time as they are better value for money, but when I (personally) see them on sale for 1/3 the price of others and they give me UTOC errors from time to time when other brands do not then that to me says somethings wrong there and that Id prefer to use (but cannot afford to) a different brand for recordings that are important to me. The patchy bits. Ive seen when holding them up to strong light. TDK/Sony look fairly smooth and uniform wheres the Hi-space Ive had do not look uniform. Ever see stress marks/colours on plastic? those rainbow colours? there are lots more on the hi-space disks than there are on more expensive brands. Are you saying that we shouldn't use Hi-Space discs for "important" recordings because they are less expensive? Use whatever discs you want, Im not saying what people should or should not do, I was only giving my opinion on the discs and how I found them. Bryan - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: Sony lens/head cleaners...
My deck still seems to be doing its usual funny thing, though not as regularly. I'm thinking optical block in the 8900 is getting close to having the dick. Once it gets past reading the TOC, it's fine, so it doesn't clearly seem to be the optical block, but hell, I think it would be the solution, ultimately. Adios, LarZ --- TAMA - The Strongest Name in Drums --- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of J. Coon Sent: Tuesday, 5 December 2000 11:19 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: MD: Sony lens/head cleaners... I still say it is best to not use these on a regular basis. Only use them just before you have to take it in for repairs, to see if that clears up the problem. But hey, it's you equipment and if you damage it because of excessive cleaner use, who stands to gain from that? So have at it! Like I said before, the laser shouldn't touch anything, the head is only used during recording and not at all during play back. The MD media doesn't lose it's coating like a tape does, so the only reason to clean it is if you got some lint in there from carrying it around. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Head and Lens Cleaners, both
Tony Antoniou wrote, | Actually, that may not be the case dude. I checked out the Australian | website and they've got the head cleaner there, but not the lens cleaner. | That was actually on the US website, but no head cleaner listed up there. As I said before, it was a couple years ago when I looked into it. | So I wouldn't draw the conclusion that if it isn't on the web, it's not in | the respective country. Nobody did. Now what we need to do is compare the instructions on a head cleaner made by a company that doesn't manufacture MD hardware to those on one made by one that does, and likewise with lens cleaners. For example, the Maxell lens cleaner says to use it once a month and carries no warnings against excessive use; maybe the Sony lens cleaner says to use it only when you have problems possibly attributable to a dirty lens, or perhaps it carries cautions that the Maxell doesn't. (If I find the instructions from the TDK head cleaner, I'll post their recommended frequency.) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: SACD? Any chance for survival?
I'm considering the purchase of a Sony 9000 ES Progressive Scan DVD Player. As a bonus, it also plays SACD. Titles available in SACD are few and far between and seem to mirror the same (Sony titles only) that were initally available on prerecorded MD: Bangles Greatest Hits, Cyndi Lauper-She's So Unusual, etc. They sell for about $30 each. Question: what is the difference in sound quality and why should anybody in the general public give a flying f**king rhinos ass? I have sincere doubts anybody will ever give a s**t about DVD-Audio, let alone SACD. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: SACD? Any chance for survival?
The future doesn't look bright for DVD-A or SACD. If nothing else, I think us people nowadays are far less likely to spend on audio as if it's a hobby, and pursue the (supposedly) more refined stuff. Of course, that's probably also due to things like MD being so easily available. A proof - Nakamichi nowadays survive on computer peripherals and car audio, the same company who sold decks that recorded up to 20kHz on a cassette back in 1973. :) SACD, AFAIK, is supposed to sound more analog-like, without losing fidelity. There are people who think digital audio in general sounds too "hardened", and heads off into vinyls/cassettes. Don't ask me to explain their rationale. ;) Leon From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rodney Peterson) Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 10:00:48 -0800 (PST) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: MD: SACD? Any chance for survival? I'm considering the purchase of a Sony 9000 ES Progressive Scan DVD Player. As a bonus, it also plays SACD. Titles available in SACD are few and far between and seem to mirror the same (Sony titles only) that were initally available on prerecorded MD: Bangles Greatest Hits, Cyndi Lauper-She's So Unusual, etc. They sell for about $30 each. Question: what is the difference in sound quality and why should anybody in the general public give a flying f**king rhinos ass? I have sincere doubts anybody will ever give a s**t about DVD-Audio, let alone SACD. - 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: SACD? Any chance for survival?
Question: what is the difference in sound quality and why should anybody in the general public give a flying f**king rhinos ass? I have sincere doubts anybody will ever give a s**t about DVD-Audio, let alone SACD. They shouldn't, unless they are a high-end audiophile type. DVD-Audio can capture the dynamic range of a jet engine. I'd say that's a bit extreme. Most people don't need that kind of fidelity. Pardon me is I have no idea what i'm talking about. Feel free to correct me. JT - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: SACD? Any chance for survival?
I'm considering the purchase of a Sony 9000 ES Progressive Scan DVD Player. As a bonus, it also plays SACD. Titles available in SACD are few and far between and seem to mirror the same (Sony titles only) that were initally available on prerecorded MD: Bangles Greatest Hits, Cyndi Lauper-She's So Unusual, etc. They sell for about $30 each. Question: what is the difference in sound quality and why should anybody in the general public give a flying f**king rhinos ass? I have sincere doubts anybody will ever give a s**t about DVD-Audio, let alone SACD. I just bought the unit you are referring as my main dvd / cd / sacd player on my system. If combined with a very good surround amp it can produce fascinating results. I love the unit and works completely ok in all types of re-production (dvd all regions/cdr/cdrw). I definitely recommend this unit if you are not only looking for a DVD. Harry Koutsogiorgas [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: SACD? Any chance for survival?
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === What's this sacd thing? Never heard of it. At 10:00 AM 12/5/00 -0800, you wrote: I'm considering the purchase of a Sony 9000 ES Progressive Scan DVD Player. As a bonus, it also plays SACD. Titles available in SACD are few and far between and seem to mirror the same (Sony titles only) that were initally available on prerecorded MD: Bangles Greatest Hits, Cyndi Lauper-She's So Unusual, etc. They sell for about $30 each. Question: what is the difference in sound quality and why should anybody in the general public give a flying f**king rhinos ass? I have sincere doubts anybody will ever give a s**t about DVD-Audio, let alone SACD. - 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: SACD? Any chance for survival?
Leon wrote: The future doesn't look bright for DVD-A or SACD. If nothing else, I think us people nowadays are far less likely to spend on audio as if it's a hobby, and pursue the (supposedly) more refined stuff. Of course, that's probably also due to things like MD being so easily available. Isn't it a little early to write off those two formats (especially DVD-A, which has only just become available)? Few people would have been buying CDs when they were first available in 1981. And, on the face of it, DVD-A has a lot going for it -- reportedly better sound quality than CD, and a whole new format for the record companies to sell to people whose record collections are in CD format (many of them will already have "upgraded" once from vinyl). I doubt that MD will have much effect either way, because the pre-recorded MD market is so small. Gerry - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: SACD? Any chance for survival?
SACD=Super Audio CD, a new supposedly superior (and of course incompatble with current CD players) audio format from Sony. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: SACD? Any chance for survival?
I though Super Audio CDs had multiple layers, one of which was totally compatible with current players? Which I suppose means SACDs effectively have the music recorded on them twice, one layer dedicated for backwards compatibility and the other encoded at 32bit 2MHz or something crazy. Dave - Original Message - From: "Rodney Peterson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2000 10:38 PM Subject: Re: MD: SACD? Any chance for survival? SACD=Super Audio CD, a new supposedly superior (and of course incompatble with current CD players) audio format from Sony. - 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: SACD? Any chance for survival?
SACD=Super Audio CD, a new supposedly superior (and of course incompatble with current CD players) audio format from Sony. However the huge bonus of SACD is that you can have a convential CD-Audio layer on the disc which _will_ play in regular CD players. That is what will sell the format (if at all) to the public. They can buy a new release in SACD format, play it with all the extra resolution on their main home system while still being able to play it in their car/kitchen/study/wherever. It's something that could be an enhanced feature of regular CDs (looking at it from the other perspective), so if they were cheap enough to make then all future releases could be SACD with the CD layer - no need for record shops to stock two things. However I think any takeup of either format will be really slow. CD and DVD both offer long-term durability over their analogue counterparts, extra convenience and that "quality for the masses" factor, people getting really good results from relatively cheap equipment. Same with MD over tape really. For DVD-A and SACD the only real trick is better quality (something that many people could achieve by simply buying a better CD player) - the other advantages we've already got from CD. It then ends in a vicious circle, not enough people with players, so no economic gain in releasing for it, the format dies. Of the two though, SACD is the obvious one to back - the players are here now and reasonably priced, and the backwards compatibility will mean people will be more willing to invest in the music for it. DVD-A only has the strength of the DVD name - everyone will assume they can play them on their DVD-Video player and be very disappointed when they can't. -- Simon (who has no plans to buy either...) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: MD Lens Cleaners (anyone remember this thread?)
Just a final note on the MD Lens Cleaner discussion - I've had the opportunity of checking out a Sony MD-6LCL lens cleaning MD in the flesh. It looks like a pre-recorded MD - shutter on one side only. You insert the thing in the MD unit and press track 2, and it beeps when the job is done. Apparently tracks 3 and 5 have a music selection on them -presumably for testing the cleaning job. I can't figure out how it works, but the sales assistance said it uses a brush. Anyhow, the packaging suggests you use it once every 2 weeks. The assistant suggest once every 6 months. Anyhow, the upshot is Sony say you should use it as regular maintenance, not as a "fix" in the case of malfunction. Take from that what you will. Once it's been used 50 times you have to throw it out and buy a new one. What's interesting you CAN'T use it is car MD headunits, apparently. No indication why (that kind of prevents me from buying one, because my Sony car MD is the unit I'm most concerned about). Richard Lang Solicitor Duncan Cotterill Christchurch, New Zealand email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel: (++64)-3-379-2430 fax: (++64)-3-379-7097 http://www.duncancotterill.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: disc quality was :Re: Lens Cleaners
On Tue, 5 Dec 2000 10:17:09 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dan Frakes wrote: I have heard nothing but good things about Hi-Space discs, from both retailers and reviewers. Do you have any evidence to your claim that they are inferior, and should not be used for "important" recordings? I've been examining some of my Hi-Space discs compared to some of my Sony and TDK discs, and I can't see any of the "patchy bits" you describe. Are you saying that we shouldn't use Hi-Space discs for "important" recordings because they are less expensive? Hi-Space would love you. theres a sales manager job going if interested... (dont think Id get the job after my last post) http://www.hi-space.com/eng/pages/general/jobs1.html I wasn't plugging them ;) I was only telling you my experiences and what I've heard about them. Your criticisms of Hi-Space just seemed to be out of line with everything else I've heard. I was asking for clarification. The only problems I have ever had with blanks are from Maxell and Hi-space. Several times Making a recording with a new disc freshly unwraped from the plastic only to find it wont play correctly. Also lots of UTOC errors. It was not my equipment as on the occasions where this did happen I tried a Sony MZR-30 a Sony S38 and a Sony MZR-90 to make sure, and I gave a disc to a friend with an MD build into a hi-fi and she got errors too. Just as a side note, if your MD somehow caused errors on a disc, especially to the TOC, that disc will then have problems in other units, as well. So that technically doesn't rule out your machine as being the cause. If other people were having those problems on their own equipment *before* your equipment every touched the discs, that lends support to your theory. The patchy bits. Ive seen when holding them up to strong light. TDK/Sony look fairly smooth and uniform wheres the Hi-space Ive had do not look uniform. Ever see stress marks/colours on plastic? those rainbow colours? there are lots more on the hi-space disks than there are on more expensive brands. I understand. I was simply saying that I've examined a number of my discs (Hi-Space, Sony, TDK, Maxell) and don't see any differences in the disc surfaces. I have noticed that the Maxell dics seem to be "cheaper" in construction, though. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: [Fwd: HHB PORTADISC - MDP500]
=== The original message was multipart MIME=== === All non-text parts (attachments) have been removed === Here is an announcement I received regarding a pro model Minidisc recorder from HHB. The unit is already listed on the Minidisc Community page but it has not been available until now. Anybody know anything about it other that what is said in the company blurbs? Jim Lee Original Message From: Tracey McPherson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: HHB PORTADISC - MDP500 Dear HHB Customer We are very pleased to inform you that the HHB PORTADISCTM MDP500 - Professional Portable Minidisc Recorder, is now shipping and will be available from the dealers listed on the enclosed sheet. The product has a suggested retail of $1545. PORTADISC DEALERS.doc We thank you for your patience in allowing us time to fully develop this product and bring it to market, we think you will be very pleased with the end result. Your feedback is always appreciated and welcome. Best wishes, Tracey McPherson HHB Communications Phone: 310 319 Fax: 310 319 1311 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] === MIME part removed : application/msword; === - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: MD manufacturers?
=== The original message was multipart MIME=== === All non-text parts (attachments) have been removed === Hi; What company, if any, besides Sony and Ameri Disc manufactures small runs of MD (non-recordable disc, case, labels) from a mastered CD? I'm interested in having this done quickly and can find very few resources so far. Thanks John Bateman === MIME part removed : text/html; === - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
