Re: MD: USB to MD
mne:Tid:08.44 MEDDELANDE Re: USB to MD Datum: 1-02-05 [EMAIL PROTECTED] skrev (sndag 4 februari 2001): You'd be helping a lot of people who happen to use a Mac if you would mention in passing that the Xitel equipment is PC Windows only. Actually, if you look at their faq you'll find this: Does the AN1 or DG1 work on a Mac Issue: Can I use an AN1 or DG1 on a Mac and will all the features be supported. Fix: We do not currently support Mac computers because the USB audio on Mac has yet to be completely standardized. Both the AN1 and DG1 will work on Mac systems running OS 9.0.4 with Apple Audio Extension1.0.5. The AN1 will operate as described on this website. The DG1 auto trackmarking feature is defeated on Macs, because Mac media players tend to spool all the audio tracks and play them as one continuous stream. This ensures that the audio quality through the USB port is great, but defeats the track marking feature. It is possible that with the correct media player, the auto track marking feature will work fine - as long as the tracks are played individually and not spooled. At this stage, the included MusicMatch software is a PC only version. I am, like yourself, a mac user... /M From: Markus Laurin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 04 Feb 2001 13:09:24 +0100 Subject: Re: MD: USB to MD mne:Tid:13.08 MEDDELANDE Re: USB to MD Datum: 1-02-04 Check out this nifty little gadget from Xitel. It seems to do the job, only cheaper. http://www.xitel.com/nav_home.htm /Markus -- - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: PC connection with MDS-JB940
On Thu, 01 Feb 2001 15:50:15 -0800, Paul Kerl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It converts a signal from the USB port on your computer to an optical signal for your MD Deck, so no special connectors on the deck. So, the signal path remains digital ... it doesn't go PC digitial out via USB - black box - MD analog in? I believe the Xitel digital interface does change the signal to analog best I can determine. Just want to be sure. Thanks. -jts Arlington, TX - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Some food for thought/fuel for discussion...
So, how does it sound? That is really the crux of the matter. "David W. Tamkin" wrote: Don Capps wrote, | ...I have noted with some interest that several list members apparently | record mp3 files from their computers onto minidisc. ... | In light of this, how do you all feel about the fact | that mp3 files recorded to minidisc have been subjected to rather heavy data | compression, not once, but twice? This, it would seem to me, would have a | definite effect on fidelity. ... Any thoughts on this? I see it this way: The lossiness of ATRAC is not orthogonal to the lossiness of MP3 encoding. If a song was on a CD but you have it as a 10:1 .mp3 file, and you play the .mp3 file as input to MD, the resulting MD track is 1/5, not 1/50, the size of the original CD track. There is a lot of extrapolation in decoding the .mp3 file into S/PDIF or into analog output, and, because of overlap in the algorithms, a disproportionate part of what ATRAC discards comes from the extrapolation rather than from the retained data. -- 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: USB question
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === Thanks, Matt, Your answer helped me find a webpage that had some info on it http://www.usb.org/forums/retail/messages/1845.html and http://www.usb.org/forums/retail/messages/3251.html http://www.usb.org/forums/retail/webboard_12031999.html Matt Wall wrote: yes i know the answer as i've dealt with this before. you have to get an ABIT specific usb header usb connector. they really didn't use anything standard and so they used thier own thing. anyway you have to get a usb thing that is abit specific. go to your local computer shop (non best buy) and ask them, if they dont know, then look for it on pricewatch.com. hope that helps. - Original Message - From: "J. Coon" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 12:02 AM Subject: MD: USB question I just picked up a 2 port USB connector for my computer. The motherboard is an ABIT PX5 and it says it has USB on it. It shows up in the device manager as working properly. However, the header pins it has for it show a 2 pin wide 16 pin header. the usb socket has two 5 pin plugs. Anyone got any ides on how to connect it? The ABIT site is for the birds...The have a newer version of the manual, but the link to it is bad. -- 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] -- 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: Some food for thought/fuel for discussion...
From: "David W. Tamkin" [EMAIL PROTECTED] The lossiness of ATRAC is not orthogonal to the lossiness of MP3 encoding. If a song was on a CD but you have it as a 10:1 .mp3 file, and you play the .mp3 file as input to MD, the resulting MD track is 1/5, not 1/50, the size of the original CD track. There is a lot of extrapolation in decoding the .mp3 file into S/PDIF or into analog output, and, because of overlap in the algorithms, a disproportionate part of what ATRAC discards comes from the extrapolation rather than from the retained data. You're telling me that compressing the file twice doesn't effect the audio quality? Not sure I'm getting you here. Don C. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Some food for thought/fuel for discussion...
From: "J. Coon" [EMAIL PROTECTED] So, how does it sound? That is really the crux of the matter. Exactly. Don C. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Effects of different ATRAC versions
On 04 Feb 2001 14:33:29 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * "Francisco J. Huerta" [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sun, 04 Feb 2001 | Also, I had a strange problem on my MZ-1. I recorded audio off a DVD with | 96/24 resolution (truncated to 48khz), and although it plays perfectly on | the R90, it skips on the MZ-1. All the other discs work fine on both | machines. That was funny. Weird, because as far as I know you should not have been able to make that recording in the first place. AC3 tracks are usually marked SCMS final. I've never had any SCMS related problems recording digitally from DVDs (audio soundtracks), using a coax interconnect from my DVD player to the coax-in on my bookshelf. Cheers Neil ___ Send a cool gift with your E-Card http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/ - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: md-l-mimedigest V2 #875
Memo from John H Rolt of PricewaterhouseCoopers Start of message text From: Ivica Petrovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] is there any MD based bookshelf, mini system, micro system, or home decks with a Microphone Input in it? And it must be readily available, of course, something still producing by the MD manufacturers ( don't advised me into some sort of prehistory machine, please)! Ivica I was looking in the UK for something similar last year, as my wife wants something similar for her classroom music teaching. I found some mini units with mic input - however, they were mainly in grotesque (IMO) "teenager's bedroom style" with lots of buttons and flashy lights and more importantly only seemed to have mono recording via the mic (presumably for "karaoke" recording). So take care to get what you want and beware the snake oil "sales executives" who probably won't know! Regards .. John (usual apologies for corporate text clutter) - End of message text The principal place of business of PricewaterhouseCoopers and its associate partnerships is 1 Embankment Place, London WC2N 6NN where lists of the partners' names are available for inspection. All partners in the associate partnerships are authorised to conduct business as agents of, and all contracts for services to clients are with, PricewaterhouseCoopers. The UK firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers is authorised by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales to carry on investment business. PricewaterhouseCoopers is a member of the world-wide PricewaterhouseCoopers organisation. The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: MD recorder with microphone input
The Sharp MD-R3 has the following connectors: Coax input, Optical input, Optical output, microphone input, line input and output, and headphone jack. The microphone input has its own analog level control. Check the PDF user's manual for more information. http://www.minidisc.org/part_Sharp_MD-R3.html David -- David B. Fincher Associate Professor Central Christian College of the Bible [EMAIL PROTECTED] 660-263-3900 - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Effects of different ATRAC versions
Hello, | Also, I had a strange problem on my MZ-1. I recorded audio off a DVD with | 96/24 resolution (truncated to 48khz), and although it plays perfectly on | the R90, it skips on the MZ-1. All the other discs work fine on both | machines. That was funny. Weird, because as far as I know you should not have been able to make that recording in the first place. AC3 tracks are usually marked SCMS final. The recording was not an AC3 bitstream; it was a 96/24 PCM recording (Alan Parsons Project "I Robot", by Classic Records). I have a Pioneer DV-525, and I configured it to output a 48Khz signal. This way, I could record everything on the R90. Francisco. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Effects of different ATRAC versions
Since Mexico (.mx) is in Region 1 I think it is reasonable to assume Region 1 discs, which mean AC3 or dts. Not really. We are R4. But my DVD is R1. Reason was that when DVD took off, there were no pieces of hardware R4-compatible. So everyone bought R1 stuff. | Also, while you can't copy a DVD using a stand alone unit. On a computer | you can copy DVD's if you have the right software. Yeah, but he did not say anything about ripping the audio out of a DVD-Video, so I did not assume he did. No, I ripped the disc from a DVD-V. Francisco. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD recorder with microphone input
I use a Sony MZ-R900 with a stereo condenser mic, with very good (and stereo) results for recording my music practice. This may not meet the original writer's criteria as it is a "walkman" style recorder. For me that is an advantage, having it so portable. Cheers, Anna -- Anna Langley voice +44 20 7986 3253 Bond Portfolio Analysisfax+44 20 7986 3220 Schroder Salomon Smith Barney, Level 3 Citigroup Centre 33 Canada Square, London E14 5LB, UK - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Some food for thought/fuel for discussion..
I have a few discs of light jazz that I've downloaded from MP3.COM. All of the material on MP3.COM seems to be recorded at 128Kbps. Some of the files are encoded better than others, but even the best seem to have a slightly edgy quality to the treble. I find the worst encoded files hard to listen to, so I've not bothered to dub them to MD if the original encoding is bad. I decode the MP3 with the Fraunhofer decoder in CoolEdit2000, and use CoolEdit2000 to play the file via a 44.1K digital output on my computer. This is connected to an MDS-PC2 recorder (ATRAC 4.5). I have not been able to hear any additional degradation caused by the ATRAC in the MD recorder. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Some food for thought/fuel for discussion...
On Mon, 5 Feb 2001 08:40:22 -0800, "Don Capps" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're telling me that compressing the file twice doesn't effect the audio quality? Not sure I'm getting you here. The claim has been made that you can record a CD to MD, then re-record MD to MD via analog inputs about 8-9x before noticeable degredation becomes apparent. I have not verified this but I've seen it claimed on several occasions by those who have tested it. By analogy we should be ok going from mp3 to MD. I do this and the sound is just fine. I convert using MusicMatch, then burn a cd-r (to keep in my collection) on the computer then copy the cd-r to MD in the hi fi system using a cd and MD deck via optical inputs. I first used 128 kbps mp3's, but quickly went to 160 kbps for increased fidelity. I now try to keep the floor at 192 kbps mp3 files and they seem just fine via critical ear phone listening (Sennheisen 580's via a Total AirHead amp), source usually an R50 portable recorder/player. I'm using an ISDN line but if I had cable or DSN I'd probably go to the highest mp3 encoding available. -jts - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Some food for thought/fuel for discussion...
John Small wrote: On Mon, 5 Feb 2001 08:40:22 -0800, "Don Capps" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're telling me that compressing the file twice doesn't effect the audio quality? Not sure I'm getting you here. The claim has been made that you can record a CD to MD, then re-record MD to MD via analog inputs about 8-9x before noticeable degredation becomes apparent. I have not verified this but I've seen it claimed on several occasions by those who have tested it. Here is a link to a site with examples of multiple generation MD copying loss. http://www.minidisc.org/generations.html As for recording mp3s to MD, I do it all the time. I've got most of my CD collection on my hard drive in MP3 format at 160 kb/s (compromise between size and quality) using the lame encoder. I make MDs to listen to on my commute on the train to and from work. The sound is just fine, since there is a lot of traffic and train noise. Even when I listen at home, the degradation from 160 kb/s mp3 to MD isn't noticeable. -steve - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Some food for thought/fuel for discussion...
Don asked, | You're telling me that compressing the file twice doesn't effect the audio | quality? Not sure I'm getting you here. No, I'm saying that a cumulative effect does exist, but it is not as great as what you'll expect if you multiply compression ratios. Putting audio through 10:1 MP3 compression and the MP3 output through 5:1 ATRAC compression sounds worse than the MP3 file, but it would not be as bad as 50:1 compression. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Some food for thought/fuel for discussion...
one question i've not heard this question asked. you said you heard no quality difference. well are you listening to the audio using the same sound setup? i mean it can even sound better if his puter has an old sb 16 sound card and he is using some generic desktop speakers that dont sound good, but after encoding them twice and put's them on cd or md plays it on a very nice stero system, yes it's going to sound better there than on the computer just becuase of the simple dynamics of what each can handle. so as for the quality sounding better who know's everyone hears different anyways :) - Original Message - From: "David W. Tamkin" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 12:36 PM Subject: Re: MD: Some food for thought/fuel for discussion... Don asked, | You're telling me that compressing the file twice doesn't effect the audio | quality? Not sure I'm getting you here. No, I'm saying that a cumulative effect does exist, but it is not as great as what you'll expect if you multiply compression ratios. Putting audio through 10:1 MP3 compression and the MP3 output through 5:1 ATRAC compression sounds worse than the MP3 file, but it would not be as bad as 50:1 compression. - 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]
MD: Difference
Are you saying that there is an obvious difference in sound quality based on double blind studies where the sound levels have been match to a fraction of a dB or are you saying that because you think there are obvious differences based on your personal listening experience? I was making a remark on a personal observation. What I said exactly was "There is an obvious difference *to me* (especially in my Classical recordings..)" Actually with a lot (but not all) of the music I listen to,I can't tell the difference. But with a classical recording, I can *easily* tell the difference between a CD and MD; especially a quiet piece. I can tell the difference with professional equipment as well as home units. The rest of you can debate about the type of testing done, the conditions of testing and the type of equipment used. I have used professional studio equipment, and (obviously) own home equipment. No matter where I am, or the equipment I use I can *personally*, through my own (perhaps inadequate) listening experiences, hear the difference between a CD classical and MD classical recording. - And yes - even when both are created from the same digital master. But even so -- I find that the conveniences of MD far outweigh its' shortcomings. So even for my classical, I'll stick with MD. Long live MD!! :o) -Don - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Effects of different ATRAC versions
* Neil [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Mon, 05 Feb 2001 | I've never had any SCMS related problems recording digitally from DVDs | (audio soundtracks), using a coax interconnect from my DVD player to the | coax-in on my bookshelf. Weird. Maybe its just the stuff I buy ;). -- Rat [EMAIL PROTECTED]\ When not in use, Happy Fun Ball should be Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ returned to its special container and PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ kept under refrigeration. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: R50 or R90/R900
At 2/4/01 3:15 PM, John Small wrote: Since both are available (R50 at $250, R90 at $220) is there one reason to prefer one model over the other? Beyond the R90 issue is there some reason to prefer the R900 over either the R50 or R90, aside from the LP feature? These are the only three portable player/recorder models being considered. Wow, I'm surprised no one answered this yet. All other things being equal, the R900 is far superior to the older machines. It's battery life is longer, it's faster (more responsive) than the R55 and R90; but not the R50. It finally allows you to set it so End Search is automatic. And it supports MDLP, which IMNSHO, is a big step forward. The only real drawback to it is that it has one output for both headphones and line out. It uses a software setting to control the output instead of a hardware switch, and it reverts to headphone mode at the drop of a hat. But this is just a minor annoyance in an excellent design. In short, unless there's a particular reason not to, get the R900 over other choices. I have one and I'm VERY happy with it. Ed "What the" Heckman [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--+ | Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is probably the | | reason so few engage in it. | |-- Henry Ford | +--+ - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Difference
From Audio Hi-Fi Equipment, http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Club/1484/audio.htm Mini Discs are junk and total waste of time and money. They have "lossy compression" which ruins the stereoscopic imaging, ruins the dynamics, and sound too "harsh." This technology was obsolete before it reached the USA because now CR-R, CD-RW, and the upcomming DVD-R and DVD-RW are becomming the new standards. Unfortunately, some European and Asian countries have adopted this mediocre, soon to be obsolete format. You can get better results recording on a hi-grade cassette deck and using metal cassette tapes. Stereo Review article: Recording Rivalry MiniDisc vs Dolby S On Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:58:58 -0500, "Donald Person" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But even so -- I find that the conveniences of MD far outweigh its' shortcomings. So even for my classical, I'll stick with MD. I think Don covers the ground adequately. MD may not be 'perfect music forever' but in my hands it is at least as good, yes even better than my Nakamachi cassette deck (Dolby B, C ... not HX or S) and so much easier to use that it's absolutely no contest. Basically I could not tell any difference with either the Nak (3 discreet heads) or MD (JE510 or ATRAC 4), excepting the Nak added some hiss and occasionally I'd hear wow and flutter ... esp sustained piano notes. Mostly I record rock and jazz. Not classical (I listen to the records or CD's for this when I am resting comfortably at home). The article cited above was by Ken Pohlman using a JE500 (ATRAC 4) vs a Teac Dolby HX/S deck. He found the highs cut and somewhat strident compared to the cassette. Well, I'm not using my cassette and I am using the MD equipment. There was, oddly, a comment about MD's limited to 74 minutes while cassettes are 90 minutes. Given that 45 minutes per side = one album and may not equal one CD I don't really see the point. Anyway everyone knows what a PITA it is rewind to other side if that's the music you want to listen to. From this 1997 review the Hi-Fi site above boasts, 'MD's are junk and a total waste of time and money'. Now I have not read this site before but it makes me wonder about the remaining advice. So, as Don says, others can debate but the convenience of MD coupled with more than adequate sound makes the choice for MD a slam dunk. Much better than carrying CD's and a large portable player (which cannot record) by MD standards. If some prefer cassette I may have a BX3 for sale! -jts Arlington, TX - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Difference
On Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:58:58 -0500, "Donald Person" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From Audio Hi-Fi Equipment, http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Club/1484/audio.htm Mini Discs are junk and total waste of time and money. They have "lossy compression" which ruins the stereoscopic imaging, ruins the dynamics, and sound too "harsh." This technology was obsolete before it reached the USA because now CR-R, CD-RW, and the upcomming DVD-R and DVD-RW are becomming the new standards. Unfortunately, some European and Asian countries have adopted this mediocre, soon to be obsolete format. You can get better results recording on a hi-grade cassette deck and using metal cassette tapes. Stereo Review article: Recording Rivalry MiniDisc vs Dolby S You know what's really a total waste of time and money? If you have invested in Digital Compact Casette DCC invented by Philips. That's really something obsolete. and yeah, that thing never been popular anywhere in the world. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MP3's vs MD.
...I have noted with some interest that several list members apparently record mp3 files from their computers onto minidisc. Apparently, from what I've read here and on the several webboards devoted to minidisc, this is a rather common practice. In light of this, how do you all feel about the fact that mp3 files recorded to minidisc have been subjected to rather heavy data compression, not once, but twice? This, it would seem to me, would have a definite effect on fidelity. Even well encoded mp3 files may have been subjected to compression ratios as high as 10 : 1. Not to mention the added ATRAC compression of the minidisc recording process itself. Any thoughts on Unfortunately, when the MP3 craze first hit, I too was bitten by that bug. I purchased a MP3 encoding program and decided I would convert ALL my CD collection to MP3 and have my entire library on only a few discs! Hell of an idea in theory, but a bad one in practice. After converting everything and burning the CDs, I was very disappointed in the sound quality. I didn't know that MP3's could be compressed up to 10:1 at the time, but I do now! Regardless I decided to stick w/ MD after that experience. I have recorded a few downloaded MP3's onto MD, and they don't sound good at all. Unfortunately, when you download an MP3, you're subject to whatever hardware/software combonation the owner of the file used -- plus whatever compression algorhythmsp their software uses.. On top of that, ATRAC compression further degrades the quality. Most of the time the sound is horrible at best. This is another reason I don't understand why all these portable MP3 devices are so popular. The sound of an MP3 (when compared to any other format) is horrible IMHO. Besides -- I feel more confident when I record onto a MD - rather than recording onto a memory stick. A little static electricity and *poof* there goes your memory stick music... - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: PC connection with MDS-JB940
Yeah, the sony one is all digital... but on sony's website, it says you can also control the deck through the PC. Doing editing and naming...etc... how do they do it? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Small Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 7:26 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MD: PC connection with MDS-JB940 On Thu, 01 Feb 2001 15:50:15 -0800, Paul Kerl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It converts a signal from the USB port on your computer to an optical signal for your MD Deck, so no special connectors on the deck. So, the signal path remains digital ... it doesn't go PC digitial out via USB - black box - MD analog in? I believe the Xitel digital interface does change the signal to analog best I can determine. Just want to be sure. Thanks. -jts Arlington, TX - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Difference
Actually, I've been moving away from MD towards analog cassette and DAT. It's not that I think MD is not good enough; actually when I look at other formats, I get this "ah, no wonder MD can be popular" feeling. I guess there's this "audiophile" part of me (in quotation marks because I'm not sure of what I am) acting up right now :-) Leon on 2/5/01 12:04 PM, Taky Cheung at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You know what's really a total waste of time and money? If you have invested in Digital Compact Casette DCC invented by Philips. That's really something obsolete. and yeah, that thing never been popular anywhere in the world. - 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: R50 or R90/R900
Some people regard the R50 as the "absolute norm" - some kind of ideal form for an MD portable. My guess is that after the R50, MD portables generally became caught up in a somewhat pathetic quest for better stastical performance (low power consumption, for example). I don't know what the R50's amp output is, but if it's over 5+5mW then that may be a reason enough for some of us to pursue it. I've read a lot of discussion on headphone amp output. A lot of people claim that the smaller the output, the "lighter" and thus "sharper" the sound, but that it actually sounds somewhat unsettled. It seems that greater output generally gives a stronger sense of depth and scale. This issue is not just limited to MD portable, of course. And it's not that the portables with less output are not "good"; it's just that I'd always like to see a maximization of the sonic potentals. :-) Back to the Sony portables discussion. I have the R900. The nice thing is that every time you use it, you realize how hi-tech it is. It prompts you to "pushENTER", shows you how much data is left to be encoded, and revs up like nothing else (aside from 45x search cassette walkmans). The one major complaint I have of the R900 is the way it handles power. The battery indicator "spasms" all the time as it draws some extra power to start the spindle, read, write, and so on. Sometimes I'd start recording confident that I've got plenty of power left, then come back 5 minutes later, to find the R900 cut itself off from an empty battery. There are parts of the operation logic (i.e. how you go about operating) that are erratic to me. However, this is probably a personal issue and isn't quite a reason for affecting decision-making. I realize these may all be a bit irrelevant to the questions... sorry bout that. Leon on 2/5/01 11:43 AM, Ed Heckman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 2/4/01 3:15 PM, John Small wrote: Since both are available (R50 at $250, R90 at $220) is there one reason to prefer one model over the other? Beyond the R90 issue is there some reason to prefer the R900 over either the R50 or R90, aside from the LP feature? These are the only three portable player/recorder models being considered. Wow, I'm surprised no one answered this yet. All other things being equal, the R900 is far superior to the older machines. It's battery life is longer, it's faster (more responsive) than the R55 and R90; but not the R50. It finally allows you to set it so End Search is automatic. And it supports MDLP, which IMNSHO, is a big step forward. The only real drawback to it is that it has one output for both headphones and line out. It uses a software setting to control the output instead of a hardware switch, and it reverts to headphone mode at the drop of a hat. But this is just a minor annoyance in an excellent design. In short, unless there's a particular reason not to, get the R900 over other choices. I have one and I'm VERY happy with it. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: PC connection with MDS-JB940
On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Kenneth Lee wrote: Yeah, the sony one is all digital... but on sony's website, it says you can also control the deck through the PC. Doing editing and naming...etc... how do they do it? IIRC that's only with the MDS-PC3, not the JB940. You can send the music to the 940, but not control it. Josh - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Some food for thought/fuel for discussion...
I had posted, No, I'm saying that a cumulative effect does exist, but it is not as great as what you'll expect if you multiply compression ratios. Putting audio through 10:1 MP3 compression and the MP3 output through 5:1 ATRAC compression sounds worse than the MP3 file, but it would not be as bad as 50:1 compression. Matt Wall replied with the following text, which uses the word "you." Below it he quoted my post. Apparently I'm his "you" just as the person to whom I was replying was my "you." | one question i've not heard this question asked. you said you heard no | quality difference. Huh? I said that "a cumulative effect does exist" and that the MD copy of an MP3 "sounds worse" than the MP3. How on earth Matt got the idea that those words mean "I hear no quality difference" is beyond me. He went on to ask a question based on that strange interpretation: | well are you listening to the audio using the same sound setup? and to theorize that the claim of identical sound that I never made could have derived from listening to the MD on better playback equipment than the MP3 file. If something never happened, then "It didn't happen" is an adequate answer for "Is this how it happened?" So my answer is this: it didn't happen. Again, the MD would sound (perhaps imperceptibly) worse than the MP3, but not as bad as the person who originally asked the question expected from multi- plying the compression ratios. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: Re: MZ-1 (was: Effects of different ATRAC ve
I own couple Sony/Sharp models and none of them of the heat problem except the MZ-1, it will even refuse to operate after couple hours of re-playing. The only problem is that in Hong Kong the power company supplies 220V AC so I need transformer to step down to 110V AC in order to use the Japanese imports, and that's the hottest part. Anyway, glad to hear that yours is ok! Cheers, Hi. I never had the heat problem that you mentioned. But my newer portables get hot when I recharge them. Larry - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] === s K O q l l c http://sinamail.sina.com.hk - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Difference
Donald Person wrote: I was making a remark on a personal observation. What I said exactly was "There is an obvious difference *to me* (especially in my Classical recordings..)" But have you at least done these listening "tests" where you were not aware of which was which? The point that I am making is simply that unless you do not know whether you are listening to the MD or CD, the difference that you hear my be psychological. Larry - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD recorder with microphone input
Thanks to both Anna Langley and David B. Fincher! Yes, the Sharp MD-R3 has the mic input. It is discussed as a good solution, with a poor CD part. But you can't get it all. Any info about the price in Europe? And to Anna, I already have a portable MD recorder, but I need some kind of standalone unit for the second part of home recording work with microphone. I'm doing a great deal of field work with a portable, so back at home I'm a little bit tired of pushing small buttons, watching small display and so on, if you know what I mean. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MP3's vs MD.
Donald Person wrote This is another reason I don't understand why all these portable MP3 devices are so popular. People are misers? wow, a bunch of music for a cost of nothing! and the quality is equal. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: R50 or R90/R900
At 03:58 PM 2/5/01 -0800, you wrote: Some people regard the R50 as the "absolute norm" - some kind of ideal form for an MD portable. My guess is that after the R50, MD portables generally became caught up in a somewhat pathetic quest for better stastical performance (low power consumption, for example). That actually about sums it up. I've got an R50 and given a good source for new unrefurbished product I'd probably buy two more. They may not have MDLP, but they are one hell of a machine. I would put an R50 up against any deck unit given the available input and output methods (obviously portables don't have optical out) the R50 is one hell of a trooper, and can withstand a lot of abuse without sacrificing sound quality. just my 2 cents. -Jeffrey - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: MDS-PC3 (was PC connection with MDS-JB940)
Does it worth spending $400 buying MDS-PC3? I want to record songs from MD back to my PC as Wave using Optical In. Is it possible to do that? My sound card has both optical in and out. Thanks TAKY CHEUNG http://hottaky.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "JT" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 6:49 PM Subject: RE: MD: PC connection with MDS-JB940 On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Kenneth Lee wrote: Yeah, the sony one is all digital... but on sony's website, it says you can also control the deck through the PC. Doing editing and naming...etc... how do they do it? IIRC that's only with the MDS-PC3, not the JB940. You can send the music to the 940, but not control it. Josh - 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: MP3's vs MD.
Hiya, When I decided MD over MP3, just about a year ago, it was OBVIOUS even to me, one who LIVED on his MP3 Playlist, that MD was better. This magnificent little disc holds 74 minutes of audio, in a very clear and dynamic compression algorithm. MP3 players turned me off because usually players held no more than 64MB (~32min at my bit rate), and the media is about $1/MB, too expensive! I bought my Sharp MD-MT15 with 8 blanks on an eBay auction for about $195. I payed too much, but hey! Even this ugly player (my opinion) grabs eyes. Chick magnet galore. By about May at school, kids were getting these dopey MP3 players. Nothing beat my nice little MD-MT15 though, with its little "HELLO!" when ya started it! And a real fun thing to do with an MD player is attach a little mic and record stuff. Just recording random things durning a school day would get kicks galore for me and my friends. Can ya do that with an MP3 player, other than one of those bulky hard-drive-in-a-box players? I think not. Sure, MD has its non-believers (see the MD community post, in the news section is something about a self proclaimed "audiophile" who hates MD but likes MP3.), but it seems a lot of those people sit in front of their two $30,000 monaural amps driving $20,000 speakers. And they also think turntable sounds better than ANY digital audio. I'll give them CD, but I'd have to say that 48kHz/32bit sounds better than anything a turntable can cough up. MP3 is a techincally dead, however consumer-loved medium. MiniDisc just sadly doesn't have the "oomph" in the consumer market it needs. Looking from a purely technical standpoint, ATRAC beats MP3. ATRAC is fully reverse and forward compatible, and is constantly updated with new revisions. MP3 has been the same since the MPEG1 Audio standard was made back in the late '80s. MP3 uses Flash Media, which does beat MD in one aspect - durability. However, a $1.50 MD is a lot nicer when it breaks than a $64 SmartMedia. With an MP3 player, you can usually copy your music faster than realtime. Beats MD again. There are ways around this - CD-RW and a faster-than-1x CD-to-MD copier. But, to record to MP3, you need a computer - at least a 686 generation processor around 300MHz. With MD, you need a line out, thats IT. And my (soon to be here) Sharp MD-MS722 looks AWESOME! I mean, the industrial design that goes in to these players is VERY impressive. Especially for Sharp. MD all the way! -- Robert J. Lynn, Jr. Brainbench Certified Computer Technician, Linux Administrator, and Master Windows 98 User PGP Key ID: 0xCDE22CFB (RSA) [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] EFNet: Vegeta99 - Original Message - From: "Ivica Petrovic" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "MD" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 4:42 PM Subject: Re: MD: MP3's vs MD. Donald Person wrote This is another reason I don't understand why all these portable MP3 devices are so popular. People are misers? wow, a bunch of music for a cost of nothing! and the quality is equal. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Sony MXD-D4 or D5
Anyone looked or owned one of these two? What is the difference between them. The D5 is Type R with 5 cd-changer and a single MD recorder. Is it available? Thanks. -jts - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: sec: unclassified: R50 or R90/R900
To all R 50 owners, has anyone had any problems with the buttons not working on the front or remote? Mine have gone west and don't want to pay mega$ to get it fixed if there is a easy remedy. Thanks Kev -Original Message- From: Jeffrey Scorsone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 6 February 2001 14:13 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: MD: R50 or R90/R900 At 03:58 PM 2/5/01 -0800, you wrote: Some people regard the R50 as the "absolute norm" - some kind of ideal form for an MD portable. My guess is that after the R50, MD portables generally became caught up in a somewhat pathetic quest for better stastical performance (low power consumption, for example). That actually about sums it up. I've got an R50 and given a good source for new unrefurbished product I'd probably buy two more. They may not have MDLP, but they are one hell of a machine. I would put an R50 up against any deck unit given the available input and output methods (obviously portables don't have optical out) the R50 is one hell of a trooper, and can withstand a lot of abuse without sacrificing sound quality. just my 2 cents. -Jeffrey - 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]
