Re: MD: Sharp Bootleg Record Level
I know I can adjust the record level on the fly with my Sharp 831, but I'm not sure what kind of lighting I'll have at the Red Hot Chili Peppers / Foo Fighters concert I will be attending. Bring a small red light source (a good LED keychain light works great), and get a decent level during the opening band. Then, sit back and enjoy the show. During postprocessing, you can run it through a compressor to get fewer transient sound level fluctuations. Anyone have any advice on this? I was thinking 15, but not sure. I've used shitty mics (I mean, *truly* shitty -- used a set of headphones from a $5 portable tape deck, but backwards, as a stereo mic -- decent quality, belive it or not) in my '702, and find my settings at ~22 or so if I'm in a small-to-medium club venue, and within the first 10 rows of people on the floor. On the '702, 15 is the threshold between 'low' and 'high' mic sensitivity, so there's a big jump in response. I'll try to adjust, but don't want to give myself away... Don't worry -- once you're into a show, and there's lots of people around, it's rare for someone to actually pick you out of the crowd. This is my first time using the Sharp for a show that I care about. I always used a Sony before, but got sick of worrying about End Search... Well, I can't say much for the musical choice (my boots are of techno shows like Underworld, Orbital, and such), the Sharp should behave quite nicely, and give you good performance for recording the show. good luck, /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: My MD-MS702 Skips...Won't Record/Play
OK, so I do some research and find out that this is a common problem with the MD-MS702, which leads me to my questioncan anything be done about this problem? Obviously I'm beyond the warranty period. Am I screwed? Well, FWIW, if it's the standard optical-block failure on the 702, then you probably need to pay for professional repairs to get it fixed. On my '702, recording got skippy, but playback of already-recorded discs worked fine. I isolated the problem by opening it up (via Ian Horsey's directions .. great work!), and forcing the recording-head assembly all the way to its stopped position, then putting it through the auto-adjust in testmode, and it worked fine. /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sharp Spares
Can anyone on the list tell me where I can purchase Sharp spares ( i.e. spare li-Ion battery for 701/702). Sharp-UK directed me to their Minidisco.com sells high capacity Li-ion batteries for the 701/702/722 for decent prices. Not affiliated, just a satisfied customer. /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sony's new Internet Audio Recording Interface
1) I don't know of any device that can 'see how a chip worked'. There are devices that allow you to reverse-engineer a chip through physical means. You can literally shave off one thin layer at a time, and use a high power microscope, and then apply image-analysis algorithms to build masks to make chip duplicates and to determine how it works. /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sony's new Internet Audio Recording Interface
Which brings me back around to the original point that implementing real time ATRAC in software on today's desktop is not going to happen. Well, I think that there's a small qualifier here. I've been watching this thread for a long time now, keeping my trap shut. What it comes down to is that while ATRAC *could* be implemented in realtime (if not now, then in the near future), but that the complexity of the algorithm makes it a stupid decision. It'd be cheaper to just make a small ATRAC board that carries the $5 ASIC on-board, or some other embedded solution. It's the same argument as any other form of emulation -- sure, you *can* run your Playstation games on a computer with Bleem or such, but will that make people stop buying Playstations? No. The hardware inside a Playstation is designed for a small niche, and ATRAC chips are the same way. It's does only one thing, but it's very, very good at it. A general-purpose computer is better utilized for more generalized tasks. My US$0.02, /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Md and airoplans
Is this from experience or some other reason? I have a couple of flights this week, both by Airbusses (A320/319) and would like to listen to my MDs or at least take the opportunity to title my tracks. I've listened to my MD on Northwest Airlines A319 flights with no problems. They're just limited during takeoff and landing. /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sony's new Internet Audio Recording Interface
Even if a high-speed ATRAC chip is used as opposed to software ATRAC, I think the encoder would be better off at the PC end as this allows more utilisation of the limited bandwidth USB ports. Well, I'll just give my standard response to this sort of argument -- USB is designed for peripherals, not for media storage or transfer, IMHO. If I'm going to be doing data storage or retrieval, I'd be using SCSI. Honestly, making some kind of hardware-based solution makes the most sense, but if you're trying to save bandwidth on an already-CPU-intensive bus (AFAIK, USB is still essentially an interrupt-driven technology, causing CPU use every time a packet travels the wire), offloading the encoding to an already-working CPU might be a poor decision. Transaction 1 - US$0.02 Transaction 2 - US$0.02 --- SubtotalUS$0.04 :wq!, /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: soundcard with optical out
I stand corrected - it is not a laser. But the optical networks are, right? Just a bit confused, that's all, after talking to Nortel people. Yes. Optical networks are usually either visible-red or infrared lasers on specially formed fibers (multimode, graded-index, etc. to minimize loss far beyond standard fibers) with multiplexing to carry more. /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sony's new Internet Audio Recording Interface
If that were the case, then you would be able to encode MP3 streams that sound as good as ATRAC 4 (which they do not) in real time on your desktop (which you cannot at this time). As I mentioned previously, a Pentium II running at 400MHz is capable of turning SPDIF into 128Kbps MP3 in real time, if it is not doing anything else. The particular machine in question is a 64Mb system with fast/wide SCSI (so, no bottleneck there), using LAME. 128Kbps MP3s do not sound nearly as good as ATRAC 4, so I have to say that the computational loads are not comparable. Well, FWIW, I can do realtime at 128, 192, and 256kbps with the 8hz-mp3 encoder on my Alpha (21164A, 533MHz, UW-SCSI), but that still doesn't mean that the computational load is "light" by any stretch. /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Will MD Survive?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Tape cassettes are virtually dead any more. Most of my younger friends don't have a single tape playing device. The market is very narrow if Ever look at a car? Most cars (in the US, anyway) have tape decks, and *only* tape decks. Car CD players are still prohibitively expensive, and I know a number of folks who keep many tapes to listen to in the car. Also, If you go to any major music store (Tower Records, Record Town, etc.) you *will* find huge selections of cassettes. If the market isn't there, they wouldn't have a selection that big. /Andrew -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBOIyAILVO5F5M77LBAQEDegP/bJmcvaUAedhNaiVIuU0MrRJlPQKcsSqA ISztaLGgppC8MlUFqO1MuavKm9mUdPg2yhlJHrGlegpnX0iHCiEn6M8t99ETDQPT K4tYR2puI/oCQJTF2kyf8NNuavZMIcVKIvu9aslJ2KP2Rk3+Cdx1tTJEmJMqDya3 0qEQ4JZfDng= =EZxb -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: Will MD Survive?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- an audiophile to appreciate a good sound. Probably a good reason why most of them went about actually investing in MD's themselves 3#-) After playing my '702 for a number of friends, at least 7 of them have since gone out and purchased MD units (either 702, 722, 831, or R55). Why? They saw the size of the discs, the *durability* of the discs and the units, saw that you can not only play back but *record* in the palm of your hand, and that the quality was practically indistinguishable from CD, even on a set of high quality headphones (I usually demo my MD with my Sony MDR-V600 phones). /Andrew -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBOIyA6rVO5F5M77LBAQHVxwP9FdS0QG68De1KTFvWhxNNuArD00vkYS1O dNzgq9NZj/LH5OU1UKsSRx2fpQG7j6fWvAcbI3PqbywJqd41OafknfHc26Z+AiOL PVIGeh19BB9dAhc1SrIH9hvqgFAe4sh6x0738RFJW5MeBgLtPvjPMD9X2MoeWtsD jzXSuA29vfQ= =U+uQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MP3 -- Am I the only one that hates it so?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- The subject says it all: am I the only person in the world -- or even here -- that hates MP3? I mean, yes, it has definite advantages, such as trying out music or getting it free by downloading; but I hate having to depend on my computer so much. I think that a music medium shouldn't be so tied in to computers. I agree wholeheartedly, actually. MP3 is great if I want that one random song, or if a friend tells me, "check it out, this is a cool track," and if I like it, I go purchase the CD, or add it to my CDnow gift registry and hope that someone else buys it for me. =) [shameless plug: I turn 19 on Thursday, so if anyone feels like getting me a gift, even though I've never met any of you, go to http:[EMAIL PROTECTED] =) ] I don't mind MP3 as long as it keeps its place: behind MD and CD. Portable MP3 seem stupid to me because ... well, it's tough to explain. It just seems so much easier and smarter to just transfer MP3s to MD (or CD). To me, that's the only reason it should be used -- and not as a stand-alone medium. It's so computer-intensive! I know what you mean... also, MP3, unless at 192kbps or higher, sounds much crappier than the CD. My MP3's are around for a very simple reason... when I'm at my computer and I'm too lazy to reach into my CD's to find a particular one, I just find a directory of mp3's and play 'em. /Andrew -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBOIyYU7VO5F5M77LBAQE54gP8Cq+O9Ns4PyvJ9lsXmCDMxJZY9Edh9dXO bSR0DcULuIFEvDn7oTih/UW11aIGB3i0JN05f5HaIA/FH8t9IVlgM/+Ixixpqbry keondq6XSyqReCaItk8IlnpwpsvOPIinX/LRg+K5dBByUFJu+Ov/xUhI96h71yM8 j7KkJI2XIKw= =8haL -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: 702 crash.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Could be the UTOC error, or maybe it needs a re-adjust... Goto www.wood-soft.co.uk for that info ;) Follow link in bar to MiniDisc's ;) Wouldn't the UTOC error also manifest itself on playback as well? I've already done the AUTO adjusts (AUTO1 and AUTO2), and they both give an "ADJ. OK" ... Oy. =) /Andrew -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBOIyaILVO5F5M77LBAQFilwQAinxvo/V0EXWvb/SamvH2S9bcex9CDlzJ KUQIW04Xq9+sC2NtixSh8jqBs5YgtTaI6kdIDF5nhVFw7J3CweGCON3sw4DqNNc1 4lDTlyuk3bX2O90KsIs8NIQ8QSBuKfTokpSDQuiw1bFX//tEvIvpUEU2oj5bqsOo LRsBIjWjKao= =IFC1 -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Wavelets (was Re: ATRAC-R and Laser Colors)
I suspect this is nonsense. (sorry Andrew) You do have to sample the data to get it into the digital domain, before you can process it. (Unless you are going to do an ANALOG wavelet analysis - please supply diagrams) IANAsignalengineer, but .. =) Yes, that might be total BS. I was under the impression from long ago when I was reading about initial research in wavelet compression that you sample, then use the samples to form a wavelet composition that represents the sampled data, then send the parameters of the wavelet. For instance, a 32 bit signal at 96kHz is more than neccesary to fully represent an analog audio signal with no loss. So, if we sample 1s of that audio, we use up 4 bytes * 1 channel * 96000 Hz = 384000 bytes/sec. Now, if through wavelet analysis, it's found that the signal can be represented by the following sinusoids superposed: 3 sin (.5t - .2) -2 sin (1.3t + .4) 4 sin (-2.5t - .83) For that one second of audio, those sinusoids accurately represent the sampled data. Now, sending the data that represents those sinusoids is as easy as sending a 32 bit IEEE floating point number for each of the 3 parameters per sinusoid, so --- for simple sinusoids, that relatively simple signal can be represented by only 9 paramters * 4 bytes = 36 bytes for an accurate representation of 384,000 bytes worth of sample. Nyquist's law effectively restricts sampled audio to 1/2 the sample rate, giving a certain minimum amount of information neccesary for transfer to transmit that signal from one point to the other. This sort of compression breaks the bounds of Nyquist's law in transferring, though it still limits the actual sampling of the audio. Am I misinterpreting the technique of wavelet compression, such that the model and calculations which I've provided here are inaccurate, baseless, or just plain BS? If so, how does wavelet compression actually achieve what it does? appropriate ), so there will be a short delay. The computational demands are probably similar to ATRAC. I suspect that wavelets will not be as good as ATRAC for any particular data rate, as they seem to me less amenable to psychoacoustic coding. Very interesting... I'm very interested in wavelet compression (as I'm sure many others on this list might be also) ... do you have any good references for the algorithms and mathematics behind it all? Thanks! /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: Hi-Space Disc Problems?
Based on postings over the months to this list, and from my own experience, it seems that most people experience a glitch with a disc from time to time, but there isn't any consistency with the brand of disc that gives the problem, be it cheap or expensive [with maybe the exception of Memorex, Yeah... the Memorex's have been particularly fragile in my experience, and generally unreliable under high-vibration recording conditions and high-impact storage and playback environments... I tend to make bootlegs of techno shows where the recorder gets bumped significantly, and I've found that Sony discs give me the fewest skips. Also, I listen to discs in a Sharp '702 that rides in my jacket or backpack pocket, and I also store discs there... they suffer a great deal of throwing around and dropping in an average day on campus. For me, the Sony Onyx and color collection discs are the most reliable. I've found that the metal shutters on the Hi-Space discs tend to get dented or bent, making them difficult to slide, whereas the thin, flexible plastic shutters that are on the Sony's return to their original shape after deformation and are *extremely* durable. discs themselves are usually OK. I would stick with the cheapest / most attractive that work for your machine. And for your application... for someone who handles their discs carefully, Hi-Space is probably a good bet... another question: does anyone have experience with the Axia discs from MiniDisco.com? The ones from Japan that have Hello Kitty or other cool designs on them? My girlfriend just purchased a 722 and is trying to figure out which discs to purchase. /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Titling MDs
+ Disc + Track A (track on a one-artist album); or + Track B (track on a various artist album) Elaborate... I've never seen/heard of a secondary track title that's accessible on minidiscs... is this a shortcoming in my '702, or am I misunderstanding your point? I only know of Disc Title and Track Title. Here are the formats I use (inspired by Sony recordings): + Disc: "DISCTITLE / Artist(s) 1999; CD-d" (The last part contains the year of release; source; and method of dubbing [dig. or analog]. Also, notice there are 2 spaces on either side of the slash in the disc title.) + Track A: "SONG" + Track B: "SONG / Artist(s)" Personally, I do the following: If the album is all songs from one artist/group, or is all remixes from various DJ's of songs from one artist/group: Disc: Original Artist(s) / Album Title If the album is songs from various artists remixed by one DJ: Disc: DJ / Album Title If the album is just originals from various artists or is various artists remixed by various DJ's: Disc: Various Artists / Album Title Track: if performed by same artist as in the Disc Title: Song Title if performed by a different artist (or various artists on CD): Artist(s) / Song Title if remixed by a DJ whose name is the artist in the Disc Title: Artist(s) / Song Title (Mix Name) if remixed by a DJ whose name is not in the Disc Title (a CD with various remixes of various groups from various DJ's): DJ + Artist(s) / Song Title (Mix Name) For most folks, the DJ issue isn't really a problem, but since I listen to a great deal of techno, etc... as well as making mix discs which include various tracks from various artists, remixed by various dj's, and the mix name doesn't always reflect who did the remix... I use this scheme because it pretty much handles every possibility. My $0.02, /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Another look at the AHRA and MD
Syd -- just commending you... this is perhaps the most lucid e-mail I've seen on this thread so far. =) Also, this e-mail contains a lot of opinion and personal belief. If you're prone to flaming replies, just delete this right now. Read only with an open mind. Sydtech said: C'mon - if you copy a commercially released CD from a friend, you're pirating it. It was put out on the market for the record company and (hopefully) the artists to get compensated for their work, i.e. entertaining you. Exactly. This is the core of the argument. When discussing legality of copying music which you do not own, people get so caught up in the lingo that it's hard to keep a sense of what's right/wrong and what's legal/not. [small disclaimer: I'm a US citizen and have been for all of my life. My comments will therefore likely show a knowledge of law and ethics confined to the US. ] My opinions (and interpretations) come down to this: 1) Copying a work to which you do not have a license (that is, have never officially purchased it from an artist or someone licensed by that artist for distribution purposes) is illegal. 2) Copying that work for your own personal uses is not likely to get you caught by any police force. 3) Regardless of whether you get caught/charged/sued, copying a work that you do not already own at least one legitimate copy of is theft from the artist, their label, techs, roadies, and distributors. 4) Being theft, it is unethical (and personally deplorable) to copy a work in this manner. Admittedly, I have one or two minidiscs which have been copied from CD's that friends have let me borrow (rat: read jer). At the same time, these are works which I feel a personal obligation to purchase in the near future, as I feel dirty whenever I listen to them. Perhaps I suffer from moral compunctions that others simply don't feel... that's my problem. However, I believe that most interpretations of the law, in the context of legal action brought by an artist or label against an individual in the United States, will end up defending the same opinions which I hold. This is why I get so pissed off when people confuse the trading of boots with pirating. It ain't the same thing. Yep. I trade concert boots and unreleased/limited pressings of my favorite groups all the time. It's a great way for true fanatics to expand their collections while meeting new people with similar interests. Burning copies of your CD's and trading them with others, or doing the same with MD, for the sole purpose of pooling your music collection is a disgusting thing to do, as it raises prices for the rest of us. Furthermore, pirates are often confused with bootleggers in the media, much like the common media confusion between "crackers" and "hackers" ... one group is committing blatantly illegal acts with no regard for the consequences, while the other group seeks to expand certain fields, letting the legal lines grey a bit if they get in the way. Don't get me wrong - I don't feel that bad for the record companies; I think they rip the artists off far more than a home pirate doesthis is why MP3 scares the shit out of record companies - it makes them obsolete. Agreed... but physically trading discs with other folks for the sole purpose of expanding your collection with top-40 hits is stupid, illegal, and wrong. My $0.02, /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: OT: [non-flame] gun control (was Re: MD trading)
In the U.S., we let wackos carry guns, we let hate groups babble on incessantly, and we let home MD users record CDs they don't own. The first two are obviously unethical, you think the third is unethical and I don't. But all three are legal in the U.S. (unless the wacko has a criminal record or something). As a practical matter, I just We've had this flame-war before (re: Guns). There is nothing unethical about carrying or operating a firearm. Also, not all gun carriers are wackos. If you really feel like starting flame wars about gun control on a list that has nothing to do with it, please look at the archives and read what's already been said. /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: OT: stupid comment Re: MD trading
wrong + wrong right. Someone is in a world of BASIC. =) wrong + wrong != right. *grin* /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD Trading
C'mon guys, this is a MiniDisc list. We've all got minidisc stuff and I bet 99% of you have used it for unauthorised recordings. If we really want to enter the silly season Unauthorized doesn't mean copying borrowed material. When you purchase a CD in the United States, you become the owner of that copied piece of material, and inherit a certain limited set of rights with it. You are allowed under the AHRA (Audio Home Recording Act) to make a copy of a CD which you have legally purchased for personal use. Personal use doesn't mean non-commercial, it means PERSONAL. That is, you are allowed to listen to it and are not permitted to give it away. Count me as part of the 1% that has never copied a borrowed album to MD. The only unauthorized recordings that I've made are of live concerts. were the discs 74min long the same as CDs? Now that some CDs break the standard up to about 80mins, guess what... 80min MDs!!! Yes, but that means for personal use only. /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: concert recording
i recorded a concert tonight on my 722, and 95% of the songs, the ones that had heavy base were not recorded satisfactorily. ATRAC could not handle heavy base: all parts with base sound like digital noise, which completely drowned out all other frequency bands. Very doubtful. I've recorded a number of shows on my trusty old '702, and they've all come out just fine with bass. Your microphones are most likely the weak link in your recording. /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: You have 24 hours to win!
One more quick message. If you're interested, you've got 24 hours to win a Sharp MD-MT831 from ESM. You can enter as many times as you like at http://www.erzone.net Does registering multiple times with the same information change our chances of winning? /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Found a CD that cannot be digitally recorded on MD
I just suddenly remembered something about digital sound data - the MSB is a sign bit. If you imagine a sine wave being fed into a system that chopped the MSB, i would turn into an 'm' shape. and it still wouldn't clip. Are you sure? That format of the data depends entirely on the platform on which you're doing the data transfer... most computers (in PC PCM format) use signed word (16 bit) storage... though, some use unsigned word... *pondering* ahck. my head is broken. I can't figure out whether or not that'd make a difference. =P Although... if it is using signed word, and the sign bit gets dropped, if its using two's complement, it'll screw up the two's-complement conversion, and possibly throw off the data stream. /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Found a CD that cannot be digitally recorded on MD
| No, the LSB gets dropped and you still end up with a signal that will not | overflow the register. All that happens is you lose the extra 1 bit | resolution from the LSB end. And this is significantly different from "clipping" in what way? Loss of data is loss of data, no matter how you try to spin it. Well, clipping manifests itself as chopping the MSB (bit or bits, depending on the severity of clipping) because the incoming signal has a range far beyond the sampling range of the A/D converter. Magic's LSB clipping would occur only if you're transferring digital data, and the frame copy routine is specified to maintain the MSB when discarding data. A poorly designed routine would accidentally discard the MSB instead of the LSB, resulting in a behavior that sounds much like clipping, but without the A/D stage that clipping is historically characterized by. This is all IIRC, so if I'm wrong, feel free to correct me politely. =P my $0.02, /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: memory stick?
Its about double still, so NZ$60 for a 4mb stick that holds less than one mp3 at a decent recording rate... yuck. Easy solution --- *koff*koff* Don't use mp3's. =) /Andrew -- oh god, getting into this arrow business, but a MiniDisc zealot who greatly dislikes the audio quality of mp3's - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sharp 702 ( yet again )
its test mode that I was hoping some of you could answere for me. First of all is there anything even semi usefull or entertaining that you could use Sure... I've used my '702 test mode to change the bass boost settings to higher values. =) /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 01:18:57 +1000
This is interesting. Do you have any information regarding why this was done? Did they do it specifically to get the "vinyl sound," or was the original master tape lost or somehow destroyed? Capitol Records never released the first 3 Kraftwerk albums on CD, just because they were too old (early 1970's). /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 01:18:57 +1000
Finally, judging from my youngest daughter, prerecorded MDs are going to have to have all of the "packaging" and art work that comes with a CD. I keep telling my daughter not to buy so many CDs. Split them with her friends and I'll "burn" copies for her. Nice to know that the parents of America are teaching their children good values in terms of piracy. snicker Seriously, though, I find collecting CD's to be a very fufilling endeavor... sure, it's expensive, but there's nothing cooler than to find some out-of print or import single of a favorite group, showing it off to all of my friends, and having them envy the fact that I own a full copy, with the cover art, liner notes, lyrics, etc. You can't get that same feeling of ownership with a CD-R disc. But to them the original art work and what ever "literature" comes with the CD seems to be necessary. See above... I find that the art work and literature are very, very important to the personal value of owning a piece of music. It's kinda' like telling a person who listens to classical music to see their favorite symphony orchestra in a acousitcally perfect venue that's got all kinds of technological wizardry and modern architecture. Sure, the sound will be the same or better, but the experience isn't as rich as it'd be to see them at some large, grand concert hall, such as Lincoln Center. Removing the bits and pieces that surround the music somehow cheapens the experience. /Andrew -- "who's going with his arrow this way too, and doesn't know why he's doing it at all..." - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 01:18:57 +1000
Your theoretical numbers kind for remind me of a sign I once saw. "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance. Baffle them with Bull Shit". What I showed you aren't bullshit numbers, but proven theories regarding signal processing. If you can represent the full range, the "warmth" of the audio is irrelevant. An audio signal is merely a sequence of sound intensities. That's all your ear detects. When you hear a sound, it's just a membrane moving to varying sound pressures, translating that motion via a small bone over to another membrane that rests at the opening to your cochlea. That smaller membrane moves, and pushes a fluid through the sealed cochlea. Small hairs inside the cochlea then translate those varying motions into electrochemical signals that travel into your brain for processing. As long as you generate a sound pressure that is continuous, and a comparison of the output with technical means (such as an oscilloscope) is the same, the sound pressures getting passed to the cochlea are exactly the same, regardless of media. Seriously, what it really comes down to is not numbers, but rather what the human eye can see and hear. Exactly. And what I was pointing out is that with a sufficiently high bit width and sample rate, your output from a digital medium can be absolutely indistinguishable from an analog signal. I agree that a CD can never sound as good as a live performance, but I *do* believe that a CD sounds much better than an LP. Ever listen to Holst's "The Planets" on vinyl? Ever hear it on CD? Ever hear it live played by the London Symphony? Sure, the symphony sounds the best. The LP blows. The CD is the closest we can currently get to being there. I included sight because my nephew who was a video major in college once made a point about video that has always stuck with me. I realize that video isn't necessarily a digital media. But it is an electronic one. As opposed to film which is a "true" analog reproduction. Actually, it's not. Film is actually "digital" in nature. A movie that you see in the theater is a "sample" of the scene taken every 1/30 (or 1/24, depending on format and media) of a second. This is no different than sampling a sound pressure every 1/44100 of a second. Still, you don't hear folks coming out of the woodwork saying that they're only going to go to see plays because movies don't reproduce the full quality of the work. That's because designers, after trying 10 frames per second (back with Charlie Chaplin and such) found that 30 frames per second was enough to fool the human eye into believing that it was seeing an accurate reproduction of reality. Audio engineers just need to find the same thing. However, what I'm talking about is reproducing the reality of the sound. Just because the sound coming out of your speakers is the same one that came from the instrument *doesn't* mean that it sounds any better, however. I guess that's what the problem is here... when I listen to vinyl, I hear a certain warmth of audio and depth. However, this warmth and depth was NEVER in the original performance... it's merely the artifact of the medium. Folks who maintain that tapes and vinyl give better sound are locking into the artifacts that you get when you have a medium that doesn't fully reproduce reality. I guess that's okay, if you're in it for a subjective playback. I mean, music is indeed a subjective medium in the first place. Seriously, though... the other day, I found a copy of the Kraftwerk album Ralf and Florian in CD format in a friend's collection. I listened to it. It sounded *exactly* the same as the copy I had in vinyl. Why? Because the CD was mastered from the original vinyl recording. Now, this brings up a key point. Just because it's on CD (or another digital medium), doesn't mean that it won't have that warmth and depth that so many audiophiles will claim is the advantage of vinyl. If you like that sort of warmth, master out to vinyl, and then record it back onto CD, and you'll have the same effect. You never "lose" the warmth of a recording when going to CD, you merely never have that warmth introduced into the recording at all. I suppose that folks could design a filter to simulate a vinyl mastering, and apply it prior to the pressing of the CD, and everyone would have the same "warmth" on CD that's so loved by vinylphiles. major. He said know, "because as good as you can make video, all you have to do is double the size of the film and you will once again have better quality on film. You're not comparing the final output. You're talking about one frame at a time. When you talk about increasing the size of the film, you're talking about making your "samples" bigger. So, let's say we go with something like a 64 bit sample? That's the same thing as increasing our film from 35mm to 70mm. You're still only playing back at 24 frames per second (or 44.1kHz, in the audio analogy), but
Re: MD: Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 01:18:57 +1000
I know that this is going to sound stupid to most of you. But I still question using digital storage to store analog information. Sound is analog. At some point in the process you are going to have to convert analog to digital. Very true... the only issue is that as soon as you try to store data in an analog format, you have to worry about A) physically moving parts that are very sensitive (like phonograph cartridges) or B) media damage (like a cassette). Degradation becomes too much of a factor, both on the playback end *and* on the media. As for storing the data digitally, Nyquist's theorem (IIRC) states that with a sampling frequency of n Hz, you can store data at *NO LOSS* that goes up to the Nyquist frequency, which is n/2 Hz. Now, currently, a CD stores data at 44.1kHz, 16 bits wide. That means that there are 65536 distinct possible sound intensity values. As digital storage sizes increase, the potential exists to double the sampling rate to 88.2kHz (bringing the Nyquist frequency to 44.1kHz, high enough to be inaudible by animals, and finishing up the farthest reaches of the dynamic range that the human ear can discern), and bringing the bit width to 32 bits (so there would be 4294967296 distinct sound pressure values). You could store *much* higher quality audio in only 4x the space. If such a format shift was performed, backward compatibility into older DAC's would be trivial (cut the last 2 bytes off of the end of the sample, making it the most significant 16 bits, then skip every other sample to bring the sample rate to 44.1kHz) without going below the current quality standard. If such a format shift occurred, the bottleneck of audio quality would no longer be the storage medium, but the playback equipment, and whether your speaker system could reliably respond across the range that you're encoding into your media. /Andrew - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
