Re: MD: Mini DV Cam/md-l-mimedigest V2 #461
Wait a minute, Christopher Spalding, genius, excellent person, etc. You were the one who initially said the PC100 was the 3CCD DV Cam version of the TRV900. I and several others on this list then pointed out the DCR-PC100 is not the DV Cam 3CCD version of the TRV900. The DSR-PD-100 is the 3CCD DV Cam version of the TRV900. The DCR-PC100, which you have been reading the manual of, of course, doesn't mention a 3CCD because it is, in fact, a single chip Mini DV Camera. You just got the model numbers wrong, they are really similar. DSR-PD-100 is the 3CCD DV Cam version of the TRV900, the DCR-PC-100 is the 1070k single chip multi CCD Mini DV Cam that has since been revealed by Graham Baker to actually be a 680k CCD for video, exactly the same as the TRV10. Yes, thankyou, I already admitted my mistake, but in actual fact it was the model letters that i got mixed up, purely because the PC100 has not been released here yet AFAIK. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. - even if he's occasionally wrong. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD DIscam vs. Sony DCR-PC100
May I conclude that you're using video in the semi-proffesional domain and not in the consumer domain? Cheers, Ralph School student - i do all the school's in house stuff, and if all goes well work experience at 60 mins australia. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. (ICQ#: 43270049) __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD DIscam vs. Sony DCR-PC100
1) A 120 minutes movie on a DVD takes less than 4GB, that comes down to less than 35MB per minute! Yep, and you'll notice that DVD videos are only consumer releases, since although they're better than VHS (which is actually the worst form of video storage, they are actually very high compression. the DVD video artifacts are hard to notice, because MPEG-2 compresses using GOP (groups of pictures), whereas I think DV is on a frame by frame basis, which is much quicker, and thus is (was if you're right about the ompression) more feasable for on the fly in camera use. Also, there is very heavy compression on the audio of DVDs, I'm sure you've heard it, whereas there is none on DV. 2) Somewhere I heard the MDCam uses the same compression as DVD Video, Well, the data size matches roughly, so that could be possible. 3) Are you sure its 10 minutes for 2 GBytes and not 10 minutes on 2 Giga Bits? Absolutely certain. I edit with it, data space is always foremost on my mind. DVD based video recorders for the home consumer are starting to be introduced. I'm sure people will accept that quality! I'm inclined to say that DV is better than DVD, but i still haven't had a chance to look at DVDs on TV, so i really can't. but once again, these releases are for the /consumer/ market. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD DIscam vs. Sony DCR-PC100
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === Right. The DCR-PC100 is one of the cigarette sized box ones. It's the latest U.S. model. It appears in the latest Sony Style (the one with Milla Jovovich) on the front cover on page 91 That would explain my confusion, sorry 'bout that folks, downunder, in our usual late releases, we have only had the PC3 for a few months. Besides a photo of the camcorder itself with i's two and a half inch swivel screen open, a brief synopsis spells out a few highlights: Digital Video Recording First Mega Pixel CCD DV Camcorder (1/4"-1070k Pixels) (We have since learned here thanks to Graham Baker, in reality it uses only 680k for Video, the extra pixels are for still shots only which is a shame since the TRV900 has 1,140,000 total pixels, if 1,070,000 pixels on this camera were actually used for Video, quality would be very, very close to the TRV900. But they're not.) 520 Lines Of Horizontal Video Resolution (Don't know how this can be true in relation to the above. While Sony isn't exactly engaging in misleading advertising, they are certainly embellishing the truth. I think most people who buy this camera will never know they're getting only 680k pixels for Video, not the 1070k claimed by Sony.) Memory Mode With Memory Stick Digital Storage Media High Quality Mega Pixel 1152 x 864 Still Image Resolution (this is where the 1070k pixels are used) Advanced 'HAD' CCD Technology (Sounds very impressive, right? A quick glance at Sony's still digital cameras reveal they use this technology. Of course, if you didn't invesigate throughly (in this case you would have to do much more than just ask a salesperson) you would believe this applies to Video, because that is what is clearly implied, rather than still images only. Don't be too sure, Sony have sued PowerHAD on their Pro video models for ages now. It would be nice if Sony could make their digital still cameras capable of shooting and storing not just MPEG video, but MPEG2 video and you could really be off and running with a high quality camcorder. And it would be a real reason for people to move into adapting Sony's Memory Stick tecnology if real time MPEG2 video could be stored on them, transferred and edited into film any way the user desired. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. (ICQ#: 43270049) __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD DIscam vs. Sony DCR-PC100
Christopher I really appreciate those calculations you made-they sound like they make a lot of sense and took a great deal of thought. No worries I am aware the 3CCD DV Cam is almost identical to the TRV900. The DVCam model however is the DSR-PD-100. The DCR-PC100 is the newest version of the smallest of the Sony DV cameras. Sorry, which one is the DCR-PC100 is it one of those cigarette-box sized ones, 'cause we're only on the PC3 here, downunder. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. (ICQ#: 43270049) P.S. Sorry we're starting to get OT __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD video cam
I would bet that future models will have a 1394 port, without it, sales will be very low - consumer demand will dictate and rule! GB - Original Message - From: Rodney Peterson I really think the reason for having no digital input and output on the MD Discam is SCMS. Since it is both a digital audio and video device, this would be true since you can make unlimited digital copies of anything through the IEEE 1394 Firewire Port. But you can already do this with Mini DV and DV Cam with near DAT quality, so it makes it seem really unfair to leave such an important feature off such an innovative video camcorder. What format is it in, because of course you could only hace the IEE1394/firewire/ilink if it is a DV standard compresstion? Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. (ICQ#: 43270049) __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Car Minidisc Player
Does anyone know where one can get a car minidisc player for under $300 -Mitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] You could take the really cheap option and get one of those cassette adaptors for an existing portable - they sound pretty good for about au$30 Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. (ICQ#: 43270049) __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD DIscam vs. Sony DCR-PC100
Perhaps all is not lost in the prosumer movie filming world with the Sony MD Discam after reading Graham Baker's link to a story about the MD Discam yesterday that got me to thinking. Evidently the MD Discam can record movies in Quick Time via the ethernet connection. I hope you all will forgive what to some are going to seem amatuerish questions, but all of my computer owning experience is limited to WebTV. So, first off, can you download your MD film to Quick Time, assemble it from other MD film and create a longer movie by digitally splicing on the web. Once there, what would you do? Go out from the IEEE1394 Firewire Link to a Mini DV Cam and digitally duplicate DV from there? Is Quick Time quality film or does it look not much better than MPEG? If so, why bother? What kind of computer and software would be required? How much money would need to be invested in a desktop or laptop capable of all this? The other option besides the MD Discam would be the slightly older Mini DV format and the new Sony DCR-PC100. I suppose if you wanted to do what I want to do with the MD Discam you would need a DV recorder of some kind anyway and I just sold my TRV900. The PC100 has some neat features, a 1,070,000 pixel multi CCD lens compared to 1,140,000 total pixels on the 3CCD's of the TRV900. I was told by one of the mail order camera stores that in reality the PC100 has a 680,000 pixel lens-the 1,070,000 pixels applies only to still photos and then only those stored on a Memory Stick. I would hope this were not true. Does anybody know? Sony promotes the Carl Zeiss lens as being one of the best features of their Mini DV cameras. The MD Discam, since there is no mention of this, must have a Sony lens as does the TRV900. I really don't know if there's a difference all that much, does anyone here? I have to admit the Carl Zeiss name sounds impressive, but what does it really mean? The PC100 besides the advantage of being small both it and the MD Discam have over the TRV900 also has Nightshot, which does not appear on the TRV900 and appears not to be on the Sony Discam. I like this feature, although I can honestly say I never needed it, the infra red (?) capability offers a nice touch and I wish it had been on the TRV900 and added to the Sony Discam. Thanks. It sounds to me like you don't know that the TRV900 and the DCR-PC100 are actually the same camera, only the PC100 has a different coloured chassis, has the buttons organised more for a more professional user and uses the DVCAM tape format (the primary difference between DVCAM and the consumer DV is that DVCAM runs at a higher tape speed, and i think cliplink comes into it somehow, too.) So they have the same 3CCD block, and thus the same resolution, same lens, it's all very similar, and the main difference that sony pushes is the tape speed, which they say is more reliable under mobile conditions. As for your question If you can get a video file onto a computer then you can probably edit it, using Adobe Premier or Ulead Media Studio Pro, and if you have a firewire port then you could probably re-compress out to it, but i'm not sure what quality the MD camera creates the MPEG files to. I think i read somewhere that you get 20 mins per 650 MB disc, which is much lower quality than DV, in which you get 10 about mins to 2 GB (so that comes to about 32.5MB per min of MDcam Vs 204.8MB per min of DV - and that assumes that the video isn't compressed more for the conversion to QT.) By my calculations the video on the MDcam is compressed at approx 30:1, where DV is 5:1, there are artifacts which are readily noticeable on the DV when you work with it for more than 20/30 hrs, so i'd immagine that 30:1 would be pretty low quality. It is for this reason that to date, tape has still been the preferred media for aquisition, both analog and digital. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. (ICQ#: 43270049) __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Terratec Soundsystem DMX First looks
Sounds excellent! How much? Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Why Sharp ATRAC sucks (a review)
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === There was only one case I heard of where a person could reliably tell whether the recording was from a Sharp or Sony ATRAC, and unfortunately we never substantiated that with outside experimenters. If the differences are in general as strong as you suggest, I think others would have picked them up by now too. In any case, would it be possible for you to post to a web page some short, 44.1khz, 16 bit PCM (i.e. CD audio) segments of recordings made with both the Sharp and Sony that clearly exhibit the differences so that we can all listen to them side by side? Thanks, Rick Eric Woudenberg wrote: Thanks for the long article. It's well written and I like it, except for one thing: I think your MD-MS722 was defective. The differences between modern ATRAC encoders from the various makers are subtle, really. If you have a situation where the MD recording sounds like a bad 128kbps MP3, something is wrong. My suggestion: repeat the experiment with another Sharp unit (the Sharp MT83x, MT82x and MS72x all have Sharp ATRAC 6, the MS70x is Sharp ATRAC 5). Hmm, I don't know if I can do that. I bought it from minidisco.com and they only have a 7 day return policy. I don't want to claim it's defective and then look like a fool if my theory about Sharp ATRAC being a lousy encoder is right. Maybe I can ask them if they can send me a loaner unit to verify my suspicion? With the reliability of modern electronics, I can't imagine anything being defective in such a subtle way, though.. Then again, with all the UTOC errors people have been complaining about with Sharps, who knows? Or maybe their ATRAC really isn't that great.. After all, it's subtle enough that maybe nobody noticed. I haven't seen anyone say anything other than "they both sound the same to me, but I don't have very good hearing", or even worse, "Sharp's at version 6 and Sony's at version 4.5 so Sharp must be better!" Most importantly, I haven't seen anyone doing serious double-blind tests between Sharp ATRAC and anything else. What if Sharp knows their encoder is no good but they see people are still buying it? How many people can tell a bad 128kbps MP3 from the original other than musicians with trained ears? For most people, the quality loss is apparent at a subliminal level.. you might think that 128kbps MP3 sounds ok, but try playing low bitrate MP3's for 8 hours in a row and then putting in an original CD, and the improvement is stunning! Maybe that's the case here. In my experience with the Sharp portable units 702, 722 and 831, there is a discernable instability in the high frequencies when it is played back through the unit on speakers of a reasonable quality, sounding somewhat akin to MP3 compression, i'd agree. Yet it is not noticeable on the sony 520 deck. I haven't yet had the opportunity to try the R55 sony portable through speakers. I'm not entirely certain it is to do with the encoding, because when you play sharp recorded discs on the sony, you can't hear it, and when you play sony recorded discs on the sharp you can. My conclusion therefore is that it is either a) sharp ATRAC DEcoding, b) Sharp portable output stage (ie headphone amp) or c) some filter that sony put over their output stage in the decks. At a guess, i'd say c) and/or b) because it's inaudible with the sharp-provided earbuds, which are what the unit is primarily designed for use with, so sharp may have cut some corners. but that is just a guess. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Kareoke on MD??!!
Anyone noticed that if you pull the earphone plug just a little way out (2-3mm) on the RM-MZR50 the audio turns to mono and loses the main vocal track? Yep, the same happens with the sharp 831. But i wouldn't use it for Karaoke, because you'll lose anything that's in both the left and right channels. I think what happens is that somehow it puts everything in mono, only one channel is out of phase, and therefore you lose the main vox because they're panned centre. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sharp 831
Noah, I also have the 831, and have noticed the exact same problem. I've actually gone through two of them (first bought the silver model, then sold it and bought the blue model which I still have) and both of them were a little bit crooked (but only by about a mm or so). Also it did not look like it closed completely on one of the front edges. I've talked to a couple of other 831 owners, and they all have the same story, so I think this is (sadly) normal. Oh well, still a great unit, and not too huge a deal. --Brian Youn Hmm, this is interesting, out of curiosity, where was yours made and where did you buy it from? Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. (ICQ#: 43270049) __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sharp 831 (yes! again)
Howdy, I recently picked up the new Sharp 831 that came out not too long ago. I've noticed something about it and i'd like to know if any other people have noticed. When i open the unit up, i notice that the door opens more on the right side then the left: -10/16 of an inch gap on the left side -11/16 of an inch gap of the right side A small difference, yes, but quite large for such a small precision instrument. I'd really appreciate it if other people out there who have this unit could let me know whether their units are the same. Simply measure the distance between the door and the unit itself. Any help would be great! :-) noah j Nope, mine opens exactly 17mm on both sides Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. (ICQ#: 43270049) __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Sharp MT 831
I just bought this unit (831) from SAWADA DENKI in Japan, mail order to Australia. I would just like to say that it is excellent, and for anyone considering a portable recorder, this one should be a definite consideration. FYI: despite the fact that the exchange rate a the moment is the worst i've ever seen, I was still ahead of the cheapest Aussie guy I could find by AU$60 (on the unit alone), until customs found it, (despite it being labelled as "gift") and I was only ahead by AU$5. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. P.S. The sound is phenomenal. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Bus congenstion
My PC setup is as follows: O/S: Windows 98 (Original full release) CPU: AMD K6-3/400 M/bd: MVP3 TI5VG+ with 1Mb Cache RAM: 2x16Mb EDO 60nS SIMMS That's a joke, right? HD: 4.3Gig (2Gig free) Video: Creative Savage 4 AGP 32Mb (2x AGP on m/bd v/card) You really have as much Video RAM as you have system RAM? Audio: Creative Live Player 1024 CD: Creative CD-RW 2 2 24 FD: Standard 3.5" Modem: Rockwell chipset ISA v90 Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: SB Live! skipping when playing an mp3 and copying to MD
I have a SB Live! full version with both daugther cards and have found your guessing at the problem to be rather interesting. However, let me give you the real problem. The problem is that the sound card is a PCI device and as a result has to share the pci bus with lots of other devices. There is no real fix for the problem. I've found that a network card can cause the problem to occur more often than other cards (some cards can take priority thus causing the live to get delayed data). I was able to solve the skipping problem by moving my Live! over a PCI slot. It doesn't seem to be an issue with IRQ sharing either. It still shares an IRQ with other devices as it did before, but now I can't make it skip no matter how hard I try (that's a good thing). I can't really give you any more suggestions than shuffling your PCI cards around a bit. However if don't use anything else at the same time you should be sucessful with getting winamp to not skip on playback (unless your HD's controller is causing the problem). That's all very well but i don't see how PCI congestion could make the MP3 stutter (repeat bits), I could understand it causing dropouts. It also does this when it does something like loading an app. I just had another idea, it could be hard disk congestion, when playing an MP3 at about 160 Kbps it reads every 2 or 3 seconds, I've noticed that most of the problems occur when the computer reads form or writes to the disk (even if it's just the swap file). (p.s. a p100 has enough power to play back mp3's and run autocad 13 at the same time without skipping. I used to do it all the time) maybe but can it load AutoCAD while it's playing MP3s without skipping? It happens when you start or close apps, it does it to me all the time. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Hesitating sound
I'm going to take a rough shot at it being the graphics card. Unless you're running something less than a P150 you should never have skipping in Winamp. If you have a P150 or above then even the screensaver should cause much of a problem - you only need a P166 to use some screensaver plug-ins for WinAmp that synchronise display with the MP3, so just playing back without anything else running should be a breeze! The reason I say the graphics card is simple. In order to squeeze as much performance as possible from these cards they send just slightly more data to the card than it can take to try and push it. This results in the command being left in the data lines until the card is ready for it, meaning no other card can use those data lines until the graphics card is ready. Ordinarily this isn't too much of a problem - the chances of you noticing the printer pausing for a microsecond, or maybe the mouse locking for a very brief instant, or even the hard disc taking just that millisecond longer to read a file go pretty much unnoticed. With the sound card though it is clearly audible when this happens. If you have a WinModem it will be effected too - many people blame their ISP when they get disconnected, but actually it's the graphics card breaking communication. The solution is to nag the b** off your graphics card manufacturer until you get some drivers that *don't* lock up the bus - either that or switch graphics cards. Nope, you're definitely wrong there Magic. I have a PIII 500, 128 megs of RAM, and my graphics card is on the AGP bus, not PCI and when I start an application or even when the computer just puts the monitor in power save mode, Winamp frequently does what seems to be playing the same fraction of a second of music over and over again (if MP3s work on quantisation as well then it could easily be one quantised section) or it skips bits. I assume this is the same problem as with which the question originally started. OK, i just did it then by starting the biggest program i have (3DS Max, but i stopped it before the graphics were initialised) and according to the system monitor, the only thing that was at 100% was processor useage, but allocated memory came close. It's not that hard to use 100% of any processor in my experience - that's why you have to wait for things to load. I would theorise that winamp probably, for some reason, during playing would decide that it needs more processing power, but some other program is using it all, and there isn't any more. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Hesitating sound
Hi all, I've got a new problem, maybe you can help me. It never happened anything like this before, but it's two days that I'm trying to record some MP3s to my JE530, using an optical connection from my SBLive + Hoontech Optical daughterboard to my MD deck. What's happening is that every now and then the sound coming from WinAmp (but it shows in Liquid Audio too) "hesitates" resulting in a strange sound, like if a bit was lost in the reading process, or like it was read twice. I've tried re-installing both WinAmp and Liquid Audio with no luck. I've also defragmented the hard drive, but the problem remains. This has been happening for a couple days, and there has been no changement in my PC configuration, nor I had installed any new program. Any idea what it can be? Thanks in advance winamp does this to me all the time, it happens when your computer's processor is used for something other than MP3 decoding. what you have to do is make sure that your computer does absolutely nothing while you are recording (this especially includes screensavers - make sure you turn them off). If it does it on it's own with no corresponding system activity, then i've got no idea what's wrong - maybe try shutting down some other stuff that's in memory (like in the taskbar) Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Soundblaster Live! 1024 Player anyone ?
IF so a cmopany called opcode (www.opcode.com) produce a device called the DATPort which is a digital input/ouput device. This may be the ideal solution for you - no MIDI, XLR, COAX or anything other than 1 input and 1 output. Looks interesting, but unfortunately has no optical connectors. And at $250 I'd rather buy a new soundcard, since I need a new one anyway. Thanks for the tip though ! there is one called the SONICport Optical which does only it is sold at AU$899 Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: headphones: down to 2
Regarding my last post thread on best headphones.I order the Koss Portapros for my small headphones, are they the ones which fold up? Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: DC surges, a warning
If you're touching the car body while attaching the positive lead, you've got such a high resistance that you're not shorting anything. Put your hands across a car battery's terminals and you'll see for yourself. Not with your hands, with a tool (eg spanner) Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: DC surges, a warning
When I don't have my multimeter handy, I test PP3s by sticking them on my tongue and judging the tingle, crude possibly stupid, but gives me a rough idea :-) So do I, once we were doing a drama production with 10 radio mics, and I had guys backstage checking them for me, and they left it to one guy to test the batteries (standard 9v). After his tongue got too sore, he switched to using his gums, you shoulda seen the ulcers! It was very funny and this was the kinda guy who liked showing off his pain. btw if you insist on connecting a dozen PP3 batteries in series and end up electrocuting yourself, I accept no responsibility. Having said that, 117V AC at 60Hz is more dangerous than 300V DC I think. Do not rely on this as a DIY electrocution guide. Actually I'm pretty sure that it depends on the current as well as the voltage as to the danger of this, I don't know if its enough but car batteries are pretty high curren,t for 12V anyhow. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: DC surges, a warning
The direct quote, from page 7-29 of the Camry/Vienta Owner's Manual (the wide bodied version - i.e. the one before the current model) under checking battery condition is: "NOTICE: *Be sure the engine and all accessories are off before performing maintenance. *Remove the ground cable first and reinstall it last. *Be careful not to cause a short circuit with tools." also collaborated by the Corrola manuel. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Pure marketing hype from Sony
When I was about 17, I could hear the high voltage flyback transformer whine in a televison set. If I remember correctly that is about 18khz, and the technical book I was reading at the time said it was inaudible to most people, but some with very good hearing would be able to hear it. I too, when younger, could hear fly-back transformers (they're just under 16KHz) as well as the ultra-sonic motion sensers in jewelry stores. Alas, that was over 30 years ago now and I am no longer bothered by such sounds. :-( I'm still young and can hear all this stuff, like the high tension btis of tvs, that parents, teachers, etc can't. :) I have actually heard CDs which have had continuous high frequency tones throughout. It can be more of a pain than helpful - imagine having to hear the monitors of mac LC 450s (at least i think that's what they are) as well as having to use them! Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Minidisc Direct (Australia)
Ok, this guy Joshua Smith is selling MD units from here at the best prices i've seen in Australia. I was wondering if anybody had tried using his services, and if he is reliable and what you thought. his address is http://www.minidiscdirect.net so if you see anyone with cheaper prices (remember these are au$) for mail delivery, that can easily be paid - ie i can write a simple cheque or use credit card let me know. thanks Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: best/favorite headphones
I'm considering a new pair myself... does anyone have any comments on how a stock Sharp headphone (came with my MT821) stacks up? I haven't had any opportunity to compare. My school has a pair of KOSS, i don't know what model, but they're designed specifically for portable pro use. They are an over-the-head design which fold up, i've heard them on a sharp 722 and they sounded somewhat phenomenal. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Pure marketing hype from Sony
Question: what sort of speaker did they use to send sounds in (presumably) the 15-30KHz region. Unless they used specialised ultrasonic transducers there is little knowing what you were hearing. [Gaz is tempted to mention sub-harmonics but thinks that is bull and thinks he is in enough trouble with the ongoing Linux thread]. Me thinks their speakers were c**p, or rather incapable of reproducing a clean 22KHz or higher signal. There is a reason any hifi speaker has 2 or 3 (at least) elements-- each can only give good reproduction over a limited frequency range. Anyone taking these "how high can we hear" tests should ask a) what speakers they use b) how high they crank up the sound pressure level with frequency c) couldn't we all hear a tone of 25KHz if blasted at 150dB Ok, for starters, the current JBL studio monitors (LSR 32) are flat (in frequency response to +1dB/-1.5dB) from 60Hz to 22kHz, and are 3dB down at 54Hz. besides which who says we use our ears to detect these "inaudible" frequencies, we can't hear a 5Hz tone, but we know when it's happening. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: Pure marketing hype from Sony
But what the accuracy of the data comes down to is that whilst the error correction my cause the errors on the discs, etc to be unnoticable, it is still ony the machine's best guess as to what should be there, so it isn't exactly what the original should sound like. It may only be the difference that a fanatic audiophile or experienced engineer may notice but it is still there. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. (ICQ#: 43270049) __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: Pure marketing hype from Sony
besides which there are those (and from what i've seen, they have a pretty solid case - my main sources are AudioTechnology Magazine in Australia) who believe that 44.1kHz, 16bit audio leaves a lot to be desired - the current top CONSUMER audio is 24 bit 96kHz (this is the DVD Audio format). Rupert Neve (if you have to ask who that is, don't bother responding to this email), aside from swearing that the best analogue will always sound better, feel better an generally be better than any analogue, says that he feels digital will be of an acceptable quality when it is 24bit 192kHz (kinda leaves MDs for dead, huh?). This is because of high frequency dynamics, which affect the sound colour. It is because of this that much of his gear has enormous frequency responses. This makes MD look even worse than CD/DAT in this respect, for the ATRAC coding actually trims the frequency response to compress the audio more easily. Don't get me wrong, i think that MD technology is great - i have been saving for ages to buy a unit and have my heart set on the 831 - but it has its limitations, it is not really appropriate for high end pro use, and i would imagine that diehard audiophiles would probably prefer to use higher end stuff also. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Pure marketing hype from Sony
I'm not entirely certain about the validity of Sony's claim although I do have a tendancy to believe that the more reliable the media the more accurate the reproduction will be (this applies to all data, sound and video formats digital and analogue). That belief is flawed, at least for digital media. Digital media only have varying reliability, not accuracy. Eric himself sums it up best in the FAQ: "Since MDs store digital data, there will be no qualitative difference between the sound of various discs so long as the disc's raw bit error falls within the bounds of what can be handled by the MD ACIRC error correction system." As for empirical difference, that can also be discounted: "The CD specification allows for discs to have up to 220 raw errors per second. Every one of these errors is (almost always) perfectly corrected by the CIRC scheme for a net error rate of zero." - Andrew Poggio It actually takes a metal class tape to store digital data on, and even on these you will notice that DAT occasionally will have glitches and it happens more often on digital video tapes (more with the picture than the sound because it's harder to correct, and you are more likely to record this in an environment with much motion.) and most floppies stuff up pretty easily. Now, obviously more durable media such as CDs and MDs don't experience errors that much thus the higher quality the media the more likely it is that the reproduction will match the orriginal. If you took a bunch of cheap minidiscs and continued using them until you had a few glitches, and then repeated the experiment using higher quality discs, you would probably find that it would take longer for the higher quality discs to produce glitches. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. While I endorse immodesty, I do think this was perhaps a bad post to make this claim on. As always, my claims are open to complaint. :-) have a sense of humour! Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Pure marketing hype from Sony
I'm not entirely certain about the validity of Sony's claim although I do have a tendancy to believe that the more reliable the media the more accurate the reproduction will be (this applies to all data, sound and video formats digital and analogue). That belief is flawed, at least for digital media. Digital media only have varying reliability, not accuracy. Eric himself sums it up best in the FAQ: "Since MDs store digital data, there will be no qualitative difference between the sound of various discs so long as the disc's raw bit error falls within the bounds of what can be handled by the MD ACIRC error correction system." As for empirical difference, that can also be discounted: "The CD specification allows for discs to have up to 220 raw errors per second. Every one of these errors is (almost always) perfectly corrected by the CIRC scheme for a net error rate of zero." - Andrew Poggio It actually takes a metal class tape to store digital data on, and even on these you will notice that DAT occasionally will have glitches and it happens more often on digital video tapes (more with the picture than the sound because it's harder to correct, and you are more likely to record this in an environment with much motion.) and most floppies stuff up pretty easily. Now, obviously more durable media such as CDs and MDs don't experience errors that much thus the higher quality the media the more likely it is that the reproduction will match the orriginal. If you took a bunch of cheap minidiscs and continued using them until you had a few glitches, and then repeated the experiment using higher quality discs, you would probably find that it would take longer for the higher quality discs to produce glitches. Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. While I endorse immodesty, I do think this was perhaps a bad post to make this claim on. As always, my claims are open to complaint. :-) have a sense of humour! Christopher Spalding Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
