Re: MD: Recording audio to video tapes
Gary Gilliland wrote: 4. VHS Hi-Fi is not digital and is usually implemented poorly for critical recording in all but really expensive pro decks. Whether it's digital or not is largely irrelevant here. What matters is the sound quality, and I don't think MP3s are going to give you incredibly better sound quality. As I said before, the drawback to that is 2 or 6 hours to a tape. I agree that at 6-hour speeds the sound wouldn't be as good as at 2-hour speeds, but the audio quality doesn't drop at all as much as the video quality between SP and EP. At standard speeds (2-hour), even on a mid-level hi-fi VCR, IMO the sound of VHS is better than MP3. But if he's not looking for the best sound quality, and just wants to review some radio programs, then 6 hours of VHS is a pretty good way to do it, and certainly a lot easier that dealing with recording/ripping MP3s. As for finding content, some VCRs (my Mitsubishi is one) allows you to place index marks on your tapes that work just like track marks. Not all do, but if you do it's a great feature. las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While I'm sure that Dan F. knows that VHS Hi-Fi is not digital, I don't think he realizes that the problem with MP3 is usually the hardware and not the format. Not sure what this means, Larry. MP3 is compressed audio, but not only that, even at the highest bitrate it's inferior compression to our beloved ATRAC. In my mind, that makes the problem the format, since even the best hardware is limited by the format. Perhaps Dan has very high end equipment, but as impressed as I was with Hi-Fi video when they first came out (both VHS and Beta) I don't think that the sound quality is as good as many of the cuts on the MP3 CDs that I make. Perhaps it is our systems. Certainly possible. But I don't have high-end video equipment, just a nice Mitsubishi Hi-Fi VCR (although an older model from when Mitsubishi was the cream of the consumer crop for VCRs ;) ) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
re: MD: G$ Audio input
David Bock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well it turns out the G4 has no minijack input. I was told to use a USB port to bring audio in, but am having trouble finding the right adapter. I'd like to keep the audio digital, but from what I've read I will have to go from an analog out. Someone else mentioned a soundcard, but Griffin Technologies has a whole line of audio input devices for G4s: http://www.griffintechnology.com/audio/ On the cheap end, you'd be happy with the iMic ($35). The new PowerWave ($99) is a step up, and includes a 10W/channel integrated amp for output to external speakers. If you want a great external soundcard that works with the G4, the Onkyo SE-U55 ($199) offers optical and coax in/out, along with Mic input, line in and line out, and a headphone jack. It connects to your G4 via USB: http://www.onkyomm.com/products.cfm?id=1 They also have a cheaper version, the MSE-U33HB ($149): http://www.onkyomm.com/products.cfm?id=2 If you're going to be doing a lot of recording, I would recommend the U55. It has every input/output you might need, plus recording level adjustments and good monitoring settings. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: recording audio to video tapes
On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 13:45:23 -0400, las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That would be 10 hours of compressed, BUT digital recordings made from digital originals. Larry, the implication in your post is that compressed digital MP3 recordings will sound as good as, or better than, uncompressed analog recordings. I would have to disagree. A good hi-fi recording on SP using a VCR will sound better than any MP3 file. But, as you said, that's only two hours, compared to 10 with MP3s. To answer the original poster's question, you shouldn't need any special cabling -- most hi-fi VCRs have stereo line-in jacks. Simply go from your tuner or pre-amp/amp to the VCR and press record. Although what I said above about audio quality won't be as relevant if you're using EP to catch 6 hours on one tape. The audio quality degrades if you use EP. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MP3 downloading via NetMD
David W. Tamkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So when you said that MIniDisc will become platform-dependent you meant that bad marketing -- or false rumors left unchallenged by weak marketing -- will allow people to get the impression that there isn't anything to MD except NetMD, so MiniDisc will *seem* platform-dependent to them? Exactly. Nice summary, David ;) Let's hope it doesn't come to that, but in places like alt.audio.minidisc and MiniDiscussion posts asking whether one can record onto an MD from a source other than a computer are common. It's not hard to imagine that the next step beyond thinking that one can record only from a computer is to think that one can record only with the advertised software. Precisely, and Sony's marketing is, well... we all know LOL Matt Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...wow this netmd thing has really gotten some people all wound up. why dont we just actually wait till some software specs come out instead of an announcement for something. face it no specs except for usb was announced. oh that and that the disks made will work with current products. Based on what Sony has said, the assumptions being made (that much of NetMD's functionality will be through software) are quite safe. By the way, this is an MD *discussion* list. If you don't like to discuss, then maybe it isn't the best list for you? - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MP3 downloading via NetMD
David wrote: How would that make MiniDisc platform-dependent? Are you predicting that people who use other OSes will stop all MD use in a huff over being left out of the first release of NetMD? I'd hope not! No, not at all. What I'm saying is that NetMD was clearly developed to attract MP3 users to MD and to keep current users who have contemplated moving to MP3. However, if the software necessary to use NetMD is only available for Windows, users of other platforms will never see any of those benefits. From a marketing standpoint, it would be stupid for Sony not to make the software cross-platform. Sony is going to be plugging NetMD big time. Sure, NetMD systems will still have all the functionality of today's MD, but all the PR will be talking about is NetMD. Users of other platforms will assume that MD isn't compatible with their systems, and will just buy MP3 systems (just like they did while Sony was saying our MD recorders are only compatible with Windows). However, Sony has a history of being quite stupid when it comes to marketing. Mike wrote: Possibly, although I question why they would do such a thing, because at the very least they have analog inputs. It's not like their OS's can't do that. Mike, I wasn't referring to analog vs. digital (which doesn't matter anyway, since other platforms can use digital connections, too). I was referring to the computer software that appears to be necessary for NetMD. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MP3 downloading via NetMD
Eric Woudenberg, Minidisc.org Editor wrote: Yes, it makes me wonder how much work will be involved to get an MP3 track downloaded via NetMD. In theory, you should be able to convert a .wav file to secure ATRAC, right? (Or will you have to have your own real CD to make ATRAC files?). So, since you can make .wav files from MP3 files, why not an MP3 to secure ATRAC convertor and downloader, all running in software, with no change to the NetMD based recorder? The thing that makes me worry about NetMD is that if the above is true (you need software to do the conversion), MiniDisc will become platform-dependent. That is, in order to be able to use NetMD, you need software written for your computing platform. It is my experience that MD is far more popular among Mac and *nix users than it is among PC users (that's not saying there are *more* Mac or *nix MD users... only that the proportions of use are larger in those groups of people). The fact that for a time there were so many more MP3 encoders/players and Napster-like clients for Windows and so few for other platforms probably had a big role in that (there are plenty now, but early in the MP3 craze, there weren't). Regardless of the reasons, MD is quite popular among non-Windows groups, especially Mac users. Sony has historically been clueless when it comes to non-Windows products and software. It took them over a year of saying no, our MD recorders are not compatible with Macs before they finally plugged a Xitel in and realized that it worked from Day 1. Likewise, the software for all their Music Clip-type products (the ATRAC encoding/transfer tools) is Windows-only. Now that they are moving towards MD equipment that looks like it will need software, I hope they take their proverbial heads out of their proverbial behinds and make sure that they make this new format/feature available to everyone. The amount of time it would take them to write Mac and *nix tools would be miniscule compared to the amount of return they would get. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Earphones for MD
Mike Lastucka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally I prefer the closed type. Especially at work. :) They do an excellent job of blocking out ambient noise. Definitely wouldn't wear them while driving, and you definitely have to be more aware of your environment when out and about walking and such. :) For closed earphones, the only decent ones for less than $50 are the Koss UR-20, which retail for around $25. For around $35 you can get the UR-30 which are the same thing but fold up for portable use. Go up to $60 and you can get the Sony V6 (NOT the V600), which are significantly better (and also fold up for travel). Spend around $90-$100 and you can get the Denon 750 (or the 950 for around $130). Or you can spend $250 or so for the Beyer 831. However, the Denon 950 and the Beyer require a dedicated headphone amp. Hopefully that gives you a l'il something for every budget ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Earphones for MD
on 6/18/01 4:44 PM, Bard, James at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I saw a post concerning B O earphones, and it just so happens that I tried a pair which a friend had today. I thought they sounded very good. I'm not sure what the model was, but may have been A6 or A8. Those BO headphones look really cool but their sound is very average. Which means that for the price, they are a horrible deal ;) I am looking for very high quality sound and wonder what you would recommend. As I mentioned in a post a few days ago, before we can recommend anything, you need to answer a few questions: 1) Do you have a preference in terms of earbud vs. circumaural (on-the-ear) vs. supra-aural (around-the-ear) headphones? 2) Do you want open or closed headphones? In other words, do you want 'phones that block out external sound and keep your music from disturbing others? Or do you want to be able to hear the outside world? Keep in mind that in *general* open cans sound better. 3) Do you have any preferences in terms of how you like your music to sound? Accurate? More bass? More treble? If you answer these, we can help you pick some really great 'phones for your budget. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
re: MD: headphones amps
Booth, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyhow, I was wondering if anyone has suggestions for a great pair of headphones that are between $70-$150, and a good headphone amp. Eventually I'd like to upgrade to something like this because it sounds like with what I am using I am not getting the best sound quality I can get. (using the headphone amp and my cheap sony headphones). Richard: If you're only going to be spending $70-$150, you'd be better off finding a pair of headphones that don't need an amp, since the cheapest good amp (Headroom's Total Airhead) is going to cost $160 by itself. You can always upgrade later (see below). The other questions that should *always* be asked before recommending headphones: 1) Do you have a preference in terms of earbud vs. circumaural (on-the-ear) vs. supra-aural (around-the-ear) headphones? 2) Do you want open or closed headphones? In other words, do you want 'phones that block out external sound and keep your music from disturbing others? Or do you want to be able to hear the outside world? Keep in mind that in *general* open cans sound better. 3) Do you have any preferences in terms of how you like your music to sound? Accurate? More bass? More treble? If you answer these, we can help you pick some really great 'phones for your budget. There are quite a few very good 'phones that can be powered by your MD portable within your price range. Francisco J. Huerta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rick, for $150 USD you can get an extremely good set of headphones that won't need a headphone amp: the Grado SR-125. They are very efficient, open aire headphones, that will sound very, very good out of a component output. In fact, I'd rather listen to them through my Yamaha receiver than through my X-CansV2 headphone amp! Francisco, if he's only running these out of his Sharp MD, the SR-80 would be a bit better for him, and $50 cheaper. The SR-125 is reportedly good without an amp, but the truth is that while the SR-60 and SR-80 are truly no-amp-needed cans, the SR-125 really does do much better with an amp. If you would like a truly thrilling experience, though, try to get a set of HD-580s for $199 with a surround processor (Audio Advisor might stock them). e-Bay the surround processor for, say, $40 USD. Try to get your hands on an X-CanV2 (the Creek OBH-11 is an excellent amp, but from people who own both, the HD-580 likes a lot more power... like the 1 watt RMS the X-Can is capable of producing) for $229 (again, try AudioAdvisor or www.headphone.com). In case you can't get an X-Can, an Antique Audio MG-Head might do the trick (it's the same price at www.headphone.com). For close to $400 USD, you will be in sonic heaven. I would completely agree with this as a great headphone system, except for the Sennheiser surround processor. It's awful for music, although some people seem to like with when watching movies. You can get the HD-580 for around $180 online, and AudioAdvisor will sell you the X-CANSv2 (make sure you get the v2) for around $240. The only problem with this is that 1) I'm not sure the Sharp unit you have actually has an auto-sensing line/headphone jack; and 2) if it does, the fact that it's not a dedicated line out will affect the sound to some extent. If you're thinking about getting into good headphones, I would start with buying a good set that can be driven by your portable to see if the difference in sound is quite noticeable to you (it isn't for some people). If you fall in love with the great sound, you can always move up to headphone amps and higher-end cans. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Earphones
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dan, I guess it depends upon what you consider high-end sound. Personally I don't consider sound that does not produce the physical effect to be high end. I guess it's a matter of personal taste. I really don't enjoy the feeling of the sound being in my head. That's the way headphones seem to me, like the music is in my head instead of all around me. Even these systems that use small speakers and one subwoofer don't impress me. Bose is big on this type of arrangement. They have these relatively expensive systems that use these tiny little drivers for the highs and pretty small boxes for the mid and I don't know what. Well, in a nutshell, Bose suck. I think we agree on that ;) Moving on... A lot of people would disagree with you that audio without the physical impact of deep bass is not high end. Buying audio is a compromise. Only the very best systems in the world (which cost a lot of money) can give you everything: flat response, accuracy, soundstage, precision, imaging, realism. Contrary to popular belief, *good* bass is one of the most difficult aspects to produce. Most speakers either don't have the extension, or simply aren't accurate. You can get some less expensive speakers that exaggerate the bass (and will give you physical effect) but I would rather have weak bass than bad bass. Also, bass is the most expensive part of the spectrum to produce -- it requires bigger drivers, bigger enclosures, and the most power by far. So in terms of loudspeaker-based systems, it is often the part of the spectrum that gets left behind. And many of the systems that decide to forgo any attempt at producing deep bass are without a doubt high-end. As for the inside my head sound, that's historically been a criticism of headphone systems -- and often a very valid one. However, there are two caveats: 1) a good headphone setup, that includes a *good* pair of headphones and a quality headphone amp (the amps in portables and in any receiver just don't cut it) has far less of that in-the-head sound than most people are used to; and 2) if you get an amp that has a very good crossfeed filter, you would be simply amazed at how much the sound can be outside the head. Here is a good article on the phenomenon you mentioned, and how a good dedicated headphone amp can overcome much of it: http://www.headphone.com/EditorialHeadphone/WhitePaper.asp While such technology will never be perfect, it makes headphone listening a true audiophile possibility. I think that for $550 (USD) I could find an amp or receiver and two speakers that to me personally, I would consider higher quality sound than the headphones. The price of receivers has dropped so much that I think I could find a pair of speakers for $300 and a receiver for $250 that would, for me, give me what I consider higher quality sound than a pair of headphones. If the main requirement is feeling the bass in my body, then I agree that you could. However, if your main requirement was all-around good and accurate sound, I think you're mistaken. It seems to me (and this is simply an observation, larry, not any sort of criticism) that you haven't really heard a good headphone setup before. Your initial response to a couple of us was that $300 was ridiculous for a pair of headphones. And your responses since then indicate that you don't feel headphones are a serious way of listening to music. I think if you ever had a chance to listen to a good source through a set of Sennheiser HD-600s and a Headroom amp, you might change your mind... Receivers that would have cost $500 a few years ago are turning up at places like Sam's Club (only the newer receivers not only include Dolby Digital, but DTS) for about $250.00. Is my $900 Onkyo DTS receiver really going to offer me higher quality sound than the $250 unit? Or is it just that it has a lot more surround options and inputs. OK, the THX certification is suppose to insure me of certain standards. But would I really be able to tell the difference between it and the cheaper receiver if I was only using it in the stereo mode with the same speakers on both systems? I'm an audio-only person, so I don't buy equipment with all the A/V bells and whistles. If I'm going to compare a $250 amp with a $995 amp, it's going to be comparing two 2-channel amps and how much different they sound listening to music. BTW, the THX standard has nothing to do with 2-channel audio. It's based on theater audio standards. So a THX-certified A/V amp may actually be a horrible amp for listening to normal 2-channel audio. Now if you let me go just a little higher so that I have a little more to spend on speakers and can buy the Polks that I like, I know it would blow away your headphones :) You can have the Polks ;) Those Polks can't hold a candle to the HD-600s except that they give you the physical bass impact that headphones can't. While you're feeling your Polks, I'll be listening to parts of music you'll never
Re: MD: Earphones
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Once the signal is passed through the crappy internal headphone amp of a portable unit, the damage has been done. Plugging that signal into the best separate headphone amp isn't going to remove the distortion that the crappy one has created. Well, to some extent that's true. That's why people who are serious about headphones buy units that have a dedicated line-out. As for the Sharp jacks that are impedance-sensing, while they may not sound as good as a dedicated line out, they are much better than a simple headphone jack. You can still use those jacks to hook your portable up to a good headphone amp, and you will still hear a significant difference. IF you want the best possible sound, first you have to get yourself a top notch pair of headphones. That goes without saying. But second, you should invest in a good separate headphone amp and not use the headphone out that is built into your amp or receiver. Use the line out as you would for any other component. Exactly. I'll bet that even on a a decent grade receive in in the $900 range, if they have a headphone jack, the amp is an after thought. If a good headphone amp sells for several hundred dollars by itself, I doubt you are going to find one, in a $900 receiver. Probably not even in a $2000.00 unit. In fact, there is not a single component amp/receiver I have heard of that actually has a high-quality headphone amp built-in. Some are definitely better than others, but you're 100% correct, Larry -- most headphone jacks are simply an afterthought, use cheap components, and do not provide enough power to drive a good set of cans. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Rebadged MD gear (was: Dolby and Minidisc Patents)
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Ford motor company manufactures Lincolns, but there are no Lincoln models that can be directly compared to Fords. The Mercury division manufactures models that are identical to Ford models (except for some cosmetic changes). In defense of Rat, the Ford Expedition and the Lincoln Navigator are basically identical automobiles ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Earphones
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For me headphones are only for desperate listening. In other words places were it is totally impossible to have a full speaker system. Sound is not just heard with your ears, it is felt by your whole body. I feel that you and your entire body should be enveloped in sound. You just can't do do that with headphones. Very true... a full-range speaker system has a physical effect -- the feel of deep bass. On a very good system ($$$), full-range speakers also offer imaging that headphones can't. However, unless you spend a LOT of money on speakers and source components, they will be far less accurate than $300 headphones with a $200 headphone amp, and the headphones will offer clarity that the speakers can't. Plus you have to deal with room interactions and reflections, placement, etc. You're correct that headphones can't produce the physical effect that full-range speakers can. But if you can do without that effect, for the money, headphones offer far better bang for the buck. For $550, you can't really get a good amp and speakers to hook up to your CD player that will provide you with high-end sound. But you can buy a Sennheiser HD600 and a Musical Fidelity X-CANSv2 headphone amp that will give you simply amazing sound. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Headphones
Francisco J. Huerta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They are more stylish (YMMV), silver, they don't exert as much pressure as the KSC-35, and, according to a lot of reports I've seen in Headwize, due to less pressure on the ears they don't sound the same as the 35s. Less bass. Also, they seem to fall easily. People who have the 35s and the 50s actually prefer the 35s. Francisco: Exactly (I was actually the one who wrote the review on Headwize comparing the two ;) ). Here's the big summary: The 50s have more modern styling, as they have larger silver plastic enclosures... probably to compete with Sony's awful but popular StreetStyle line. The 35s are black and, to many people, kind of ugly ;) 50s are a bit more comfortable because of the new rubber/wire flexible earclip (kind of like a cheap Gumby doll ;) However, they have a spring in the earclip, and the rubber/wire doesn't hold, so the earclip eventually moves back to the original position, meaning that while the 35s would stay on your head no matter what, they 50s will fall off if you move too much. This is exacerbated by the fact that the 50s are noticeably heavier. So the 35 is better for exercise or other uses where you'll be moving around. 35s have black, rubber coated cables. 50s have gray, fabric coated cables. The gray fabric is stiffer than the black rubber, but this could be because they are newer right now. 50s protrude much more from the head because of the new silver casing. Not only are they stylish, but they draw attention! hehe, j/k The two models sound almost identical except that the 50s have slightly less bass response than the 35s, most likely because they do not press as tightly against the ear. That's not necessarily a bad thing. The 35s have always been my favorite of the 35/Porta/SportaPro line (all of which use the same driver) because the other two models have a little too much bass (they both fit more tightly still). So while the 50s may have a bit less bass than the 35s, they still sound more balanced than the Portas or Sportas. Keep in mind that any of the four have stellar sound, and you can't get, IMHO, a better set of phones for $50 than one from this line. Marc Britten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: are these great for sport use? i have a pair of cheap sony wrap arounds that i bought on a trip to replace a different pair of headphones that got crushed(don't ask) and i'm looking for something w/ good sound, but will also stand up to the bouncing of outdoor cross country running. The KSC-35s are perfect for running. I use them every day for exercise. Unfortunately, the newer KSC-50s are not -- as described above, they are heavier, and fit much more loosely, so they tend to fall off much more easily :( I would enthusiastically recommend the 35s for running. If you find *them* too lose, you can get the SportaPros at Circuit City for $19, and nobody every accused them of not fitting tightly enough ;) las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [re: Etymotics] At $300.00 you really, really, really have to be into listening with earbuds big time! You can buy a pair of Sony Glasstron TV glasses on eBay for that kind of money. The ear buds included with the glasstron are on the big side, but have decent sound and you get to view video on a virtual 52 screen. Larry, you just really have to be into good sound is all ;) $300 is pretty standard for top-of-the-line headphones: Sennheiser HD600, Etymotics, Grado 325, Sony 3000, etc. Yes, you could get that Glasstron TV thingy and ruin your eyes while listening to bad sound, or you could get a pair of amazing headphones ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Earphones
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As far as $300 goes, For that kind of money I'm sure that you could buy full size over the ear headphones that would just about totally block out any external noise and offer pounding bass that would put any earplugs to shame. Larry, you'd be wrong there, on both counts ;) The Etymotics ER-4S have bass that's as good as the most expensive over the ear headphones -- they are simply some of the most accurate earphones made. In fact, accurate is the key term. You could buy $20 over-the-ear headphones that produce boomy, inaccurate bass, but they would be awful headphones that don't produce good sound. As for isolation, the Etymotics block more external noise than *any* over-the-ear headphone in the world, hands down. Etymotic Research is famous for three things: 1) high-end hearing aids; 2) noise isolation devices; and 3) high-end headphones. Their headphones are produced using the RD from their other products. Personally, I prefer my Sennheiser HD600s (also $300 headphones) because I'm not a big fan of in-ear 'phones. However, I've owned Etys in the past, and their sound was every bit as good. There is a reason they are widely considered one of the best headphones in the world. Obviously, you would rather spend $300 on your Sony video goggle, and more power to you. However, that doesn't mean that the Ety's aren't worth $300 to those that value top-notch sound ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Headphones
Richard Rudie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And I've heard good things about the clip-on-your-ear Q33s, too, but after spending $35 for the G63s and $70 for the E888s I won't be buying any more headphones for a while anyway. The Q33's are simply *awful* headphones, unfortunately. If you want to try earclips, the best ones by far (in fact, the *only* earclips I will even put on) are the Koss KSC-35 or KSC-50 (I prefer the 35's). - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Earphones
Steve Corey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just got a set of Etymotic ER-4S earphones, and I am astounded at the sound. They are incredible. Some people have said that the 4S's lack bass and require a headphone amp, but I'm using them with my Sony MZR-90 and they are loud enough for me with excellent bass, and that's not even with the bass boost turned on. Steve: the issues with the ER-4S needing an amp isn't whether or not they'll play *loud* enough; rather, it's whether or not they'll play *well* enough ;) The ER4S are simply designed to be used with a powerful headphone amp. If you were to buy a good amp and then use your 4S, you would immediately see what I'm talking about -- as good as you think they sound now, it's nothing compared to what a good amp will do for them. You may want to reconsider and exchange them for the ER-4P, which are specifically designed for use with portables. The don't require a separate amp to achieve their full potential, and will actually sound better than the 4S when run directly from a portable. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: . MD-Sony complaints
Which was exactly my arguement, availability, thats why MiniDisc's aren't as popular as CD's, prerecorded ones are in the majority hard to find, and you find an average consumer who wants to wait up to 80 minutes to listen to some music on their portable. Um... do MP3's just magically appear out of thin air? ;) Seriously, though. You still have to rip/encode MP3s at some point, then transfer them. Not real-time but definitely not a trivial undertaking. (That said, there are 4x CD-MD recorders which basically eliminate the - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Fw: Vaio
Francisco J. Huerta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The entire evaluation you conducted was flawed, since you evaluated PowerBooks using PC users. Then you missed the whole point of the evaluation.. I wanted to have a hybrid network at my office. I wanted to give Macs to people at the web design department; these people have used PCs all their lives. I really, truly wanted to give Macs a chance; I figured, if Macs are as good as people say they are, everyone will want to switch. Exactly my point... you evaluated Macs using people who have used PCs all their lives. It's a well-established fact, in any industry, that people dislike doing things differently than they are accustomed to. So I'm not surprised in the least that your users didn't like Macs. A valid evaluation would be to give people who have never used a computer both platforms. Seriously, the techie guy at Apple that was assigned to us accepted that Macs had fallen way behind in their GUI, and that just lately they begun catching up with Windows. Don't blame me, they were the ones who accepted it. LOL... fallen way behind in their GUI? Most Mac users, and most objective Windows users even, would dispute that assertion. Windows is WAY better than it used to be, but even now it is finally getting UI features that other OS's (Mac, Be) have had for years. It's comparable to the Mac for new users. But far ahead? True. That's one of the reasons we didn't buy the Macs after all; people wanted to work, not to learn a new system. Which makes sense. The other major reason was that we have been let down way too many times by Apple in the past. We still have 28 Macs lying around that Apple couldn't and wouldn't fix (Apple Mexico, that is). Just the facts. You're not the first. Apple has a history of poor relations with large accounts. With a few PC apps? Sorry, but I could only find Macromedia and some Office stuff. Our database won't run on Apple (Progress). Our ASP won't run on a Mac (Citrix). Nor the clients for those apps. Sun and Windows NT will. This is enterprise stuff, not the apps you would run on your home-home office. And for you, that makes complete sense. But for the average person, the average business, your assertion, which you made generally, that Macs are incompatible is simply not valid. In your case, you're using very specific software that most businesses will never use. Chad Gombosi wrote: Well the wierd thing here is that you must have been buying these G3s when they were rather old because there has never been a G3 with a list price of less than $1000 US from Apple, this price would have had to have been from a retailer with a good mark down sale. There have actually been three models of iMac that have/had a MSRP of under $1,000. Most vendors sold them for less, or included free RAM or printers. Basicly right now a top of the line G4 will run you about $3000 (no monitor). It's hard to spend that much on a PC if you tried, without getting RAID arrays and high-end server cases with multiple power supplies, quad proccessors etc. But you're talking top of the line... who actually buys top of the line? An iMac is $899, and a really nice G4 runs from $1699 to $3499... and that $3499 model is a full multimedia authoring machine with capabilities that no production PC on the planet can do. It's actually very easy to spend $3,000 on a brand-name PC if you include the same features. The fact is that nowadays, there is very little hardware cost difference between Macs and similarly equipped brand-name PCs (Dell, Compaq, Gateway, HP, etc.), especially if you avoid the Apple Store. As someone else mentioned, you can always go cheaper by buying no-name PCs or custom-built machines. But that's a fringe market. People who do that will never buy a Mac, or even a Dell or Gateway. OK, I think we've officially gone way off-topic now ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Fw: Vaio
Francisco J. Huerta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is not an argument to start a fight. Then maybe you should have not posted this? ;) Sorry, but I work with both systems, and I get tired of PC-centric people doing flawed comparisons. The entire evaluation you conducted was flawed, since you evaluated PowerBooks using PC users. Of course they are going to dislike the interface and have the problems you menioned, just as a company full of Mac users is going to dislike the Windows interface and have technical problems with Windows if you use them to evaluate Wintel laptops. The simple truth is that people are comfortable with what they learned, and a change will almost always be met with resistance, especially in the beginning. BTW, the death blow being end users complaining because they couldn't open exe files received through email? ROFL... about the only executable files people receive through email are virii and joke programs. Hmmm... Database problems, and PC-specific software -- now there is a reason that I can understand -- that is a logical reason to go with a Wintel PC. But the other reasons... A Mac is a good, albeit uncompatible, out of standard (and in many cases out of touch) computer. Sorry, but that is just incorrect. If you mean incompatible with a few PC-only applications, yes. But the Mac is just as standards-compliant as any Windows PC, cross-platform compatible, and hardly out of touch. LOL And in terms of software availability, apart from a few high-end databases and CAD applications, pretty much anything you can do on Windows you can do on a Macintosh (although WebObjects is better than any PC-only solution). And in some industries (graphic design, education, multimedia) a good argument can be made for the opposite conclusion -- that the PC is You want to use PCs, or Macs, that's great. But let's drop these flawed well, I did an evaluation arguments -- let people go try a computer on their own, armed with facts. These my computer is better than your computer for these reasons mailing list debates are so... 1980s ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sharp MD-X5 and MS-702
"Stuart Howlette" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My guess is (possibly incorrect, but anyway) is that the atrac chip in the x5 is an earlier version of the 702's, meaning its poorer in compression, meaning poorer in storing music. Also, the X5's sound could've have been counter balanced with other components, eg, speakers, noise removal, amp, whereas the 702 won't compensate (although it is only a distinct possibility, unlikely in any case...) This is strange -- does the MD recorded on the x5 ALSO sound bad ON the x5? I ask because ATRAC is backwards-compatible. A recording made on the x5 should sound exactly the same on the x5 as it does on the 702 (well, it will sound a bit different because of different amps, etc., but you know what I mean ;)). Sounds like one of the units is broken -- maybe the heads are misaligned in one of them. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: For sale: Headroom Airhead Portable Headphone Amp
Great condition. Runs on two AA batteries and powers any headphone. Great for using high-end headphones with MD players (I used it to run the Etymotics and Sennheiser 580s). Info: http://www.headphone.com/ProductsAmplifiers/TheAirhead.asp Sells for $129 new, $99 on sale. Asking $75 (including shipping). - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: The Plug - new version
"Robert Norton" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's a newer version of "The Plug" that has no black or yellow markings, only violet, and no mute button. I got a pair for $9.95 at CompUSA. They still have the lousy plug material but after I fashioned new ones out of good earplugs thay are actually quite good for the price, outperforming some earbuds at 5 times the price. I have tried those (the new ones, hoping for some improvement), and, while they may be decent for $10 (actually more, since you have to buy good earplugs for them to make them listenable), you can get earbuds without "plug" isolation that sound much better for $15 or $20 (Sennheiser MX-400 and -500), and earbuds with better isolation than the plugs and much better sound for $35 (Sony EX-70). If you like lots of thumpy bass, and need isolation, you might be satisfied with The Plug + better earplugs. But that's the target audience for them. I don't mean to be too contrarian -- I just want people to spend their money wisely ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MZ-R70, Best Earbuds
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There seems to be a unanimous opinion that the Etymotic ear plugs are the finest you can get and many people believe that they are even better than any of the full sized headphones. But at $269.00 (USD), there must be a set costing under $100 that some one makes that are close?? Nope, not even ;) Seriously... $269 seems a kind of outrageous price to me for a set of headphones! You can buy a very decent pair of speakers for that price. Just as you can buy a $3000 pair of speakers that will sound amazingly better than a $300 pair of speakers, you can buy a $269 set of headphones that will sound amazingly better than a $50 pair. I personally owned a pair of Etymotics for a few years, and I can say that apart from the Sennheiser 580s (full-sized headphones that used to retail for $300, but are now around $175), I've never heard a pair of headphones come close to the detail, accuracy, and simply *enjoyable* sound produced by the Etymotics. I made an impulse purchase of a par of Koss ear buds that have these soft "rubber" cones that slide over a tube and cost $19.99. I can't remember the name They are yellow, black and blue with a mute switch (why not a true volume control?). In my opinion they sound really bad and are only suitable for spoken word. Yes, those are "The Plug" -- simply one of the worst headphones on the market. Headwize has a tutorial for how to improve the sound by replacing the earbud pads, but even after that they are still not worth the cost of the new earpads, IMO ;) But there must be something out there for about $75 dollars that comes close the the $269.00 Etymotics?? NO?? Well, not "close" but there are several that are pretty good. The consensus is that the next-best earbuds are the Sony 888s, at around US $75. They don't isolate external sound at all (the Etymotics block EVERYTHING), but they have very good sound for earbuds. After the 888s, the "next-best" really depend on your needs. If you need isolation, the Sony EX-70 (around US $40) are the way to go. They have a pretty good seal on your ear, and good sound, including impressive bass. The highs are a bit unbalanced, and for some people the bass is a bit overemphasized, but nonetheless the sound is quite good. If you do not need isolation, go with the Sennheiser MX-500 (US $20). These have better overall sound than the EX-70s, but don't provide the same isolation or extra bass response. Apart from the four models listed above, I personally wouldn't buy any other earbud -- because of their physical limitations, it's difficult to build an earbud that actually produces good sound. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: more headphones
Stainless Steel Rat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you want inexpensive noise blocking buds, Koss "The Plug" is a better buy than Sony. URL:http://www.koss.com/koss/kossweb.nsf/SPdispCall?ReadFormTHEPLUG No! ;) Seriously, "The Plug" are simply terrible headphones. They sound plain *awful*. I bought a pair hoping for the usually amazing Koss performance/price ratio. I couldn't even listen to them they sounded so bad. Koss went out of their way to give the Plug bass response, and the result is horrible, boomy bass that produces the most muddled sound I have ever heard from a headphone. I even tried the "fixes" on HeadWize.com; they did help a bit, but not enough to make The Plug a headphone I would ever subject my ears to... The Sennheiser 400s or 500s ($15-$20 US) or the Sony EX70 ($35 US) are far, far better buys than the $20 Plugs. Still, for lightweight, portable listening, it is really hard to beat Koss KSC-35 earclips. URL:http://www.koss.com/koss/kossweb.nsf/SPdispCall?ReadFormKSC35 Definitely... I always suggest the 35's to anyone looking for earbuds. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: more headphones
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001 19:10:59 -, "Edward" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: out of the following (reasonable, but cheap [i think]) headphones which would you recommend:- - Sony MDR-EX70LP - Sony MDR-ED268LP - Sennheiser MX-500 Does anyone knwo what these cost in pounds. Am I correct in saying that the EX70 is the only one there that really keeps noise out/stops noise from escaping and annoying ppl near you? I would forget the 268s and choose between the 70s and the 500s. You're correct about the EX70s -- they almost "seal" in the ear so they block out much more external noise. The MX-500s might have a bit better sound, or at worse, comparable, plus they are half the price (at least here in the U.S.), but they don't seal out much external noise. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Panasonic's first MDLP portable
"Chad Gombosi" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You see, there are published standards for listing URLs in text documents like mail messages. No, there are stadards for HYPERLINKS. A URL is not always a link. So what if it wrapped to the next line? Copy *both* lines! There are standards for including a URL in a text email message. Rat posted one -- using URL: -- but the more common (and preferred, IMHO) is to use around the URL. In most modern PC email clients, and in any Macintosh-standard application that uses text services, the brackets delineate the beginning and end of the URL, so that even if there are hard returns/line characters in the middle, the URL will "work" without having to manually cut and paste to fix it. The fact that you couldn't go to this URL even though it was RIGHT THERE ON THE SCREEN doesn't say a lot for your problem solving abilities, which in itself is fine, but the fact that you continue to bitch to the list about the guy that took time out of his day to post the link in the first place, when your poor conflict resolution abilities are to blame is pretty sad. There is no need to make personal attacks. Rat was just asking that URLs be posted in a standardized way. I agree that Leon has made many useful posts -- Rat's request does not imply otherwise. Sure anyone could take the time to manually splice together the various parts of the URL (I did, in fact LOL). But in the future, I think Rat's request is a good one -- if people could enclose URLs with brackets like this: http://www.cnn.com it will make the list more user-friendly with *minimal* effort. And that should make everyone happy, right? ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: E900 Battery Life
"Kenneth Lee" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I only charged my battery once, and the E900 is still running after 2-3 weeks or occasional use!! =) Great battery life on the E900!!! Ain't that the truth. I got my E900 over a month ago and have only charged the batter TWICE, even with almost-daily use. And I only charged it that time "to be safe" because I was going on a business trip and wanted to make sure I didn't run out -- the display still showed 2/3 charge. Amazing battery life. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: chopping off headphone jack
John Small [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My question is if it's possible to chop my headphone jack from the remote plug, so that I can insert my airhead connector directly into the md player. There is no separate line out on the E900? Thanks. Nope, and that's my only complaint about the E900. In fact, I don't believe any of the new Sony *players* has a line-out. That means that the Airhead, which should be used with a line-out, will have to be used with the headphone jack instead. It can be done, but sound quality suffers. To answer the original question, if you want to use the remote, you would plug the Airhead's line into the headphone jack on the remote instead of on the main unit. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: best portable player
John Small [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So I'm looking for a portable player. I have an E40 and most of the time a player is just fine and if I need portable recording I do have the R50. I would spend $200 for a player, reluctantly. I would be very happy at $100. It needs to have LP4 capability. You simply won't find an MDLP player for $100. I got an E900 from a friend in Japan for $200, so I'm sure the cheaper models (E500, E700, E800) are cheaper -- but you'd have to know someone there. Other than that, you'd have to try a place like Micmic.com.hk: http://Micmic.com.hk/videogame/av/minidisk/md-m_player.htm They have several MDLP players for under $200. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: earbuds
"Jim Gray" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This may have already been answered some time ago, but what should I pay for a really decent pair of earbuds, and what model is recommended? thanx... I sent this earlier from work from a Yahoo account, but I don't think it went through, so I'm sending again... I frequent the MiniDISCussion headphone boards, as well as the HeadWize boards and Headroom's own boards. There is rarely "agreement" on headphones, but there is nearly unanimous agreement on the following hierarchy of earbuds: 1) Etymotics ER4S or ER4P (S for use with a headphone amp, P for use directly from a portable). Not only the best earbud available, but one of the best headphones of any design. $269 2) Sony MDR-E888. Not nearly as good as the Etymotics, but clearly better than anything else. $69 3) A close race: Sony EX70 (not sure, but I think around $40-$50) and Sennheiser MX500 ($20). The EX70 has much better isolation (more of a "plug" type) and therefore better bass, but the Sennheiser supposedly has better overall sound (but no isolation). I'm a big headphone enthusiast -- I own the Etymotics ER4S, Sennheiser 580s, Grado SR-60, and Koss KSC/35, and have auditioned tons of others. I actually purchased the Koss "Plug" and was VERY, VERY, VERY disappointed. The sound was muddy, with boomy, poor bass. I even tried the "fix" for them from Headwize that supposedly dramatically increases sound quality. They were indeed better, but still nothing to write home about. The reviews of the Plug have pretty much agreed with my evaluation. If you only want to spend $20, get the Sennheisers. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Imac to MD
jgvp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That latest blurb we all received from Minidisco got me to thinking. Is there anyone here in the newsgroup that is in involved with recording MDs from MP3s downloaded to their Mac computer ? I am presently achieving this process with my Sony Vaio via the superb Sony software; however, despite Apple's iTunes, etc., it seems nigh on impossible to achieve with an iMac. TIA. You can record via analog from the iMac just fine. If you want digital, you can use pretty much any USB-digital converter, such as the one Sony includes with their newer "PC" models, or the Xitel DG1. If you have Mac with PCI slots, you can get the new SoundBlast Live Platinum and use a direct digital connection. Dale Greer has a lot of Mac-MD info on his web site: http://home.sprintmail.com/~dalegreer/MacMD.html - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Best buy, phasing out MD equip ??
It is not, nor will it ever be, a replacement (or even serious competition) for CD portables. To be honest, what amazes me is that CD was *ever* a popular portable medium. It would be difficult to design a medium *worse* for portable use LOL - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: External battery packs and portable electronics
"Simon Mackay" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone ever had experience designing their own "long-distance" battery pack for their personal high-demand electronic devices? How did they go about designing the battery pack, what battery did they use as the basis of the pack and how did they connect it to the electronic device? Also, how did the device react to the external battery pack and was the device's battery meter able to indicate true battery strength of the external batteries? Headroom sells an external battery pack for many CD players, and they even include a note that "We can 4D holders for certain portable CD players. Call us for details." I am assuming that they could do the same for MD players. http://www.headphone.com/ProductsOther/AccessoryList.asp As a side note, the device's battery meter will not indicate the battery strength. External battery packs plug into the AC adapter jack, so the device actually thinks it is connected to an AC adapter. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Best buy, phasing out MD equip ??
On Fri, 9 Feb 2001 23:31:55 -0500 (EST), JT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You tell me. I can get a decent MD recorder for much $40-50USD less, and not have to pay as much for the media. What's a CF card cost these days for a card with enough capacity to hold an hour or so worth of music? A minidisc is about $1.20 to $1.50 per disc. I think you misunderstood what he was referring to. The Philips Expanium is a CD player that can read MP3s off CDRs. So, the media costs about $0.50 max for anywhere from 4 to 10 hours (depending on bitrate) of music. You have to buy a computer, a CD burner, the Expanium, and some discs just to start using it. Easily over $1000 for an entry-level machine, closer to $2000 for a good system. At that point, 50 cents for 4-10 hours of music (of inferior sound quality) is orders of magnitude more expensive than MD. And you can't edit after you create, you can't record from a Mic, and you can't take it with you. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Best buy, phasing out MD equip ??
"Don Capps" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can disagree all you like Larry. But in AB comparison where A is the original cd and B is a 192kbps mp3 file, the file is sonically indistinguishable from the original cd. Don, you forgot to add the phrase "to my ears" at the end of that statement. The truth is that it IS distinguishable. Just because you personally can't hear it doesn't mean no one else can. I can hear the difference, double-blind, between a 128kbps and 192 kbps. And for Larry, here's the methodology LOL: using the same CD and the same ripper, rip a single song at both bitrates. All other settings identical. Save them to the same hard drive. Add them both to a playlist, set to "random" shuffle and repeat. Close my eyes. Listen and hit "forward" to skip between the two files, in random order. Have a friend tell me if my guesses are correct. Using this procedure, I can tell the difference easily. On the other hand, I cannot consistently walk up to the machine without having heard both before and identify whether a single track without a point of comparison is 192 or 160. I can do it with CD vs MP3, though. The point here is that there is an audible difference. However, whether that difference is obvious in a portable environment is questionable. My computer audio system: PowerMac G4, Yamaha @PET digital receiver, NHT SuperZero speakers, Grado SR-60 headphones. and You would never now the difference between my Expanium playing MP3 files and my Expanium playing the original CD. I guarantee it. Inferior sound quality? Nope. Not at all. Sorry, Don, but you're wrong on that one. Again, just because you can't tell the difference doesn't mean others can't. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Senses fatigue
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The difference between the least expensive receiver (that would be considered by the industry definition - if there is such a thing) "HiFi" and the most expensive individual components is insignificant when compared to speakers. Well, that may be a bit of an exaggeration (I think other components are also important, and make a substantial difference in audio quality), you are correct that good speakers are vital to a good-sounding system. I agree 100%!! Using flat settings and volume equilibration compensators (I just made that up, but you know what I mean) most well designed electronics will probably have identical audio properties as far as the human ear is concerned. I would have to disagree with that, Larry. If that theory were true, given a good set of speakers, one would not be able to tell the difference between a $500 NAD receiver and a $2000 NAD receiver (both are very well-designed and manufactured). In reality, you can. There is a substantal difference in soundstaging and detail. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: MZ-R90 available
I have a friend in Japan who is picking up an E900 for me :) He mentioned to me that he's probably going to sell his MZ-R90. He said it's in perfect condition with all the original packaging, and hasn't been used much -- he evidently uses his iPAQ to listen to music. He was thinking about selling it for around $200 (plus shipping). If anyone is interested, let me know, and I'll pass it on to him. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Interesting stats on MD, MP3, etc.
From last July: http://www.stereophile.com/shownews.cgi?791 - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sony MD Bundle6 for $99
FYI, I did some homework today... for those living on the West Coast, there is only a SINGLE Guitar Center store that still has ONE of these in stock: Tukwila, Washington. Their phone number is 206-243-9077. You can call them, pay for it, and they will ship to you. Other Guitar Centers in the U.S. may still have stock, but their computer system won't let them check other regions. Good luck. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: Sony MD Bundle 6 for $100
Several people have emailed me asking for details about this sale. Unfortunately, I was just reporting what I was told at the Guitar Center booth, and I don't have any further details. I have looked at the web site, and it appears that you can't order off the site. My suggestion would be to find a local store (the website has a store locator) and ask them if they have stock. They allegedly have 83 retail stores, so you could call a few ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Sony MD Bundle 6 for $100
At MacWorld Expo today, Guitar Center http://www.guitarcenter.com/ was selling the Sony MD Bundle 6 (MDS-JE330 deck + MZ-E33 portable player + two blank MDs + optical cable) for $99.99. No, that's not a misprint ;) They have limited stock, but they said they would honor the price on phone and web orders, as well, until they run out. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === Dave Kimmel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Um... is there such a thing as "lossless" compression? I don't think so... I think "lossy compression" is redundant ;) Lossless compression is what people generally call programs like WinZip. When you compress a file with WinZip, it takes up less space and when you decompress it you get the exact same data that you compressed. In other words, it doesn't lose any data in the compression and decompression process. ATRAC is lossy because it does NOT return the same data after decompression that it was given for compression. ATRAC throws out information in order to make it easier to compress the data, therefore the compression and decompression process loses data. Right... I understand when we're talking about computer data. But is there such a thing as "lossless" compression when it comes to audio? Someone mentioned "shorten" but is it really lossless? - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD
Anthony Lalande [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it's all subjective. Cassettes are low-end, because of their low signal-to-noise ratios (I think; I'm not an expert in this sort of thing), but they were high end once. So were vinyl records and Victorolas. I don't think cassettes were *ever* considered "high-end." When they were introduced, the quality of reel-to-reel tape was vastly superior... just hard to take with you on a jog ;) Cassettes were introduced as a portable, but lower-quality, music source. So far, I think this thread has defined 2 axioms: 1) Lossless compression formats are always technically superior to lossy formats. Um... is there such a thing as "lossless" compression? I don't think so... I think "lossy compression" is redundant ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sony E500 vs. E700 vs. E900
Leon: Thanks for the info/translation! Exactly what I was looking for. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Sony E500 vs. E700 vs. E900
Has anyone seen a comprehensive comparisions of these three units? I'm looking at them on the Micmic web site and they are $195, $220 and $235, respectively. I see that there are slight differences in size, and I believe the E500 doesn't have LP mode, but I'd like to know exactly what each has relative to the others. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD Minisystems, Aiwa XR-H66MD
"Dan Scellen" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am looking to buy an MD minisystem on a very tight budget. I can get = a refurbished (which is fine with me) Aiwa XR-H66MD for around $190 = shipped. I know this is a great deal, but I've heard some bad things = about the unit and was wondering if anyone else had some experiences to = share. Also, I was looking at the sharp MD-C2 and the new MX30 (I've = been unable to find an MX30 cheap enough for my poor ass :) ) If anyone = knows where to get it for under $250, i'd love to know. Does anyone = else know of other nice Md minisystems? Thanks. If you're willing to spend $250... find a way to save $50 more and buy the JVC model I mentioned on the list yesterday instead of the models you mentioned (i.e. any Sharp, Aiwa or Sony) ;) You'll be very happy you did. It looks beautiful and sounds great (something that can't necessarily be said about the other minisystems out there). - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Headphones
"zaheerm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To continue the current headphones thread, I am looking for some mid-range
ones to go with my newly acquired Sharp MDMT831. I was looking at the Sony
MDR-G72LP 'street style' model, and wondered if anyone's tried these and
what the general verdict is on these? I would rather not spend more than £25
on the headphones, and I am looking for similar street style ('round the
head') type of designs, as I hate earphones!
I am interpreting your comments to mean that you don't like the "over the
head" style of headphones, and you don't like earbuds, is that correct?
If so, by all means go get a pair of Koss KSC/35! They are "earclips"
meaning they have a full-range driver, but no band. They simply clip over
each ear. Very comfortable, and IMHO the best-sounding for the price
range ($30 US).
-
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Christmas Present Gloat: BO earphones
"Francisco J. Huerta" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By all means, stay away from BOs if you care about sound. If looks are what count, they are the right choice. But at their current price and performance, I would not recommend them to anyone. Why doesn't that surprise me? BO and Bose are very similar: Both have mediocre products. The only difference is that Bose spends all of its money marketing them, while BO spends all of its money making them look stunning and sexy. Well... at least the BO look good ;) Of course now that we've all trashed the gentleman's new headphones, and he's feeling awful about them ;) The truth is, if they sound good to you, and you love the way they look, then just enjoy them and have a happy holiday! - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: JVC FS-MD9000 on sale
A couple weeks ago I recommended the JVC FS-MD9000 as IMHO the best MD minisystem out there, and a couple people asked where to get it for cheap. Yesterday I came across a sale on the system from Hifi.com -- ironically, in the print catalog they sent me. It's not on the web site, but the catalog shows it on sale for $299.99. This is a great system with phenomenal sound for its size... for that price you'd be hard-pressed to find anything close for an MD minisystem. The phone number for orders is 800-FOR-HIFI http://www.jvc.com/mainprod.jsp?modelId=MODL023005 Happy Holidays! - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Which to sell?
I have a Sony MZ-R50 in perfect condition and a Sharp MS-722 that is only about 6 months old (also in perfect condition). I am planning on selling one of them and getting an MR-R90 because of its size. I like various features on both of them, and I'm not sure which to get rid of! Suggestions and advice are appreciated. Any reason I should keep one over the other? - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Which to sell?
Dan Frakes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a Sony MZ-R50 in perfect condition and a Sharp MS-722 that is only about 6 months old (also in perfect condition). I am planning on selling one of them and getting an MR-R90 because of its size. I like various features on both of them, and I'm not sure which to get rid of! Suggestions and advice are appreciated. Any reason I should keep one over the other? Oops... Re-reading my original post, I realized that I totally mis-typed the model number of the unit I'm planning on getting... I want an MZ-E90 (the player only) because of size/battery life. So I'm going to get rid of one of the recorders. That means that I will only have one recorder, either the MZ-R50 or the MS-722. Given THAT comparison, any feedback is welcome. Thanks! - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: *sharp* MD-X5: Any good?
Aileen Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How much are you looking to spend? As far as MD minisystems go, I've mentioned on the list before that my personal favorite (by far) is the JVC FSMD9000. It lists for $770, but I've seen it for around $220 - $270. I'm thinking about spending 300-350 tops on the system... You said you'd seen it for 220-270? Where? :) Buy.com used to have it for $250 or so... Etown.com just had it on sale for $299.70 but they say they're sold out. You might be able to call them and see if you can still get it on sale. Hmmm... Mercata has it for $349.99: http://www.mercata.com/cgi-bin/mercata/mercata/v2/pages/details.jsp?OID=22 546partner=Dealtime AudioReview reviews (average 4.6/5): http://www.audioreview.com/reviews/Minisystem/product_5224.shtml You can also search google.com for "fsmd9000" and "fs-md9000" and get lots of results of online stores. Good luck! - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sony MD-X5: Any good?
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000 19:53:42 -0800, Aileen Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, i am going to be getting a new shelf system for christmas, and i was looking at the sony md-x5...does anybody have any praises or gripes about the system? i heard it in the store...the sound seems kind of weak, but i happen to like the built-in MD recorder/player. While I'm on that subject.. is it better to have a separate deck or to have an integrated system? All I do is copy cds to md, and i occasionally dump mp3s onto md (though I'm considering getting a portable to do the mp3-md). i already have a je-320 and i was considering just buying a shelf system with an optical digital out so that i could do transfers and such...but the MD-X5 is so much cheaper and seems like a good idea... =) Does anybody have any recommendations about this subject at all? :) Please let me know or point me to someplace that can help me out. Eileen: Do you mean the *Sharp* MD-X5? If so, it's an OK unit. We got one for $99 and it's definitely worth that. I don't know if I'd pay more than $150 or so for it. How much are you looking to spend? As far as MD minisystems go, I've mentioned on the list before that my personal favorite (by far) is the JVC FSMD9000. It lists for $770, but I've seen it for around $220 - $270. It looks very nice, has all the usual functionality,and is the best-sounding mini-system I've heard. http://www.jvc.com/subprod.jsp?modelId=MODL023005 - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MDLP- makes a good thing better!
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === Ed Heckman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Then I listened to all 4 recordings through the R900 using my Sony NC10 earbuds. (The CD was played through the R900 with the R900 paused in record mode.) I should note that it took very, very careful listening with my eyes closed and as little outside noise as possible for me to be able to hear the differences between the 4 versions. I would say that under normal listening conditions there would be no detectable differences between the recordings. Thanks for that, Ed. Although I'd be interested to hear the same comparison with some high quality, non-earbud headphones. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: disc quality was :Re: Lens Cleaners
On Tue, 5 Dec 2000 10:17:09 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dan Frakes wrote: I have heard nothing but good things about Hi-Space discs, from both retailers and reviewers. Do you have any evidence to your claim that they are inferior, and should not be used for "important" recordings? I've been examining some of my Hi-Space discs compared to some of my Sony and TDK discs, and I can't see any of the "patchy bits" you describe. Are you saying that we shouldn't use Hi-Space discs for "important" recordings because they are less expensive? Hi-Space would love you. theres a sales manager job going if interested... (dont think Id get the job after my last post) http://www.hi-space.com/eng/pages/general/jobs1.html I wasn't plugging them ;) I was only telling you my experiences and what I've heard about them. Your criticisms of Hi-Space just seemed to be out of line with everything else I've heard. I was asking for clarification. The only problems I have ever had with blanks are from Maxell and Hi-space. Several times Making a recording with a new disc freshly unwraped from the plastic only to find it wont play correctly. Also lots of UTOC errors. It was not my equipment as on the occasions where this did happen I tried a Sony MZR-30 a Sony S38 and a Sony MZR-90 to make sure, and I gave a disc to a friend with an MD build into a hi-fi and she got errors too. Just as a side note, if your MD somehow caused errors on a disc, especially to the TOC, that disc will then have problems in other units, as well. So that technically doesn't rule out your machine as being the cause. If other people were having those problems on their own equipment *before* your equipment every touched the discs, that lends support to your theory. The patchy bits. Ive seen when holding them up to strong light. TDK/Sony look fairly smooth and uniform wheres the Hi-space Ive had do not look uniform. Ever see stress marks/colours on plastic? those rainbow colours? there are lots more on the hi-space disks than there are on more expensive brands. I understand. I was simply saying that I've examined a number of my discs (Hi-Space, Sony, TDK, Maxell) and don't see any differences in the disc surfaces. I have noticed that the Maxell dics seem to be "cheaper" in construction, though. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: disc quality was :Re: Lens Cleaners
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I always hated the Hi-space disks, from even holding the disc up to the light you can see "patchy bits" as if parts of the disc were thicker than others. TDK my fav brand but they are still 15 quid for 5. Hi Space less than a pound each for an 80min blank. fine for every day use with recordings that are not important. I have heard nothing but good things about Hi-Space discs, from both retailers and reviewers. Do you have any evidence to your claim that they are inferior, and should not be used for "important" recordings? For example, minidisco.com says this about Hi-Space discs: Europe's top-of-the-line maker of digital recording media... Minidisco labs thoroughly tested these discs, and we love them. Some of the lowest error rates we've ever seen, and the disc flap housing uses a heavier embedded spring for durability. * Total compliance with every type of MiniDisc drive on the market ensured by perfect control of the pre-groove geometry of the disc during the mastering process. * Outstanding durability thanks to a protective lacquer developed by MPO. This lacquer offers excellent resistance to abrasion, a low friction coefficient and guarantees two million recordings without any measurable wear or increase in friction. * Operation under extreme conditions of use thanks to the composition, homogeneity and thickness of the magneto-optical layer. Even when exposed to the extreme temperatures or used in drives running on low-power batteries, Hi-SpaceTM MiniDiscs guarantee optimum sound quality. I've been examining some of my Hi-Space discs compared to some of my Sony and TDK discs, and I can't see any of the "patchy bits" you describe. Are you saying that we shouldn't use Hi-Space discs for "important" recordings because they are less expensive? - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Sony MZE33 on sale for $99
Just saw this today: 800.com is selling the BLACK Sony MZE33 player for just $99. I've never seen the black one before -- looks nice. http://www.800.com/prod.asp?p=3994 - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sharp vs. Sony ATRAC
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000 00:31:13 -0500, sherryl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you talking about "line-out" signals? Or headphone-out signals? Dan, You must have never owned a Sharp portable MD unit. There is only one output. The headphone and line out are combined into one and use special circuitry to determine the correct impedance. Larry, we own two ;) You're correct about the dual-purpose jack, but I was asking whether or not he was comparing headphone output or line output on the two units. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sharp vs. Sony ATRAC
James Jarvie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have been noticing for awhile that the Sharp is noticeably lacking in the highs (and, conversely the bass is too boomy). I always have to boost the hight frequencies on my amp (or head unit) when I use the MT-15. James: Are you talking about "line-out" signals? Or headphone-out signals? - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD for recording sound for film?
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === "Dave Hooper" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: when I began to notice that the MDs I'd recorded on my Sharp didn't actually sound very good at all. You know about MP3 encoding, right? It sounded like a 96kbps MP3 file, or perhaps a badly encoded 128kbps MP3 file (like you get with the "8HZ" encoder). I was kinda expecting MD to sound 'as good as' (note the apostrophes) CD, and I had already experienced MP3 and surmised that low bitrate MP3 files don't actually hold their own against CDs very well. When I discovered that the MDs recorded on the Sharp didn't sound much better than (substandard quality) MP3 files I began to investigate further. Like I already said. You have other problems then. There is simply no way that digital MDs off a Sharp unit will sound as bad as "substandard quality MP3" files. If they do, you have a problem somewhere in the recording process. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: md-l-digest V2 #806
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You'll get double the time back through saving on reboots, powering off and on, and reinstalling your OS. But how do you run all of the Windows programs that you have? Um, we don't have Windows programs? ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Where to sell MD portable?
Since I have a Sharp MS-722 that I'm very happy with, I'm going to get rid of my Sony MZR50 which doesn't really get much use. Where have people had the best luck selling MD? I know ebay, but are there better places, given the "popularity" (read: lack thereof) of MD in the U.S.? - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Speeding
Mike Burger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Where I "got that one from" was experience...I burned a couple of audio CDs (copying an audio CD in my CD-ROM drive to a CD-R in my burner) at 2x (maximum speed of my burner), and my Pioneer 6-disc changer in the next room could not play the CD. Any CD-ROM in the house could (and I have a number of systems to choose from in that regard), but no CD player. When I burned new copies of the same CDs at 1x, they worked fine in any CD *player* I own, as well as the various CD-ROM drives. That's simply because data drives have a higher tolerance for errors than audio drives. The speed you burn at is irrelevant -- if it were possible, you could burn at 100x and as long as the errors were minimal it would play on an audio CD player just fine. The above scenario means that your burner had too many errors at 2x but far fewer at 1x. CD's pressed by the standard CD manufacturing process are just that -- pressed. They have physical pits on the surface of the disk that create lighter or darker segments that reflect the laser pickup differently. On "burned" CDs, there are none of these surface variations. The burner simply... uh... "burns" the media so that it appears to be darker or lighter. This provides similar reflective properties, but it isn't as effective as pressed media. One reason audio players are so bad at error-correction is that they were all designed for production-grade audio CDs. Audio players' error tolerance is designed with the "normal" error rate of "pressed" CD assumed. When you put in a burned CD, which has far more errors, the audio player often has trouble. This is also a good way to test the error-correction of your various audio players ;) I suspect that this will be less of a problem in future audio players -- now that CD burners are more common, my guess is that audio player manufacturers are going to be improving the level of error correction on their players. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Hertz
On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 21:09:38 -0500, las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also, someone claimed that Hz in universal. Is it really??? Is it used in every country in the world? Yes, it is ;) Seriously. Hertz is an ISO standard, used everywhere. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sharp MD-SR50?
KVE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone own an SR50 (or MT50)? I am thinking of buying one, since I need a simple thin recorder with adjustable recording level (I have a Sony R30 and I have to puy in pause to adjust recording level). I don't care about remote either. Does anyone have anything good/bad to say about it? Also, how much does that recorder sell for in Amsterdam? What is a good place to buy electronics like that there? Thanx! I haven't seen that one, but I have used the 722, which has adjustable record level, and is available in the states for around $150 or so. It makes very nice recordings... - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Shrp boom box md
BTW, this isn't really a boom box... it's a shelf system. I was looking for a portable system which I why I had trouble finding it ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Broken URLs
"J. C. R. Davis" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://inserturlhere.com The angle brackets tell your email/web client where the URL starts and where it ends. On modern clients, this will allow readers to always use your URLs, even if they have hard breaks in them. I've had trouble getting this to work in Outlook Express. Has anyone else had success in OE? Are you using the Mac version of OE, or the PC version? If it's the Mac version, it will work fine, since Mac OE 5 is brand new. If it's the PC version, it may not work since Windows OE is actually a pretty bad email client. I don't think it's been updated in quite a while. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Broken URLs
Mike Burger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...if they've already gotten a broken URL, they probably won't be able to follow it without a little manual cut and paste. Unless the sender enclosed the URL in angle brackets as suggested: then it doesn't matter if there are 50 lines in between the broken segments of the URL. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Broken URLs
"Michael Burger" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not really...the people who are getting broken up URLs have their windows set smaller, and the line is wrapping. Usually, if they're using higher resolutions and bigger window sizes, or maximize the window in question, the link will come through just fine. For the most part, it has nothing to do with window size. Mail servers automatically "break" lines at pre-set lengths. Different servers can break at different lengths. If an un-bracketed URL has been broken, window width won't help. A bit of FYI that would help everyone if everyone would heed: if you're going to send URLs in email, the "official" standard (it's in an RFC) is to enclose the URL in angle brackets: http://inserturlhere.com The angle brackets tell your email/web client where the URL starts and where it ends. On modern clients, this will allow readers to always use your URLs, even if they have hard breaks in them. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Target advertising MD
At the risk of an on-topic post grin, I thought I'd mention that Target has made MD part of their Olympic advertising in the U.S. They've had an "electronics" TV commercial running throughout NBC's Olympic coverage that prominently features an MZR-90. Good to see a "mainstream" home store like Target featuring MD - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Possibly the BEST reason to read the Digest
Possibly the BEST reason to read the Digest... It let's you read ALL the messages of the day before you reply ;-) For example, I had a couple nice, long, well-reasoned replies to some of the posts made on this whole topic, trying to be fair and rational. But before I sent them I finished reading my wonderful digest, and after seeing some of the later messages, I realized that this whole topic was becoming rather hilarious in its ridiculousness. So I deleted the messages. Gosh, maybe some good things come out of the digest after all vbg - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: No more mailing list ! Keep it simple please...
"Peter Forest" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't want and need another mailing list only for coupons... Understood -- you already have one on your web site. Someone else thought you were saying you didn't want to use a mailing list besides MD-L, but you meant you already had one of your own on your web site and didn't need the one they had set up. I understood. Also, I don't think that MD user of this list will want to subscribe to another list... But according to Jim, filtering message is incredibly easy. In fact, I think Jim posted instructions for several email clients. I wouldn't worry about inconveniencing people. If you are worrying about that... oh, never mind ;-) I will do the advertisement like everyone told me to do it... With a short title and a brief message with the coupons or discounts informations... Actually, only two people suggested that way, and it was only one of several alternative that were proposed. Many more people have said not to do it at all. If you want to post your ads, that is entirely your right, but if you're truly trying to listen to what people are saying, the majority of those who have voiced an opinion on the list are against posting the advertisements at all (and yes, it is the majority -- I counted grin) Another thing you should consider is the type of impression you are giving potential customers -- based on the feedback on the list, you're alienating a large number of people who might have otherwise purchased from you, simply because of your large number of commercial posts and your apparent unwillingness to use your own mailing list, that you have already set up, to post them. I have suggested a fair proposal, that would help everyone and inconvenience no one, several times. What is it that you don't like about that idea? (Honest question). - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Digest mode vrs individual messages.
I'm sending a couple "technical" responses, since the topical responses seem to be irrelevant: one digest is about the same as 30 individual emails Not even close. Especially with short messages, thirty individual messages can be 20-25 times bigger in terms of message size than a single digest. Thirty messages take substantial more time to download, regardless of message size, than a single digest. And for those who pay their ISP per message (common in non-U.S. countries), thirty individual messages costs 30x more. - I sometimes check my mail with Pine when I'm at school, I don't want to have the messages I really care about (read: not-MD related) to be flooded in the MD messages. (set up filters? Eudora (at home) won't fetch the messages filtered by Pine in the Pine MD folder, I just checked that) You probably have it set up incorrectly. Check the previous post I made regarding how to do it with Eudora. *SIGH* He doesn't have it set up incorrectly. Pine is a terminal-based email program, but one that is estimated to be used by more people in the world than Eudora, since most academic and research institutions still allow every user to check their email using Pine. When you view messages in Pine, and file messages in Pine, they stay on the server -- they are not downloaded to a local machine. When you *file* messages in Pine to a Pine-based folder, they cannot be downloaded by ANY email client, because they are no longer in the POP queue. This is not a problem with Pine -- it is a *feature* designed to allow people to use Pine filters to pre-sort mail so that only certain messages are downloaded by their POP client. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Ok I got another one, but again, MOVE FAST it won't las
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === brd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree. By now we all know where his site is, if we're looking for deals, we'll go there. I've been thinking of unsubscribing because of this and the controversy that's ensued. BTW, I know I'm a new guy and mostly just lurk, so maybe I don't contribute and my opinion doesn't matter to some of you. So before you write me back and go "Good, maybe you should just leave," I already realize that, so no need to waste more bandwidth. :) Brian, not at all. This list doesn't exist for "long-time" readers. It exists for everyone (some would say especially new people). - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Spam Argument (Sorry!)
"Fendlewood Walker" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And yes I am just adding to the noise. Let's see how much more flogging the dead horse can withstand. Are you ready for some Hotmail spam? Prepare yourselves. LOL! That was the best one of the day ;-) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: coupons
"J. Coon" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are only a few people that really need to get it in digest mode. There are a lot of advantages to receiving it in individual messages. Most obvious is you can delete individual posts. You can sort so all the topics on one thread are together, You can set up folders and sort messages into the folders automatically. If you want to keep messages on a certain thread, you can save them and delete non relevent messages. Hell, I am on another couple of lists that really make this one look like a pikerI get on the average 75 to 80 emails a day on each of them, and only 5 to 20 on this one. There wouild be no way to be able to handle that volume of email if I got them in digest mode. We have the technology, we should use it, not be tied to horse and buggys in the days of jet airplanes. Jim, you're simply trying to shove your point of view on everyone else. Those of us on digest are not stupid. It has *nothing* to do with "technology." We know the "advantages" and "disadvantages" of non-digest mode. We also know the "advantages" and "disadvantages" for digest mode. We've made a conscious decision, based our our individual preferences and needs, to subscribe to digest. For you to keep implying that we're somehow Luddites who are ignorant is amusing to me (and probably insulting to some people). I *run* mailing lists -- I think I know how to deal with them. The solution to a list-wide problem is not to force others to comply with your personal preferences. For most people, digest mode doesn't solve anything and creates a lot of problems. You cannot make such a blanket statement. That's your opinion, nothing more. And judging by the fact that most mailing lists have large proportions of digest subscribers, an opinion not shared by most people. IMHO, people that don't like it can either skip over it and not read it, or they can just delete it, or they can set up a filter and delete it. Not if they subscribe to the digest (see above). It certainly doesn't cause a big burden to see the title of a message and then delete it. It does if you receive the digest (see above). The thing that is really unfortunate here is that the solution is easy, clear, and has been presented many times. Peter already has a "deals" mailing list. People who want his deals should subscribe to it. He should put a nice note in his sig like "Subscribe to my list to get the best deals on MD blanks!" and include the URL. The results? 1) Those who don't want to see the advertisements don't have to see them 2) Those who want them can see them (and maybe more if Peter wants to!) 3) Those who are new to the list are sure to see the instructions for subscribing on a regular basis. 4) It has absolutely no adverse effects on anyone. Simple. What's the problem? The only one I've seen is... That's right. I don't want to subscribe to another mailing list to be able to get MD related information. It should be posted right here on the MD list. Jim, you're not being fair. For all your advocacy of "technology" and filters, you're being very resistant to a fair solution that you (and you especially) can easily take advantage of. Use your filters to transfer Peter's "deal" list messages to your MD-L folder. You'll never know the difference. You're happy, those who don't want to see them are happy. All is well in the world ;) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: CD to MD and $10 coupons...
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You don't see any problem with buying a CD, making a copy of it, and then reselling it? Besides being a violation of copyright and license agreement, you don't find *anything* ethically wrong with that? I'm sure Jim asks your forgiveness Reverend Frakes I was asking a valid question -- I wasn't trying to get into an exchange of snide remarks. The process above is basically stealing a musical product. If everyone did it, the number of CDs that were bought would plummet, and we'd eventually have few bands left. If you don't like the "ethics" question, then what about the practical questions? - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: CD to MD and $10 coupons...
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === "Peter Forest" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I used to have over 300 CDs last years... It was very annoying for me to switch from MD to CD all the time so I decided to copy all my CD on MD... It was a very long and hard job to do but it was also a big clean up since I don't like all the songs on each CD ! I did 100 MD with my 300 CDs. Half of these CDs were from Columbia and BMG music and the others from different stores... I took all those CDs, and bring them to a used music store and they gave me from $3 to $5 each CDs. All the others CDs, I use to sell them on Ebay, Yahoo and another CD service on internet. I still have 30 CDs here but at least I made a lot of money with those CDs and I have all my favorites songs on MDs too !!! Of course, what you have done is illegal (not to mention unethical, IMHO). Once you sell your CDs, you lose the right to have a copy of the content. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Ok I got another one, A filtering proposal
Greg Conquest [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have an idea that may keep us all happy. If Peter and any other
merchants here could agree on some words to include in the subject
indicating sales material, then those of us who aren't interested can
filter out the ads, not Peter.
Just a preliminary suggestion, but how about:
Subject: MDsales {insert more text here, of course}
Doesn't work because the majority of subscribers read the digest version
of the list, which can't filter individual messages.
-
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Ok I got another one, but again, MOVE FAST it won't las
Just a few comments... las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As someone else suggested, set up a separate list of your own for those that _want_ to recieve your coupon mails and leave the MD-L for actual MD discussion. It will never happen. This is a non censored list (at least that's what Rick W. recent told me). If you see Peter's name when you receive your e mail, just press the delete button. Also, isn't there a way to filter out e mail addresses you don't want to receive on many browses? But that doesn't help those of us on digest mode (probably a majority of the overall subscribers), whose digests consist of a huge number of "coupon" posts and advertisements. Rick doesn't want to "ban" Peter's posts, and for those looking for deals, I agree with Rick that they are useful. HOWEVER, Simon's idea is a good one. Peter should set up his own "deals" list for those who want his commercial postings. This isn't really the best forum for that, IMHO. There must be several posts a month about something for sale in the UK or Aust. True, but Peter's posts are often several each *day*. It's nothing against Peter, or "deals." It's the quantity. I noticed that it was only one person who complained. Simon isn't the only one bothered, and there are people from the U.S. bothered as well. Rick has heard other complaints about this issue. His dilemma is how to let people get info on "deals" but not let the list get clogged with commercial junk -- not an easy thing to resolve. I think Simon's idea was a good one. Either Peter or Rick should set up a "deals" list. I don't think Peter's rationale that "people don't want to get info from different sources" flies -- for those who want to be on the deals list, it's the same amount of email. For those that don't, they don't have to be bombarded by the latest "hurry!" coupon every day (or every few hours, it seems ;-)). I have never heard any one from the US complain about all of the posts from other countries. Until all of the countries in the free world realize that we now live in a Global economy, we are going to be stuck with things like this happening. It has nothing to do with country of origin for me. It has to do with the ratio of commercial/non-commercial posts increasing dramatically since Peter starting posting. There are times I've simply deleted the digest without reading it because I can see from the message summary that it's mostly ads or talk about ads. I'm sure other people do this, as well. When that starts happening and more people stop reading the list digest, the quality of the list goes *way* down. So it's not just to appease people who are complaining -- it's to keep the quality of the list high. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: CD to MD and $10 coupons...
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === "J. Coon" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I did 100 MD with my 300 CDs. Half of these CDs were from Columbia and BMG music and the others from different stores... I took all those CDs, and bring them to a used music store and they gave me from $3 to $5 each CDs. All the others CDs, I use to sell them on Ebay, Yahoo and another CD service on internet. I still have 30 CDs here but at least I made a lot of money with those CDs and I have all my favorites songs on MDs too !!! Of course, what you have done is illegal (not to mention unethical, IMHO). Once you sell your CDs, you lose the right to have a copy of the content. IF he isn't selling the copies and keep them for his own personal use, I don't see any problem with it. You don't see any problem with buying a CD, making a copy of it, and then reselling it? Besides being a violation of copyright and license agreement, you don't find *anything* ethically wrong with that? - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Ok I got another one, A filtering proposal
"J. Coon" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Doesn't work because the majority of subscribers read the digest version of the list, which can't filter individual messages. I am not sure where you get those statistics. Are they really accurate? I'd bet money on it. I'm a mailing list administrator who had managed fifty or sixty mailing lists, some with over 20,000 members, and on lists like this, the majority of subscribers read the digest mode. Netscape, Outlook Express, Www.yahoo.com and a host of other mail programs let you set up folders and filter mail into them so your MD mail doesn't get confused with your regular InBox Yes, but for digests, that means that your single digest message is filtered into a different folder. That doesn't address the problem at hand. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: The BEST solution to Peter's coupons...
Let's avoid the "different title" proposal -- it doesn't help digest users. Let's think about this rationally and figure out a way to please everyone. "Peter Forest" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can't argue with you about the large quantity of advertisement I sent in the past... Now, I have suggested some solutions, and I think that if I only put a link on my signature it will be good too and I will only write message to help or to answer to another message... Question: in the past the vast majority of your messages have not been "content" messages (not to imply that deals are content-less -- just that most of your messages have been about coupons). Does this mean that you'll be "responding" to a lot more messages now to make sure your signature gets on the list? grin I'm not trying to give you a hard time. Just realize that under that proposal, every time you post, someone reading the list is going to be questioning whether you wrote the message to contribute to the discussion, or just to get your signature on the list. Whether that way of thinking is wrong or stupid or whatever doesn't really matter. I don't think you want people questioning your motives, and none of us want that kind of constant tension on the list. Your "deals" mailing list is clearly the best solution. It lets those who want to receive deals get them, and those who don't want them to not see them. If people are worried about how people can find out about your list, your signature could include a statement like "Sign up for the Kheops super-duper-MD-coupons List" or the like, with a link to your web site. That way anyone who is on the list for a few days or more will see at least one post from you, and can clearly see how to sign up for your list. Maybe Rick will even agree to put instructions on how to subscribe to your list on the MD-L page. That is a very simple, and comprehensive solution. I can see no rational reason why anyone should have a problem with it. And it would hopefully put this issue to rest. I think that it's better to post advertisement about MD than talk about subject with no interest with MD, what do you think ??? I think that's a philosophical issue. As I mentioned in an earlier message, I manage lots of mailing lists. "Commercial" messages are really a sore point for many people, who think that mailing lists are simply not a place for them. Again, no value judgements here -- I'm just pointing out one of the major issues on mailing lists. "Off-topic" messages often get reactions after they get out of hand, but commercial message are *guaranteed* to ruffle many feathers. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Great deal on a MD mini-system
Mercata.com is still having their 20%-off discount for new users. They currently have the JVC FSMD9000 for $324.56, or about $260 after discount. We bought one of these when they were on sale at buy.com, and it's well worth $260. It's a beautiful system, and it's by far the best-sounding MD system I've heard. Much, much better looking and sounding that the big, grey Sharp and Sony MD mini-systems. Highly recommended. http://www.mercata.com/cgi-bin/mercata/mercata/v2/pages/details.jsp?BV_Ses sionID=195574629.968777321BV_EngineID=ialikjfljhkbemfcfkmcgeckg.0OID=2254 6 - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MD comes through
"J. Coon" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Damn Sony and there stupid refusal to get rid of that damnable END SEARCH button. Whoever disigned the END SEARCH button should be strung up by his petubies. After three years on using Sony R30 it still bites. Jim, did you see the news item on http://www.minidisc.org/ today? Sony's new MZ-R900 allows you to turn end search OFF!!! - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Napster article
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought that we live in a democracy? If the majority of population want Napster to exist, shouldn't that be the case? Sounds more like mob rule than democracy to me ;-) After all, if the majority of the population thinks you should give them your savings account, should you? Sorry, couldn't resist g - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Napster article
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To me music is something you do because you have a passion for it. If people are willing to pay you money to make music that's fine. But the minute it is no longer about the music, but about the money instead, you are no longer an artist and your passion has turned to lust. Larry, I completely agree with most of what you wrote about valuable professions not being paid what they're actually worth. However, the problem with the above statement is that if we don't pay artists, there will be no art. You have to pay the rent, and no matter how much people love to write, sing, play, paint, sculpt, etc., if they can't do it while putting a roof over their head, they won't do it. Sure, there will be a few homeless artists who do it for the love of the art, but I'll sure miss the variety of music... [I won't even try to emulate Larry's attempt to keep it on-topic grin] - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: cheaper optical cables
"Chris Eddington" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I couldn't find them in Serramonte Target either. I will check the Saratoga Target this weekend. Chris: That's actually the one I was at -- but I figured since this is an international list no one would know what I was talking about if I said "Serramonte" ;-) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: cheaper optical cables
A few weeks ago someone mentioned that they saw convertible TosLink/Miniplug digital cables at Target. I offered to pick a few up the next time I went to Target and a couple people responded that they would like one. The bad news is that I went to the "super" Target in San Francisco today and the cables were nowhere to be seen. Sorry to disappoint. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: headphones and airplanes
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dan, someone suggested a site with instructions to make your own. At $125.00, unless you have money coming out of your butt (which the originator of this thread may have since he takes an MD and DVD player with him!!) don't you think that the price to value ratio is too high? Larry That depends, Larry g I have friends who claim that any CD player over $100 has a price/value ratio that is too high. I also have friends who would argue until they're blue in the face that their $5,000 transport has a great price/value ratio. It depends on what's important to you, I guess. The Headroom amps have both an amp and their proprietary soundfield processor which, IMHO, really does make good headphones sound more like speakers and less like headphones. Plus they are designed from the ground up to be great headphone amps. I've never made one of those "do-it-yourself" amps on Headwize. I don't know how good they are compared to Headroom's amps. However, keep in mind that you have to buy the parts, you have to have the right tools, and you have to have the time to build them. Depending on the tools and parts you have, and how much your time is worth, $125 might be a better deal even if the amps are comparable in quality... - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: headphones and airplanes
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that you many also be able to acquire an external headphone amp. But I'm not sure how portable they are. Probably the best person to check with about that would be Len Moskowitz at Core Sound. When it comes to portable headphone amps, Headroom is THE name: http://www.headroom.com/ They sell their ultra-portable (i.e. it runs on two AA batteries) model for $100 or $125, if I remember correctly. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Speakers
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 05:55:40 -0400, las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Buy the very best speakers you can afford. Even if it means buying a slightly less expensive receiver or amps. Maybe giving up some of the bells and whistles. Then NEVER buy speakers without a 100% no questions asked return policy. Speakers will sound different every where they are placed. Also, consider the room. You may need to add or subtract some sound absorbing objects. Larry PS if none of this makes sense, It's 5:30 AM and I still haven't gone to sleep yet!! It makes very good sense, Larry, and it's very good advice ;-) On a very similar note, for portable music I think that all this discussion of "which version of ATRAC sounds better" should be secondary to making sure you buy the best headphones you can afford. The headphones that come with *any* (and I have yet to find an exception) portable music device are simply horrible. If you can get a portable with an older version of ATRAC for $100 less than a newer unit, you'd be better served to buy it instead of the newer unit and spend the $100 on some really good headphones... - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: CD quality compared to MD quality
"Les" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now I am confused cause I do not remember who wrote what anymore, LOL I'm sure you're not the only one g I never said ATRAC degraded anything people can hear You never said that, but it's true (at least for some people). I will never believe this until someone proves it and more than a few have tried, come on over to Oak Harbor WA and try I'll offer 100.00 to anyone who can come tell me the difference in my studio; but if you loose we go to the Outback (A HIGH END restuarant, LOL) on your bill. If I lived a little closer, Larry ;-) Most serious audio people would not consider Onkyo or HK to be "high end" -- there is little difference in audio quality between a good JVC CD player and a good HK CD player. Anyone who knows audio equipment or who has ever sold audio equipment knows better than this. While not the highest end Onkyo HK are high end consumer versions whereas JVC is NOT.. But you are right, there is little difference in the sound quality which is what I tried to explain all along. SO little and subtle you can only notice it at very low volume. I would disagree, Larry, about HK vs. Onkyo vs. JVC, and I would consider myself someone who "knows audio" pretty well. Harmon-Kardon and Onkyo are *marketed* as "high-end consumer" but in reality (as you yourself wrote) they don't really sound any better than JVC. In fact, if I recall correctly, neither Onkyo nor HK ever had a CD player listed in Stereophile's recommended components, while JVC has had at least two -- one of their consumer CD players was listed as a Class C transport for several years. While some people don't give Stereophile much credence (I personally admit that I think a lot of their "tweaks" are hokey and some of their "subtle differences" are there because they want them to be there), I think that more than any of the other audio magazines, Stereophile at least does a good job of differentiating between what does and doesn't reproduce good sound. What do you consider high end by the way?? I think for CD players you have to at least get up to NAD, Adcom and the like before you can really say you're approaching "high-end." That said, there are CD players from "high-end" manufacturers that aren't that good, and CD players from "consumer" companies (like the JVC unit mentioned above) that are. And as I've said before, many people don't have "high end" components, and are perfectly happy with them -- I know you and I agree here, Larry, but I just want to reiterate that there is nothing that says you have to have "high-end" stuff to enjoy your music. That's where I disagree. While the average consumer doesn't care, you don't have to spend obscene amounts of money just to get a "high-end" system that can reveal the differences. I can agree on most of what you are saying but Again, I am very curious what you consider "high end"; if JVC decks are equal to Onkyo then are radio shack speakers in the same group as Klipsch?? Well, not anywhere near usually, but Radio Shack distributes an Optimus-branded speaker made by Linnaeus that is probably in that range. The rest of Radio Shack's stuff is pretty poor ;-) Along those lines, for years, many people in audio considered the Optimus 3400 to be the best portable CD player on the market, but who would have guessed. Kind of what I mentioned above -- even the bad companies get it right on occasion g How about +/- .0001 db; think you can hear that difference?? Or how about 5hz, think you can hear that? Have you ever had a hearing test? If equipment can't outperform the human ear then how would we ever measure human hearing? We do it every 3 months in the aviation world. This statement is simply not true but it does "sound" good, LOL. and, similarly, "J. Coon" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am an engineer, and I think that if we can hear something, there has to be a way to measure it. THis is science , not hokus pokus. If you're talking about measuring test tones, dB, frequency response, you (and Jim) are entirely correct. However, my point was that musical reproduction isn't about simply reproducing test tones, certain sound levels, and the "best" flat frequency response. If it was, we would have had perfect audio reproduction years and years ago. While equipment can measure those things, it can't tell you whether or not a certain stereo system sounds more (or less) like the original performance. In terms of hearing music and the spacial, directional, and, some argue, emotional cues within it, the human ear is much more sensitive than any equipment. Two speakers that are measured by equipment to have the exact same specifications can sound remarkably different to human ears, even in controlled, double-blind testing. That's why audio magazines don't just publish measurements, and why we don't buy stereos by spec sheets. I actually think we're on the same page here, Larry, no? And finally,
Re: MD: CD quality compared to MD quality
las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If your speaking about me, Larry Sherry, [and] I would disagree, Larry, Wow!! again, this isn't my statement!!! I think that you may have take a thread from a previous e mail and confused it with me!!! My apologies to Larry and Les for mixing up their posts. I saw "las" and "les" and got confused g that IS Larry!! Well, at least I got one attribution right ;-) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: CD quality compared to MD quality
On 8/26/00 7:05 PM, Les wrote: Actually I wrote most of what you attribute to Larry, LOL I just realized that from reading Larry's comments in the last digest ;-) You are correct about most and our disagreements are so little I'm giving up on principle! I think we had a very good discussion. Thanks to everyone for being civil -- not that you wouldn't be, but we've all seen some of the other "discussions!" - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: CD quality compared to MD quality
On 8/26/00 9:20 PM, Les wrote: How RIGHT you are on this one DAN! It was FUN, and my partner and I get into some real good ones sometimes too, LOL BTW , we both agree yellow MDs are better than blue too, right?? But I think the clear ones give the clearest sound, LOL.. Yeah, I don't like the blue ones very much -- they just add too much, er, color to my music g - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: CD quality compared to MD quality
"J. Coon" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have one customer that pays double the price to get his CDRs colored red because he KNOWS they sound better Wow, he sure is a fool. Everyone knows you need to use the GREEN MARKER. G LOL... good one. And don't forget to litter your listening room with those little black discs ;-) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: CD quality compared to MD quality
"Les" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do not believe Mike is confused but sounds like someone is I am assuming you are referring to me ;-) ...and the last direct reply to my explanation "rested my case" for me whether you knew it or not, LOL How so? I never said ATRAC degraded anything people can hear You never said that, but it's true (at least for some people). Next time you are in a hi fi shop ask for a demo and compare the same cd on a high end Onkyo or HK unit with high end speakers... Most serious audio people would not consider Onkyo or HK to be "high end" -- there is little difference in audio quality between a good JVC CD player and a good HK CD player. The guys jumping on the volume issue and claiming they never listen to theirs "that loud..." By the way, that wouldn't be me... Consumer reports and others who do honest evaluations will claim there is zero sound difference in CD players. I believed this for a long time but now realize their tests were flawed because they were listening to average speakers which are not capable of producing the differences. Agreed. Consumer Reports is great for some things. But when it comes to "high-end" audio, they aren't very useful. They are good for people on very limited budgets trying to buy the "most reliable" unit out of a few inexpensive units that are all of pretty much equal quality. In any case, nothing should ever be noticed on an average system Completely true, and that's what I've been saying from the beginning ;-) ...and only those of us willing to spend the bucks on speakers alone that most would flinch at for an entire home theater including a large screen tv would (or should) even care about such minute differences. That's where I disagree. While the average consumer doesn't care, you don't have to spend obscene amounts of money just to get a "high-end" system that can reveal the differences. Anyone who thinks they can hear a difference ...or who actually can... would not believe anything other than what they hear anyway. No, the issue isn't that people *think* they can hear a difference. The issue is that there *is* an empirical difference, and some people with some systems *can* hear the difference. If you can't, more power to you -- you enjoy the sound more than those people ;-) ...never mind that very expensive test equipment can't measure a lot of what we "think" we hear Even the most expensive test equipment doesn't measure subtle differences well. The human ear is more sensitive than the most expensive "equipment" in the world. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: CD quality compared to MD quality
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:39:46 -0700, "Les" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Guess what, any music in the hands of a consumer is in the end converted to analog since standard speakers can not convert digital information. This means each piece in the system used to reproduce sound has an effect and you have almost proved my point. You are asking a standard JVC deck to compete with your NAD. It aint gonna happen. Try hooking up a JVC CD player in your system and compare that to your NAD.. While HDCD units themselves should not make a difference on non HDCD CD they usually do for all the same reasons; the internal circuits are usually far superior on these decks than a standard one. Not necessarily true. JVC has a reputation for having some of the best "consumer-grade" CD and MD players on the market. In fact, for years JVC was the only mass-market company to have one of their players listed in Stereophile's "Recommended Components." My NAD CD player isn't top-of-the-line by any means. Is there a difference in quality? Sure. Is it the *real* reason I can hear differences? Not solely, and possibly not at all. I do have a receiver that has its own D/A converter. Maybe sometime I'll plug my MD player and my CD player into that, then run that line to my "main" stereo, just so that both will be using the same D/A converter. But back to the real topic of this discussion, as I mentioned in my initial message, the comparison I outlined was just *one* example of situations where I can tell the difference between CD and MD. It's not the only one. My CD portable sounds better than my MD portable (even though the MD portable has a better headphone amp). Even on our JVC 9000 mini-system with PSB speakers (which uses the *same* D/A converter for CD and MD), I can tell the difference. I was simply trying to provide one example that would, to some extent, be a bit more methodologically sound The single largest difference folks are going to hear from MD to the next is the deck that was used to record it. This is not necessarily the ONLY difference but it is the largest difference. So, you can also try someone else's MD recorded on at least an ES machine to listen to the difference. As I've said, I disagree. Simply because of the compression involved, the CD and MD are going to be different. And as I've already mentioned, as long as there *is* a difference, there are going to be some people who can hear it. But (also as I've said before), this is really a silly argument, because we all agree that the sound quality is excellent ;-) - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
