MD: Sony's ATRAC has had its day
Hi there guys. Just found this in my travels... sounds interesting. - Sony's ATRAC has had its day Exclusive technical report By Donald B Levie Staff Writer, CNET News.com April 1, 2000, 2:00 a.m. UT ATRAC (an acronym derived from "acoustic transformation adaptation coding"), the audio compression technology which Sony developed for use in its popular Sony Dynamic Digital Sound (SDDS) multichannel theater sound format, an audio option available on recent blockbuster successes from The Matrix to American Beauty, and also used in the struggling consumer MiniDisc music format, has been replaced by two new technologies to be announced by Sony in press conferences in Tokyo this month. The encodings called MSYDE (pronounced "em-side"), an acronym arising from "multidimensional synergistic decoder/encoder", and BSYDE (pronounced "bee-side"), arising from "binaural synergistic decoder/encoder", will be largely invisible to consumers, who will know them instead by the trademark brands SMDS and Sony Multidimensional Digital Sound. SMDS is intended to be a successor to SDDS. SMDS will be the fourth major sound format to appear on DVD Video, and it hoped to compete with the languishing DTS (Digital Theater Systems) format as the premium surround format for DVD enthusiasts. SMDS DVD is to be supported in all future players from Sony, Philips, Toshiba and Pioneer. Matsushita is expected to follow shortly. Decoders are presently limited to offerings from Sony, but licenses have been granted to seven companies in Japan alone, with many more license holders internationally. Sony will use the companion BSYDE technology in its forthcoming revamp of the MiniDisc line, which will update the nearly decade old technology to take advantage of the new densities and variable data transfer bitrates possible in DVD-like media. Sony seem to be hoping the replacement, codenamed MDV-A, will leverage loyalty of MiniDisc consumers while and at the same time grab market share which would otherwise belong to the highly anticipated ultra-hifi DVD Audio format. It is expected that even consumer level MDV-A devices will be able to modify bitrates and sampling frequency on the fly, trading off maximum possible bandwidth utilization and audio quality as needed, giving MDV-A users flexibilities previously only afforded to those using PCs to encode formats like MP3. The advantages of the new formats over their predecessor, ATRAC, are not well known, and Sony are keeping tight-lipped in the lead up to their formal announcement. However, insiders suggest that Sony is trying to preempt the next revolution in surround sound, by creating a truly three dimensional sound field with a high level of directionality and offering a capacity for vertical panning. Verical panning is not yet possible in present surround schemes, including Dolby Digital and DTS. Initial decoders, however, will be limited to rendering MSYDE for the 5.1 and 6.1 channel setups common in most theaters. It is also expected that, given the synergies between Sony's hardware and content divisions, BSYDE and MSYDE will facilitate high-level anti-piracy technologies beyond anything yet realised. Expected are military-grade encryption schemes, embedded copyright information and inaudible watermarks that survive conversion into analogue form, allowing copies made from protected media to be traced. Copyright 2000 CNET Inc. http://cnet.com/news/0-1003-201-1659726-0.html -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: Image is nothing. Sound is everything. Obey your ears. [OT]
At 07:59 PM 12/17/99 -0500, you wrote:
>So what? It still sucks big-time. I've never seen a DVD player for a PC
>have problems with playing audio CD-R's - so I obviously never thought to
>check that particular factoid about my Sony DVD player before buying it.
>And I mean, really, who gives a crap if it requires engineering effort -
>it's not like it hasn't been done before. It's not exactly rocket science
>('specially for someone like Sony). I personally think it's because Sony
>thinks CD-R's are all recorded by people pirating tunez, which is not the
>case here - i just made some mix CD-R's from my CD's and now they're
>basically useless, unless I play them in my 'puter. sheesh how dumb
You bought the thing. Before I forked over my cash, I made sure to check
that my DVD player had a dual pickup before I bought it. Since I have been
interested in DVD since it was announced, I was well versed in the three
major compatibility problems of the format, and managed to purchase a unit
which worked around all of them. (The three problems being macrovision
(cannot route through a VCR), region coding (cannot play imported DVDs) and
CD-R invisibility.)
--
Archer
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/
End.
-
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Image is nothing. Sound is everything. Obey your ears.
At 05:40 PM 12/16/99 -0500, MS wrote: >I think it's ridiculous that the Sony consumer decks that sell for $350-400 >US (like the Sony MXD-D3) don't have digital output. I also bought a Sony >DVD deck that would not play CDR audio discs (they are deliberately designed >so that they will not play them). Yeah right. You do know that it requires extra engineering to allow a DVD deck to read CD-Rs? They are invisible to the typical DVD wavelength laser. Now as much as I appreciate equipment reviews, it seems to me that a lot of you people are biased beyond belief. Branding is all about image. Make a dud product, you tarnish your brands image. Make an outstanding product, and build it. With all the OEMing and shared technology going around today, I'd say that the brand of your equipment purchase should be the least of your worries. Buy on the basis of research conducted with genuine criteria in mind, and don't believe the hype. I rarely buy two pieces of equipment of the same brand. It's only in audio equipment I have stuck with Sony- though not due to any misconceived concept of better products or reliability, but because I know a good Sony-only store, and it has always serviced my audio needs well- two Discmans, a radio-cassette Walkman, a 75WRMS Midi system and most recently a MZ-R55 and 75% of my blank Minidisc collection. Never a problem, always happy. For video decks, I have chosen JVC twice. I have a Philips television. A Canon printer. A Panasonic camcorder. A Pioneer DVD player. All chosen based on criteria, and not brand loyalty. And I have never had any of them serviced. My first VCR and TV are four years old, the printer is seven, and some of my oldest Sony stuff is five years old. Now as much as I recommend Sony, I certainly wouldn't denigrate Sharp (after all, I just bought someone a Sharp micro system as a Chrismas present). If price is your prime criteria, then yes, Sony will almost always fall behind. I advised my flatmate not to get a Sony VCR for this reason. Sony charge a premium for their brand image, which is not something I agree with. But they're equipment is good, so if price isn't that important to you, the equipment best meets your criteria, and you know a good Sony dealer nearby, then why not? Heck, you might be sponsoring the next whizz-bang technology- I'm sure nobody here would question Sony's pioneering lead in R&D. :-) -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: OT DVD Recordable
At 10:39 PM 12/2/99 -0500, you wrote: > >-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >Hash: SHA1 > >* Kade Hansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 02 Dec 1999 >| Isn't that an oxymoron? Isn't "impossibility" a synonym. > >More like, "so unlikely as not to be worth considering at this time," which >does not mean "impossible". But that ain't what you said. You said "non-existant possibility" => "absence of possibility". "Unlikely" means "very little possibility", not "absence of possibility". >| At any rate, I disagree. > >Disagree all you want, but nobody has said anything about reducing the DVD >form factor. So until a big name like Pioneer says otherwise, I would not >hold my breath were I you. There is a significant difference between improbable and impossible. It is possible to make 8cm DVDs, and it is possible to have players which play them (indeed, many already could). Heard of DVD-1 to DVD-4? Theoretical maybe, but certainly practically possible. I have no doubt that 8cm DVDs will be made (if they haven't already). I do have a doubt they will be anything more than a novelty. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: OT DVD Recordable
At 01:44 PM 12/2/99 -0500, SSR wrote: >* Mark Derricutt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 02 Dec 1999 >| What about MD sized DVD discs, I remember seeing 3" cds that held like >| 15mins of audio (some singles came out on this), DVD at that size should >| be able to hold at least 640mb, cd quality it "could" be done. > >Assuming anyone actually bothers with a "DVD-Single" form factor, which at >this time appears to be a nonexistant possiblity. Isn't that an oxymoron? Isn't "impossibility" a synonym. At any rate, I disagree. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sony MD discam (OT)
At 09:59 AM 11/30/99 +0100, RS wrote: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Funnily enough, just as audio MDs are sawn-off CD-RWs, MD-Data2 discs are >> sawn of DVD-RWs. > >Ahh > >Than I must have been wrong I always thoughed MD used MO technology and >that CD-RW used some sort of other technology that doesn't require a >magnetic field during writing. Smart ass... Tosser.. Look Ralph, it was a throw away line, but if you insist, CD-RW is, from what I have read, a magneto-optical format from the Orange Book (CD) standard: Orange Book Standard - Announced in 1990 to address the new recordable optical media and provide specifications for incremental writes. - Divided into 2 parts, Compact Disc-Magneto Optical (CD-MO) and - Compact Disc-Write Once (CD-WO) - Covers Multi-session discs, such as the Kodak Photo CD. Now, because I don't use rewritable CD media, and have no practical experience with CD-RW, I have always assumed that CD-MO was CD-RW. Please tell me if I am wrong, but I do ask that you adopt a much less condescending and patronising tone in future. All the documentation I have read on MiniDisc media seems to indicate that it is heavily based on the CD standards. After all, why reinvent the wheel. Hence my statement that MD1 is sawn-off (i.e. a smaller) CD-RW (meaning CD-MO from Orange Book). >Seriously, you can't compare MDs with CD-RWs since the underlying technology >is completly different. If you say so, Ralph. I certainly agree there is more than one way to implement a rewritable CD. But I had always assumed CD-RW was magneto-optical. >MD-Data2 is a 'high-density' MD-Data disc. It's an >evolution. DVD is however a evolution of CD (make CD double-sided, double >layered and increase the density). Oh, and MDData2 just happened along coincidentally at the same time as we figured out how to pack more onto an optical disc. To say the two are not related is farce. I'd be willing to bet that the MD2 specs bear striking resemblance to DVD specs, just as the MD1 specs bear striking resemblance to Orange Book (CD) specs. >I suppose that DVD-RAM is based on the same principles as CD-RW. No, clearly not. Every single format is completely different and constructed in a vacuum from scratch. I bow to your superior intellect, Mr Smeets. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sony MD discam (OT)
At 07:11 AM 11/30/99 +, you wrote: > >On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Ralph Smeets wrote: > >> MD-Data2 or as I call it, MDVideo, will be an alternative to the bulky DVD based >> camcorders. It's difficult to say if it is going to be a succes. > >You mention DVD camcorders, do you have any URLs for these? And can the >movies you record be played back in standard DVD players? They don't exist yet. Heck, the first consumer DVD recorder has only just appeared. And Graham, I should tell you that 8cm DVDs (DVD-2, DVD-4) are already in the specs. The only thing we are waiting for are portable devices that can record them. You shouldn't even need an adaptor in most units, although there may be problems with reflectivity and also the data format. At the moment, there are many proposed recordable DVD video formats, and most of them are incompatible with the current playback standard. (Much like CD-RW.) Funnily enough, just as audio MDs are sawn-off CD-RWs, MD-Data2 discs are sawn of DVD-RWs. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MDM-X4 home studio
At 07:30 AM 11/28/99 EST, BH wrote: >I have a technical problem with my Sony Minidisc MDM-X4 home studio. At >first I thought it was a disc defect, but now it has happened with two >different discs. The failure mode is as follows- when I execute a command >(in the most recent case- when I try to delete a song), the "undo" light >blinks green and "delete (song number)-OK" blinks continuously on the >display. Normally the Song Erase command takes only seconds to execute- with >this defect, the blinking goes on for minutes, and the only way I can stop it >is by shutting the unit's power off, and the song is not erased. I know nothing about this deck, but in case you have missed the obvious, "Delete (song number)-OK" is probably the unit asking you to confirm your delete operation. Not sure how you'd do that though. Read the manual? -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: Compaq Personal Jukebox...
At 11:29 PM 11/11/99 -0500, the master wrote: >I don't know, seems like a pretty good idea to me. 80 hours is >probably sufficient storage for a portable device without removable >media. You could listen to a lot of music before you started maxing >out on certain songs. The battery life and size are at least not >terrible. The 80 hour time on a 4.5GB device would appear to be about >128kbps, not terrible quality either. And if it could dock in my car, >and had optical digital input, and could run ATRAC (292kbps) or ATRAC3 >(64-128kbps) as well as MP3, then I think you'd have a dynamite little >machine. Why not? That's a little confusing, don't you think. My understanding is that ATRAC 3 is a version of an ATRAC encoder which uses the same ATRAC format as MD, but does a better job of representing the original sound. Are you telling me that Sony have now named a format analogous to MP3 under the same name? Not particularly bright, if true. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: In compression, the encoder rules
At 12:08 AM 11/3/99 EST, you wrote: > The reason I ask is my father, who is an avid mp3 downloader, burns most of >his selections into CD-R. Played over my same system, those songs sound *so* >much cleaner than when through my sound card -- not just in frequency >response but also there's less of the sparking/warbling/annoying as hell >sound from mp3s. That would lead me to think the decoder is better, but like >MD shouldn't the end result always be the same? Regardless, MD wins hands >down. He's got some songs burned into CD-R that were 80 kbps. He claims he >can't tell anything wrong with him. Poor, poor old man. :-) Ah, but encoders *are* different. This also goes part way to answer the question on different ATRACs affecting recording. ATRAC playback and MP3 playback (decoders) are well defined- once you have a data stream encoded, it will produce the same digital data on playback, unless you have been screwing with your equalizer. Any differences to the sound are not because of different ATRAC (or MP3) decoders. This is not the case for encoders. Every song can potentially produce an infinite number of encoded variations. It's the encoder which must pick the best match it can given the available bitrate. Early ATRACs did a poorer job at this. Early MP3 encoders, and those written by back-yard boys are also in the same boat. Ideally, if you are not working to a time limit, you can usually do a much better job than if you were. But technology is improving all the time, and these days "smart" real-time encoders work well enough. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Well, paint me green and call me Gumby
At 11:36 AM 10/30/99 +0100, you wrote: >This is exactly the sort of thing that will ensure MD survives in the medium- >long term. More major publishers deciding MD is a viable format for their >music titles rather than the current "release it on CD and MC". Maybe. Certainly flies in the face of that fat lady singing on MD. But MC is hardly dead, and I can't see three formats being used for any more than the most popular of releases. And don't forget SACD, DTS CD and DVD-A are coming into their own now. Hm, how long before we see MP3 ROM memories? >Thats the good news. Now I would if I could poll list members and ask them > >1. How many CDs have you purchased in the last year >2. How many pre-recorded MDs have you purchased in the last year >3. If the same album was available in both formats- which would you choose >4. What proportion of your MD collection are pre-recorded discs Well, Gaz, I think you are gonna get a lot of similar answers. I've only been buying prerec MDs since 1999, CDs since 1995, prerec tapes since 1992. I have about 20 prerec tapes bought over three years (none since CD, whaddya know?) and about 250 CDs bought over four years. And guess what, in the past few months, I've only bought 2 prerec MDs. For most of my tapes, I have an equivalent CD (except the odd comedy and compilation album). And half of my prerec MD collection has an equivalent CD. The two MDs I bought I imported via CD NOW, because no-one locally sells prerec MD. Heck, only a handful of stores sell blank MD. As to why I got an MD of an album I already had on CD... Well, call me crazy. I could mumble something about the MD possibly being of better quality, because of it being a 1998 release, they could have used a 20-bit master (or better) and used some whizz bang ATRAC. But that wouldn't be the reason. It was clearly the novelty factor. Compression is compression, after all. These tape reminiscient cases are funny, man. So much packing for such a little media. (A medium smaller than tape gets a bigger case... WTF?) And would you believe, because the MD was pressed in Europe, it actually has more songs on it that the equivalent US CD. (Which doesn't bother me, because I've got the Australian version which pushes the 80 minute barrier. Actually, that's probably another reason why I got the MD- I'd have needed an 80 minute blank to dub my disc anyway, and in my neck of the woods, those things are pretty scarce.) Anyway, believe it or not, I am planning to buy more prerec MDs for the novelty factor. And one of those is a new release which I am also planning to get the CD for. Again, call me crazy. Would you believe my main reason is so that I can actually set up a shelf with these weird cases on? Two is just not enough to warrant building a shelf. Hm, do I have a point in confessing my mental illness? Probably not. I think what I am saying is that I am a rare breed, and most people will keep buying CDs even if they have MD. I can't think of anyone who would have an MD player and not a CD player, and that is the key. Sony woke up recently and realised that if MD was gonna crack it at all, it was going to crack it as a home recording format, not as a minature portable competitor to CD. And so it shall be. This Warner abberation is a flash in the pan. Heck, these are the guys that gave you Alanis Morissette. :-) (Apologies to AM fans. I dig some of her grooves, but I can't make it through a whole album.) Yours in insanity, Kade. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Fat ladies
>The "PC solution" offered by Sony, Sharp and others is a >strange stopgap. First off, they cost only slightly less than >current portable MP3 devices. Second, MP3 compression is >decidedly lower quality than MD's ATRAC compression, and >recording from a CD to an MP3 to an MD puts the music >through two stages of compression! The sound quality benefits >of MD are essentially wasted. And copying MP3s to a CD-R doesn't waste quality? And two stages of compression is essentially irrelevant when one is vastly more audible than the other (i.e. MP3). I had a laugh at this article. Unfortunately, I have a feeling it might be true for the US. The editing capabilities of MP3 indeed. And what about the inconvenience of CD-R for portable recordings and editing? The public needs to be better informed, I say. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: 80 minute discs
At 11:44 AM 10/26/99 +1000, OC wrote: >i was just wondering if you could buy these 80min disc anywhere in Australia / >Sydney? ...oz ppl???...also anywhere cheap in sydney to buy blanks oz ppl >???...anyone there :) Sonex said they'd get them into Hobart if I wanted any. They're a Sony-only store. They gave me five 74s for $20 the other week, which comes out at $4 a disc. Pretty good, I think. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Minidisc2000
At 10:56 PM 10/24/99 -0400, JC wrote: >is the url a secret? Nah. It was in the MIMEd HTML that amulation snipped. :-) He'll repost if it was any good. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: more R50 key combos???
At 05:52 PM 10/24/99 EDT, Jeff wrote: >yeah, and exacly what is ejecting the optical block? is it just sending it >back to the starting position? No, ejecting the optical block will cause the optical block to jump out of the unit, deploy a parachute, and descend to the floor. This in case the unit comes under enemy fire and is too damaged to land. i.e. we are joking. :-) The key combination that was originally given should do nothing. But beware of test mode- at any moment any key can cause death (to the unit, not you). And no, that is not a joke. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Found a CD that cannot be digitally recorded on MD
SSR asked: | What would happen if the record level on the masters from which the CDs | were pressed was set higher than the allowed threshold (ie, 'OVER' on my | 702's display) for CD media? At 01:05 PM 10/12/99 -0500, DWT wrote: >Then the CD would have already been spoiled by clipping in the process of >making a digital master for the CD, those passages would sound clipped when >you listen to the CD, and a digital copy to MD at unity gain would faithfully >preserve the sound as already clipped. As I've learned here, all digital >media are incapable of representing amplitudes over 0 dB, and digital >recordings must be scaled accordingly. Not necessarily. I have a few CDs which light OVER on digital record and then when played back. I suspect OVER just means the sample was +16383 or -16384. No audible clipping is heard. +16383/-16384 is not an invalid sample in itself. But obviously, unless the recording has been digitally scaled, it is likely that this sample value would mean clipping. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: RF Modulators
At 06:32 PM 10/3/99 +1300, RMS wrote: >It was useless in the car, constanty needing retuning etc. I would much >prefer it if it was PLL locked etc. If a $20 radio can do it for tuning >then they should be able to do it for transmition. Argh. PLL locked. ATM machine. PIN number. :-) -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Should I buy????
At 02:30 AM 10/1/99 +0200, you wrote: > >I'm planning on buying the Sony MZ-R37, however I've a lot lately about Sony >releasing a high density MD format (650MB), is this true?? I'd hate buying a >new MD just to find out a few weeks later of a new replacing format... Buy, buy. Sony have just released their new portables, and they aren't HD. Truth be told, there isn't much point increasing the capacity of MD right now. Not from a manufacturers point of view. You could either reduce compression- not really valuable, as ATRAC these days preserves audible sounds near perfectly- or increase recording time. But the demand for increased recording time is equally low- mono mode is sufficient for most. Plus, increased recording time is going to reduce the number of blanks sold any any rate. :-) The costs of introducing HD MD at the moment outweigh the benefits. The costs would be through the development of new equipment and the lost sales through consumer confusion between HD and non-HD MD. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Pure marketing hype from Sony
At 05:17 AM 9/18/99 PDT, you wrote: >I'm not entirely certain about the validity of Sony's claim although I do >have a tendancy to believe that the more reliable the media the more >accurate the reproduction will be (this applies to all data, sound and video >formats digital and analogue). That belief is flawed, at least for digital media. Digital media only have varying reliability, not accuracy. Eric himself sums it up best in the FAQ: "Since MDs store digital data, there will be no qualitative difference between the sound of various discs so long as the disc's raw bit error falls within the bounds of what can be handled by the MD ACIRC error correction system." As for empirical difference, that can also be discounted: "The CD specification allows for discs to have up to 220 raw errors per second. Every one of these errors is (almost always) perfectly corrected by the CIRC scheme for a net error rate of zero." - Andrew Poggio While uncorrectable errors are possible, you are likely to have much more serious problems (such as UTOC corruptions) long before the audio data starts to be uncorrectable. Your player is more likely to hiccup than the disc, I'd say. This is basically where Ralph is coming from when he talks about power supply variations caused by peturbations in disc tracking. But if this really worries you, you can always feed your MD player output to a digital decoder, and you're back to square one (and the disc makes no difference). (Though I must add, Jon Deutsch presented an interesting problem yesterday morning... Holy MiniDiscs Batman! I'll leave someone else to speculate on the metamorphosis of a terbium-iron-cobalt alloy into Swiss cheese.) >Christopher Spalding >Genius, generally excellent and gifted person. While I endorse immodesty, I do think this was perhaps a bad post to make this claim on. As always, my claims are open to complaint. :-) -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Copy-Proof CDs--Again
At 11:03 AM 9/18/99 +0200, you wrote: >Even the in-famous Macrovision protection on DVDs can be bypassed if you own >a Hollywood+ MPEG2 decoder, and we're talking about a $120 card, not a $5000 >special-hyper-professional equipment. Actually there is a fairly simple modification to disable Macrovision on most stand-alone players. Most allow the firmware to be rewritten by some external means, and some also allow Macrovision to be disabled by breaking a jumper or isolating the circuitry. It will get harder, though. >So, in my opinion, we shouldn't worry too much on that. Maybe we should >worry about what we will do with all our MD equipment, though. As Gaz pointed out, they can never take away analogue copying. So your MD equipment will be fine. And what about all the billions of CDs already out there? Most of us listen to music of a bygone era anyway. :-) I would never by a C-Dilla disc, and I would fight it to the bitter end should I have to. But I suspect it is already dead in the water. I never bought a Macrovision videocassette, because the picture is screwed up even when fed direct to a TV (the top few lines curl really badly, and saturation wobbles). I actually took back the ones that I discovered had Macrovision, just to prove my point. (Wheras others might return the ones which didn't, heh heh.) Cheers, Kade- who lives Macrovision free -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: Copy-Proof CDs (Brief)
At 01:45 PM 9/14/99 +1000, Simon wrote: >What has happened to permitting "fair use" of copyright materials? "Fair use" is still there. They have just made it harder to make "fair use". I agree, we need new laws to make it punishable for publishers to make "fair use" difficult. But I can't see it happening. Did you know that DVD authors can actually stop you from fast-forwarding or reversing through a DVD? This is protection taken to extremes. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Y2K and MD
At 11:46 AM 9/10/99 +0800, some Guy wrote: >Does anyone have any info on the Y2K compatability of Sony >portable recorders, with specific reference to the portable >recorders using date stamp. See: http://www.unitedvisual.com/Y2K/SonyY2K.asp Portable recorders are compliant. The date stamp function works until 2089, IIRC. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: AIWA AMF70
=== = NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please = = be more selective when quoting text = === At 04:46 PM 9/9/99 -0400, you wrote: > > Hi, it's me again. :) I was just looking at the specs on the >Aiwa AM-F70. Does that say that it has 1 BIT DAC/ADC. If it isn't a >mistake, isn't that garbage for a dig/analog converter??? No. It is the best type of audio DAC. It is no mistake. Colin B once wrote: >Conventional 16 bit convertors produce a 16 bit wide binary value that is >represented as either logic high or logic low levels on 16 separate wires >for each sample value. These wires are connected to a resistor network to >produce voltages proportional to the binary values represented by the logic >highs and lows on the 16 wires. > >1 bit convertors use a technique called pulse width modulation (PWM). This >involves producing a voltage pulse of a duration proportional to the value >of the sample, for each sample. The longer the pulse, the higher the >voltage effectively produced (after filtering). > >The resistor network method suffers from inaccuracy due to the variations >from ideal in the voltages produced by each binary digit, caused by small >variances in the resistor values making up the divider network. PWM OTOH >gives very good accuracy because it relies only on a single voltage and an >accurate time base - both very easy to achieve. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Enhanced resume effect
David, My aim was not to emulate tape. Tape sux, man. :-) My aim was was to emulate DVD Last Memory so that I could resume a musical album in the same way I can resume a movie. That tape allows this is merely a side effect of its nature, but one with which many people are familiar and perhaps even attached to (witness playback of music in a car). >Also, if the timestamp of the last TOC update postdates the unit's stored >resumption point for that disc (because it was edited in the meanwhile on >another machine), it pretty much has to ignore the stored resumption point. Which would update the unique ID of the disc, thus destroying the usefulness of any record kept for it. This is how computer discs work. I do not have a problem with this- there would be no point resuming a disc you had changed somewhere else anyway. >The only way around those two little problems is, well, to store the resump- >tion point on the disc itself, not in the player. But these are not a problem for someone with one unit (such as me). And it is not my aim to be able to resume a disc in a diferent deck, but in the same deck. This is all DVD's Last Memory does. Anyway, I was just trying to get people off the... ahem... other topic. Now you've quasi-flamed me over this, I have a good mind to flame you about your last post on THAT topic. ;-) [That thread is clearly arguing in circles. I was pretty sure Gaz was being facetious anyway (I know I had a good laugh), and I can't why his comments warranted such an acidic reply.] -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Enhanced resume effect
I do think portable MD players could benefit from an enhanced resume effect (as mentioned in another unnamed thread), even if it is a (spit) tape like behaviour. I have an obsessive compulsive disorder where I must finish playing one disc right the way through before playing it again. But often, the battery runs out, or I've arrived home, or whatever. Point is, I often want to do different things with my portable deck after this, like record a CD for playing tomorrow, or take down a seminar, or something. So I eject the disc halfway through. To resume playback later, I have to manually find the point where I left off- which, believe it or not, is something I do. Someone suggested that a resume effect would have to write to the disc. It would not. MD players have static memory, and MDs have unique identifiers. In a similar way to the Last Memory function of DVD players, it could give users the option of remembering where a disc was last stopped. Though DVD players require manual engaging of this feature (supposedly due to limited memory, and the prospect of doing this for multiple discs), I don't see why it couldn't be automatic. I mean, if this disc already had a resume position, it could be updated on subsequent eject. You would only need to enforce a manual update if this was a 'new' disc and entering it into memory would mean purging the 'oldest' record. Funny thing is, my DVD player doesn't seem to have Last Memory for CDs. D'oh! -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: R90 and end search
At 11:37 PM 9/6/99 -0400, RP wrote: >Okay folks...someone's going to have to tell me about this 'end search' >button. What's it do? It SEARCHES for the END. Cool, huh? :-) -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: SCMS and DVD's
At 05:43 PM 8/31/99 +1000, Col wrote: > >Andres Mino wrote: > >>Hi, I heard that the ProspecMSP730 Digital Signal Processor do NOT decode >>the protection that DVD digital audio has. > >The only protection that the digital output of a DVD player has from >recording is SCMS. If you are playing a DVD audio disc and find that you >can't record it, either it is SCMS final in which case a stripper will fix >it, it is a sample rate that your recorder cannot handle, or it is a >compressed format such as DTS or AC-3. Most DVD players can downsample 96 >KHz audio for S/PDIF output, and can decode AC-3 2.0 to normal 2 channel >LPCM, which will then be recordable by your MD deck. If the DVD contains >three or more channels of audio and the player is outputting the raw coded >data, you'll need a digital amp with the facility to decode, downmix, and >digitally output the sound in order to record it. And just to add that all DVD video discs I have tried prohibit digital audio copying. i.e. they are SCMS zero, even when conversion is done from AC-3 to PCM, or when PCM is present on the disc. Of course, analogue copies are possible, and with a 24 bit DAC rated for 96kHz, they would be pretty good analogue copies. (Recorder permitting, naturally.) -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: 8 cm CD-Rs
At 06:13 PM 8/24/99 -0700, Danny Boy wrote: > >"PrinceGaz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>They may be kinda neat, but since there are no 8cm CD portie units available >>theyre also kinda pointless ;-P Indeed a few CD players do not have the 8cm >>centre-indented tray for placing them in. > >Any portable except the new Sony slot-loading CD will play the smaller CD >formats, whether or not they have an indented tray for them. This is >because portables almost always require that you place the CD onto the >spindly manually. The problem is actually with tray-loading home units >that don't have the indent in the tray. I think what Gaz was saying was that there are no Discmans which are 8.5 cm wide, so there is no point using smaller CDs. But I agree with the original poster. No matter how awkward and expensive they are, 8cm CDs are cool. :-) As for this argument about copy protected CDs... While I am with you guys all the way- it clearly stinks- it could have an upside... Which digital format would you choose for prerecorded material in such a world? Can you say MD? -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: memory stick?
At 08:03 PM 8/23/99 -0700, you wrote: > >Ah, but you're missing the point - memory stick doesn't encode with mp3s. >It will supposedly use some sort of ATRAC compression. But ATRAC compresses less than MPEG layer 3... it is closer to MPEG layer 1. So the situation, unless ATRAC has a highly compressed variant that sounds as good as layer 3, is even worse. This does not herald the dawn of solid state audio. It is merely a very early step on the path. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: recovering deleted tracks
At 12:08 PM 8/23/99 +0900, you wrote: >I have a Kenwood DMC-K7R. My manual is in Japanese, so I'm trying to >figure out if I can do this... > >Oh... this must be it. EDIT/AUTO MARK: Name Stamp, Read OK?, Reading, >Change MD, Insert MD, TOC Read, Write OK?, Writing!, Complete. I can't >read the Japanese commentary but this looks like what you're talking about. Just beware: TOC cloning would not be described in a user manual. I suspect this is a description of something else. I suspect this is for track copying or something, which would partially erase some of the data you are trying to recover. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Re: Analog Recording Questions
At 08:11 AM 8/18/99 -0400, Rick wrote: >Note that on the Sony MZ-R50 at least, when something is plugged into >the line-out jack, Digital Bass Boost is disabled (and it flashes >"SORRY" if you push the bass boost button). That's because bass boost is done at the ATRAC level on MZ-R50 and MZ-R55. You couldn't have bass boost switched off on one output and not the other unless you had two ATRAC decoders in parallel. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: sharp 702 ( yet again )
At 08:45 PM 8/10/99 EDT, you wrote: > >I hate to bring up the subject of the sharp 702 again because i know that it >has been debated a lot lately, but anyway I just had a few questions about >its test mode that I was hoping some of you could answere for me. First of >all is there anything even semi usefull or entertaining that you could use >its test mode for other than to repair it? ( if so how would I do this ) Also >I know I got a little ahead of myself by asking all that before but could >someone explain exactly what the porpose of test modes are on any md? And >lastly does anyone of this tie into the scms code breaking that I've heard so >much about, and if so how can this be done? Test modes are not usually entertaining, unless perhaps you press the buttons randomly, in which case you can do a mean rendition of a horror story. The safer options: test tones can be generated, servos can be sent buzzing, and some units have a thermometer, although that will measure the unit's temperature, and not that of the surrounding air. Utility functions in test modes... Not many. You can screw up a disc, but that's about it. Test modes are for self-diagnosis and tuning primarily. MD recorders/players are complicated devices that, unlike cassette players, are usually worth fixing over replacing. The fact that they are all electronic lends them to doing self-diagnosis too- you would hardly put extra electronics in a tape deck just so you could find out that the motor was faulty, or the belt was broken, or the head was dirty... SCMS code breaking is externally done. You use a peripheral device. Cheers, Kade. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: SCMS, and 76 minute cd's
At 11:26 AM 8/10/99 -0500, DWT wrote: >If the EP is on a digital medium, yes, it is possible that its SCMS bits were >set for unrestricted recopying. EP is a left over term from the vinyl days. It is used these days to mean a short album, usually of seven or eight three to four minute tracks. Typically they are rare or unrelated materials that have been compiled together. Live EPs are also common. >There are ways to tweak the CD standard to fit in up to about 81 minutes. >Many of the CDs in my collection exceed 79 minutes (though copying them to >a 74m59s MD would be no problem as almost all of those include some mono >material). > >Somewhere on the net there used to be a page listing the longest CDs, and >some exceeded eighty minutes. Except that once my Sony Midi system listed the length of a regular 74 minute CD as 80:08. I tried again, and it came to its senses. :-) -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Sharp MT821: playback time
At 07:21 PM 8/7/99 +0200, you wrote: >A friend of mine got his brand new (US version) Sharp MT821 portable >recorder last week. After few charge/discharge cycles he tried how long does >the battery last while playing MDs. He did that test with original >headphones and volume set on 15. The manuals say that the battery should >last 11.5 hours on playback, but he barely squeezed 6 hours out of it. The >player was sitting on a table and no vibrations were applied. He didn't deep discharge the battery did he? That could easily reduce the capacity of a Lithium ion battery quite markedly, as I understand it. Lithium ion batteries should be recharged whenever possible, and should not be allowed to go flat (as is recommended for Nickel Cadmiums, which have a strong memory effect). -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: Olympus/Sanyo/Hitachi iD magneto-optical discs
At 11:11 PM 8/2/99 -0400, the almighty god of MD-L wrote: >Looking at this: >http://www.nikkeibp.asiabiztech.com/wcs/leaf?CID=onair/asabt/moren/78538 >and the Sanyo announcement it points to: >http://www.sanyo.co.jp/koho/hypertext4-eng/9907news-e/0727-1e.html >describing a new MO format that's 20% smaller in diameter than MD but >holds 730MB, leads me to start thinking about MDs successor. The last thing MD needs right now is a successor. >Sony has been slow (unwilling?) to introduce a higher density version >of MD, but in any case it would be only partially compatible with >current MD audio, and would certainly continue to incorporate a >data/audio firewall. Given the opportunity, wouldn't moving to iD's >(iDisc's?) smaller, *completely enclosed* package be a better choice >in the long run? Technically, of course, the answer would be yes. But this is a critical time for MD. It is in transition for a niche prosumer format to a widely adopted consumer format. There might be a place for high density MD in a few years, when more is known about the market, and equipment backwards compatible with the old media safely introduced. But for now, any shake-up of MD, or the introduction of any comparable MO audio competitor, would be dangerous. Both would undermine faith in MD. I think Sony understands this, which is why they are watching and waiting. MD-Data died in the arse, so MD-HD, technically feasible or not, will remain a dream of their engineers for a while yet. Besides, solid state may be all the rage in half a decade. It is sensible to wait and see. On a personal note, having just started building my collection of MDs, I hope it is around in quantity for at least another decade. My 2c, Kade. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Let the Rock-Heads Rock
At 06:01 PM 7/30/99 +0100, you wrote: >Rather than fuel the ES fire, I'll be more sensible and say anyone who uses >a Mac, Acorn series computer, or any other pretend home computer have >just as many rocks in their head as Linux or BeOS fools who at least had >the good sense to get a PC originally but went on to fill their HDs with >c**p. Oi! I resent that! :-) >FYI- God= Bill Gates (MicroSoft) You sad, sad person. Sure, be loyal if you want, but you can't be serious when you call people who choose alternatives, even for alternatives sake, rock-heads. Without alternatives and choice and competition, the market breaks down and innovation recedes. I would say this is exactly what happened in the PC market from the late eighties to the mid-nineties. Were it not for the popularism of the Internet and the resurgence of innovators like Sun and Apple and Linus Torvalds, we'd probably all be years behind in technological advance. My point is: Microsoft would stand still if they could, and to a great degree, they have. And without Intel burning the floor, they would be going backwards. And to put this on topic, I think End Search is kind of cool. It allows me to search for a song in the second half of a disc more rapidly- almost like making it two sided- like a tape. :-) Of course, a numeric entry would be better, but when are we likely to see that on a portable? My two cents, Kade- still an Acorn user, so with a computer much less pretentious than yours. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: md from VCR
At 09:34 PM 7/24/99 -0400, you wrote: > >hi, > i have a concert on a vcr tape i want to record to MD. i cant get any >sound out of the audio jack of my vcr. its not a stereo vcr, i was going to >MD it in momo. any one know how i can do this? It sounds like your jack might be broken. It is the output jack, right? (I had to ask.) If you are using a portable with a miniplug input, try using a mono miniplug to 1xRCA connector. Or a 2xRCA to stereo miniplug with a suitable adaptor. Cheers, Kade- who has a stereo VCR, so never has to bother with such obscure cabling. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MD: md copies
At 11:43 PM 7/21/99 +1000, you wrote: > >Check your cable. For the first time last night, I was recording Derek >Sherinian's "Planet X" album, and on one track, it actually got split in >two. My guess is that it may have had something to do with level sync, but I >don't think there was any silence in that track anyway. When I get my CD >back from my friend, I'll try to replicate the problem in case it's >something else. I had a brainwave about this supposed 'fault' last night, while listening to some Jarre. A little known feature of the CD format is the ability to place intra-track marks. It is commonly used for marking passages on classical music CDs, and my Oxygene 7-13 has them. But as I don't yet have digital (maybe tonight), I can't test whether these are transferred by S/P-DIF. At any rate, it could be that this is a normal and desired behaviour. But if you don't like intra-track marks, you can always delete them... I don't suppose MD has intra-track marks. Michael asked: > when i make digital copies from a je520 to my mrz-30 with a toslink >shouldnt it make exact copies? i am using sync recordinging, and a disc >that is one track becomes four tracks on the copy, with a difference in >total time. i dont recall that happening before, but it has happenned a few >times lately. any ideas?? I guess the difference in times is a rounding error. Tracks are actually a little bit longer than they appear (sound like something one would write on a rear-view mirror). When you split them the sum of each rounded to the nearest second can easily be different to the rounded total length of the original track. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MD: Q. When is a sine a saw a square? A. @ 44.1kHz (a little OT)
At 11:01 AM 7/19/99 +0100, Barnesey wrote: >> Kade Hansson wrote an informative piece about audio formats, but: >> >> >> A 22kHz sine wave is on the fringe of human heaing. However, a CD will >> convert this to a square wave, >> > I think the input from the master is filtered to remove all >frequencies above some frequency slightly BELOW 22 kHz. And the CD would not >reproduce a 22 kHz sine wave as a square wave, because of the output >filtering, which would remove the harmonics, leaving a fairly smooth sine >wave. You are probably right. But I am a digital man, and a wave form is a series of flat steps lasting for 1/frequency. For me, if a signal is +32767 for 1/44.1 ms and then -32767 for 1/44.1 ms in the next sample, we have a square wave. I am glad CD players smooth this into a sine/sawtooth wave (assuming infinitesimal samples), but then we have the same problem for producing a true square wave as we might've for a true sine or sawtooth wave. The result is unchanged though- this is clearly the limit of the format. >> (which is hardly relevant to your average listener, who has more problems >> in their amp than from digital artifacts) >> > No question. I can't tell a 15 kHz sine wave from a 15 kHz square >wave. Neither can I. But they are different, which is what the number crunching audiophiles will throw at you. >> A steep sine wave simply cannot be accurately represented at a 44.1kHz >> sample rate. >> > Not sure what this means. I mean that you can't draw a *particular* smooth line (the intended waveform) when you only have two points on that line (samples with their centre points 1/44.1 ms apart). Any line you draw is an approximation to what might have been intended. In the acoustic domain, we can theorize that a sine curve would be a good bet, but there even a few ways we can draw that through two points. But I seem to be arguing a case even I don't believe in, so I'll shut up. :-) The point is that this is how the audiophiles justify a greater sample rate than 44.1kHz- "more points = smoother lines = nicer sound". I too think this is crap, but at "smoother lines = nicer sound", not "more points = smoother lines". I may be convinced otherwise given some science on human perception of ultrasonics and otherwise inaudible harmonics, but for now, I think it's crap. :-) Anyway, I'm glad to have fostered such a discussion. It's interesting to hear what prosumer digital-heads think of this debate. I think I may have to agree that DVD-A is doomed if your collective views are as popular as I suspect. Cheers, Kade- who's quite happy with 128kbps MPEG layer 3, really. :-) -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: another MD trick...
At 11:20 PM 7/18/99 -0400, you wrote: >(no more pulling-the-whole-sound-system-out-and-apart-to >-plug-in-the-cables) I usually leave a line dangling from each piece of equipment I hook my MZ-R55 up to. This avoids the need of having to unplug/replug (except into the MD unit itself, of course.) Certainly, when I get my DVD player, I can see the optical cable dangling from there too. :-) - My stereo has a miniplug dangling from its RCA line-in jacks. - My Discman has a miniplug dangling from its miniplug line-out jack. - My computer at work has a line out dangling from its miniplug line-out jack. - My multimedia speakers at work have a line-in miniplug dangling from them. I don't have a cable dangling from my VCR, but I could (at least for line-in, as line out is already plugged into the "home theatre" set-up, such as it is). But how often do I need to dub MD audio (or any audio for that matter) onto a video... Let me count the ways... :-) Cheers, Kade- who thinks he's posted way too much to the list for one day... although at least maybe he's now balanced off-topic stuff with on-topic stuff. :-) -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: record digital from a DVD player
At 11:53 PM 7/18/99 EDT, you wrote: > >Can I record digitaly from CDs to MDs useing the digital caoxial out of a low >end DVD player, which is intended for Dolby Digital / DTS signal output? Should be OK. The Pioneer DV-717 I'm getting has associated documentation that claims it can do this, but I couldn't tell you whether this is a high-end or a low-end feature. I suspect it's a low-end feature, as it is painfully simple to implement. (The cabling would be pretty obscure for a portable MD recorder too... a single non-RCA coaxial to miniplug!) But note that you probably won't be able to record digitally from DVD-Video unless your player can output linear PCM @ 41.1kHz or 48kHz based on the Dolby or DTS signal. Theoretically possible, although unlikely, especially for DTS. There are some DVDs with PCM audio on them- these should work OK. But note that I could be talking crap, as I haven't actually got a DVD player yet. :-) P.S. WRT copying DVD-As onto MD digitally, I may have mislead you slightly in my previous message (entitled "Super Audio CD not so Super for MDers")... Of course, you will need a recorder that can downsample from the sample rate it outputs and handle the (possibly increased) number of channels. And if its the losslessly compressed form of DVD-A, this compression may also be present in the digital output, which would screw up any MD recorder not prepared for it. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: MDs, PCM audio, Super CDs and DVD-Audio (OT)
At 11:40 PM 7/17/99 -0700, you wrote: >Let me de-lurk here for a moment and ask a totally newbie question: > >What is PCM Audio? Isn't it the format that DVDs use for audio? It's a fancy name for signed linear uncompressed audio. The typical sample rate is 44.1kHz, with the waveform represented by 15 bits of amplitude and one bit of sign. It is the format used by CDs, and while such sounds are possible on DVD, they do limit the bit rate available for the video, they are usually retired in favour of compressed formats like MPEG, DTS and Dolby Digital, which also have the advantage that they are well adapted to presenting surround sound. >Also, does anyone know what Super CD and DVD-Audio is? My company >will begin carrying Super CD and DVD-Audio decks in late 99-2000 (I >think). I've heard Super CD and DVD-Audio are supposed to sound much >better than CDs (and MDs, I assume). How is that possible? I thought >the regular CDs sampling rate already picked up every possible >frequency that the human ear can hear. How will these new formats >improve upon the current? And -- most importantly -- will they be >compatible with MDs (no copyright lockout)? Well, DVD Audio has only just been formalized, and details are only readily available to members of the "standardization" organization. It is supposedly part of the "acoustic audio renaissance". For years, devoted audiophiles have been complaining that CDs are too "sharp" sounding and do not present the "warmth" of vinyl records. I personally find this ridiculous- vinyl is clearly a distorted impression of the sound- and it is my belief that a vinyl record, suitably filtered, and recorded onto a CD (or MD), would exhibit no difference to a listener accustomed to this warmth. i.e. The effect is probably a desirably familar distortion, not an advantage of analogue sounds over digital sounds. However, there may be a case to answer in terms of distortion present on CDs and other 44.1kHz 16 bit PCM audio media. There are two forms of distortion here- quantization distortion (the 16 bit part) and waveform distortion (the 44.1kHz part). For my money quantization distortion is vanishingly low at CD quality, because 66536 steps should be more than enough to reproduce a smooth waveform to all ears (caveat being that soft sounds have fewer steps available in this linear scheme). However, there may be a case to answer in terms of waveform distortion. A 22kHz sine wave is on the fringe of human heaing. However, a CD will convert this to a square wave, and waves slightly above and below this sound level will be indistinguishable, wheras there are perhaps perceivable differences to analogue waveforms around this level. This extreme example (which is hardly relevant to your average listener, who has more problems in their amp than from digital artifacts) does also present an effect in all high frequencies, though to a significantly lesser extent. A steep sine wave simply cannot be accurately represented at a 44.1kHz sample rate, which has the number crunching audiophiles up in arms. Whether the reality is that the human ear percieves these mishmashed square waves as different from corresponding sine waves is debatable. However, to appease the audiophiles, and to present a possibly new wave of the lucrative "I already have that on media X, but on media Y it will sound better" rebuying scenario, the record companies are taking advantage of the density of DVD media to present sound at the limit of what is digitally feasible today. "DVD-Audio supports a wide range of digital audio options: PCM and MLP decoding are mandatory for all players. Discs may use either on a track-by-track basis. Sampling frequencies may include 48 kHz, 96 kHz, 192 kHz, and 44.1 kHz, 88.2 kHz, 176.4 kHz. DVD-A can have bit resolution of l6-, 20-, or 24-bit. With MLP the precision may be selected between 16 and 24 bits in 1-bit steps. Up to six channels are available for multichannel recording, with a transfer rate of 9.6 Mbps. Many provisions for providing 2-channel and multichannel mixes. High compatibility with the DVD-Video and DVD-ROM formats." - http://avacademy.com/news/stories/06_03_99_01.html There are also possibilities for directly encoded 6 channel sound (akin to surround schemes like DTS and Dolby 5.1, except there is no compression), which is a definite benefit over CD. This is somewhat ironic given that such high sample rates would have been sufficient to allow a highly directional form of Dolby ProLogic to be used, even for high frequency effects- phase differences would be much more readily represented given the increased resolution. How DVD-A is used in practice... well, we'll have to wait and see. And that wait could be quite significant- we have already waited some 5 years for a standard to emerge. Which leads us to yet another "competing formats" scenario, although it may be true that it has already been won and lost. As you have alluded to, Sony in partnership w
MD: Super Audio CD not so Super for MDers
Sorry Jay, I just realised you actually had an on-topic element to your question. With respect to copying Super Audio CDs digitally... "Built-In Protection To guard against unauthorized copying, SACD employs both invisible and visible watermarking on the disk, and content is encrypted before recording. The SACD players will have no digital output for the SACD signal." - http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19990409S0004 So we're talking an insurmountable equivalent of SCMS zero-copies, with an option on tracing anyone who makes an analogue copy via the watermark. (BTW, does anyone know what use an invisible watermark would be?!) And you thought V2 were nasty... :-) As for DVD-A, I don't know exactly how that will end up. I think digital recordings of PCM streams from DVD players are allowed, so DVD-A shouldn't be any different. But I reserve the right to be very, very wrong. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MD: In compression, the encoder rules
At 04:58 PM 11/4/99 +, PAW wrote: >Just trying to decide what this has to do with MD's? Oh yeah ATRAC was >mentioned, I also remember hearing that some units sounded better then >others on play back, but I have no proof for that. Oh, it was on topic, give me a break. You're the one that mentioned Linux and Windows software. I was talking about audio decoders in general (and these are kind of central to the MD application). That some MD units sound better than others has to do with many factors. It is my understanding that all hardware ATRAC decoders are capable of doing perfect reproduction in real time. So any difference must be in the electronics which generates the analogue signal from the compressed digital stream and delivers it to your ear. Or the ATRAC encoder which produced the digital stream (and these do differ in quality with ATRAC version). That MP3 decoders don't (assuming your evidence is true) is a reflection of the fact they are imperfectly programmed, and aren't efficient enough to deliver the stream in real time without sacrificing quality. I doubt any hardware decoders are in this boat. >But I do [have proof] for the MP3 ;). [which I snipped] Proof and subjective opinion are different things. :-) Look, I'm not about to argue, but it is my understanding of the MPEG audio layer 3 audio format that perfect reproduction of the sound-as-encoded should be possible, given a reasonable amount of time on fairly baseline hardware, to do the decoding in software or on a well-constructed hardware decoder in real-time. That WinAmp sound like crap (taking your word for it) is probably because the code is inefficient and therefore has to further reduce the number of frequency components it renders in order to keep up. But I'm guessing. -- Archer http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/6413/ End. - To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
