samueldilworth

To some extent they're making up for it by putting out good in-ear headphones with 16-ohm impedance and high efficiency (e.g. the MDR-EX500LP headphones have 106 dB SPL/mW). That's plenty of volume for me. At home you can plug in a headphone amp and drive whatever you want. I agree it's unfortunate, but making a high-power amp with good sound quality would probably require more expensive components than making a low-power one that sounds good. If the alternative is a high-powered amp that doesn't sound good, I'd rather take the weak one.

I presume he's referring to the large battery company, once known as Gold Peak. I didn't realise people other than Sony made these gumstick batteries in the past. The fact that they're getting hard to find reinforces my belief that being able to run an MD on AA cells is important (whether directly or by AA-powered USB chargers).

Hi MDane. Just to be clear, the speed of your computer enables it to encode faster than a MD recorder, but the exact speed of your computer has no effect on the sound quality of the files it encodes. The encoder does everything it is programmed to do, taking as long as it needs to, regardless of the speed of your computer's processor. Therefore the fact that it takes only 30 seconds (or whatever) to encode a track doesn't compromise the sound quality. A desktop computer's processor is massively more powerful than a MiniDisc recorder's processor, but it's a general-purpose processor, whereas the MD has a digital signal processor designed specifically for encoding ATRAC (or at least for processing digital audio). So the quality differences, if any, may be less than you might expect, though probably in favour of the software and computer combination where present. I too have my doubts that removing 19+ kHz information is problematic. I wonder if the average person could ABX this, or indeed, if anyone could with a typical music sample? With a 15 kHz low-pass filter it would be another matter, though still not as easy to ABX as many people imagine. Regarding transcoding ATRAC to MP3: this is a lossy to lossy conversion and should be avoided if possible, because sound quality degradation due to the compression builds up from one generation to the next, and may become easily audible. That said, MP3 at high bitrates is indeed very good, but it does depend on the specific codec you use. Versions 3.97 or 3.98 of the LAME codec mentioned by Avrin are generally considered the best choice, and are certainly much better than many MP3 codecs.

The real reason I'm planning to get the MZ-RH1 is because I want high-quality portable recording. But if ATRAC can sound very good (I've yet to hear it) and the Sony MD players have good DACs and amps, it seems like an opportunity to rethink my portable music player too (currently a worn-out first-gen iPod shuffle, known for its excellent "push-pull" amp and good sound quality). The current iPods don't appeal to me on sound quality (2nd-gen iPod shuffle, iPod classic) or price and form-factor (iPod touch). The nano is probably the most appealing overall. The manual for the MZ-RH1 says that it can also record standard MiniDiscs in either the Hi-MD or legacy MD format. If I used the latter the resulting discs would work on old non-Hi-MD players, if I understand correctly. However, because I have a Mac it would involve recording in real-time via optical-in, which is really very cumbersome by today's standards. And then we're down to about an album per disc, like 1995 all over again! Still, I value quality above quantity and wouldn't mind limiting myself to an album or two on the go (before getting home and having access to more music). Choices, choices.

I'm one of those seemingly rare people that think both Apple and Sony make great products. Each have their strengths and weaknesses, but both create innovative products that push the envelope and redefine expectations. That said, the Sony MZ-RH1 (which I'm planning to get) and the Apple iPod touch are very different beasts. One has superb recording abilities in addition to playback, while the other for all practical purposes cannot record but has 32 GB of flash memory, a large screen, Wi-Fi, and software that lets you do a lot of things besides play music, such as browse the internet. The iPod touch is also one of the best iPods in terms of sound quality and is certainly very good, if possibly measurably worse than the MZ-RH1. (With perfect digital audio files the sound quality depends primarily on the digital-to-analogue converter and headphone amplifier of the player, and Sony is very good at this type of thing.) As you probably know, digital music is stored as ones and zeros. It can be compressed with either a lossy or lossless compression scheme (codec), to take up less storage space on your computer or player. Lossy codecs such as MP3, AAC, or ATRAC lose information, i.e. the ones and zeros are not reproduced exactly. However the sound quality can be perceptually identical if the compression isn't too severe (the exact compression ratio that is "transparent" depends on the codec and listener). Lossless codecs such Apple Lossless and FLAC (Free Lossless Audio Codec) do not achieve as high compression ratios as lossy codecs, but enable a bit-for-bit identical reproduction of the music. One advantage of a lossless codec over lossy codecs is that second-generation lossy copies can be made that have perceptually identical quality, whereas transcoding a lossy codec to another lossy codec creates progressively poorer quality with each generation, like photocopying a photocopy repeatedly. This can be important depending on your workflow. If for some reason you want to change the format of your music (e.g. you switch from an iPod to something else), you can make perfect copies to another lossless codec, e.g. from Apple Lossless to FLAC. If your music is in a lossy codec like ATRAC you cannot make bit-perfect copies in another lossy codec like MP3 (though you can make perfect copies with a lossless codec, at the expensive of much larger files). The iPod touch supports Apple Lossless, while the MZ-RH1 has no lossless codec support. It does support Linear PCM which is a full-size bit-perfect audio stream. I can't really help with your decision, but my suggestion is to make sure that when you rip your CDs to your computer you make lossless copies (e.g. Apple Lossless, FLAC, or full-size WAV or AIFF files). This will give you more flexibility in the future, even if you don't listen to these files directly on your portable audio player. With a perfect original you can create compressed copies in ATRAC (for the MZ-RH1) or AAC (for the iPod touch) or MP3 (for both devices) that will sound as good as the original. Hope this is more helpful than confusing!

Thanks for posting this, baturjan. I use Macs and am likely to get a Sony MZ-RH1 sometime after Christmas. I have a couple of queries: 1. What does MDMonitor do? Perhaps it somehow permits the MZ-RH1 to mount in Finder and appear in Music Transfer at the same time? Though the behaviour you describe doesn't seem problematic to me. 2. I'd like to double-check that the MZ-RH1 appears as a USB drive if connected to a Mac with no Music Transfer software installed (for data storage/transfer). From your experience, is it at all sensible to consider using MiniDisc as a portable audio playback format with a Mac (no Windows installed)? If I get the MZ-RH1 primarily for field recording, and also for creating discs of my music, then get a cheap MD player for playback only, perhaps it would work. Not sure whether to go Hi-MD or standard MD for the player.

I'm thinking of getting an MZ-RH1. Could someone definitively confirm all or any of the following: 1. All functions including recording from mic-in can operate while charging from USB. 2. All functions can operate while powered by USB alone, with the internal battery totally dead (though Guitarfxr basically confirmed this elsewhere; thanks!) 3. All functions can operate while powered by USB, with the internal battery physically removed. 4. If recording can be done by USB power, that the signal-to-noise ratio is unaffected. Merci! These home-made USB-power devices are fun, but if you're not too handy with a soldering iron you might be interested in the following products, which are the best battery-to-USB power supplies I've seen so far. Sanyo is one of the most experienced battery manufacturers in the market, and their famous "eneloop" AA cells are among the best NiMH cells available. The company can probably be trusted to do things right. Sanyo call these products "Mobile Boosters". Read about them here, Japanese site here. Of particular interest is that Sanyo specifically mention the Sony MZ-RH1 in their list of compatible products. Three versions are available, all of which supply up to 500 mA at 5 V: The Sanyo KBC-E1S: 66 x 60 x 25 mm, 55 g (empty), about 100 g (with cells). This model is perhaps the most interesting, as it runs on 2 AA cells so is "future-proof" to some extent (which is my main concern about the lithium-ion battery in the MZ-RH1). Because it's branded eneloop it will certainly work with the lower voltage from NiMH cells, whereas companies like Energizer, etc., may have a vested interest in making their USB-power products work poorly (or not at all) with rechargeable cells. It's also a USB charger, charging the two 2000 mAh AA cells via your computer's USB port in less than 4 hours. The Sanyo KBC-L3S: 70 x 39 x 22 mm. 70 g. This one uses a 2500 mAh lithium-ion battery (3.7 V) to provide about double the energy of the KBC-E1S in a more compact package. Charges from a USB port in about 7 hours. The Sanyo KBC-L2S: 62 x 70 x 22 mm, 130 g. A beefier version that uses two lithium-ion batteries, storing double the energy of the KBC-L3S or quadruple the energy of the KBC-1ES (5000 mAh at 3.7 V). Has two USB sockets for charging two devices simultaneously if required. Charges fully from a USB port in 14 hours (!), or via an included AC adaptor in 7 hours. I don't know the conversion efficiency of these, but it's probably decent enough. Hope someone finds this useful. I'm looking for one for myself, so I thought I'd share what I found, especially as the MZ-RH1 is specifically listed as compatible in this PDF file.

Good info. It's the great preamps more than anything else that make me want a Hi-MD recorder rather than a flash device. From what I've read they give you lots of clean gain. You'd think by now there would be heavy competition from the flash recorder market, but nope, most of them have rubbish preamps (the Sony PCM-D50 is a notable exception, but it's large and heavy and expensive compared to MiniDisc). Here are some of the comparisons that made me appreciate the preamps in Sony's Hi-MD offerings: Sound Devices 722 v Sony MZ-NH900 v M-Audio MicroTrack Sound Devices 722 v MZ-NH900 Very impressive. Do you know if it will run from USB power (supplied by computer or a battery pack) with the LIP-4WM battery (a) completely dead, ( removed from the unit?

Thanks for the replies, all. Why not? Is it known to be fragile? According to Guitarfxr and Sony the software runs on Intel Macs. In any case, if I buy an Intel Mac (which I no doubt will at some point) I'll easily be able to run Windows. I'm also going to keep at least one PowerPC machine around for years to come, because I need it to run an obsolete film scanner (for photography). A mic I'm seriously considering, actually. I saw an MZ-RH1 for 350 euros in a shop window today, wondering if that's a fair price. It's a pretty expensive little device compared to a Zoom H2, but then again it has vastly better mic preamps. It's surprising that Sony didn't concentrate more on Mac compatibility considering how many sound professionals and musicians use Macs. The restrictions on what you can do with recordings from MiniDiscs recorders are incredible considering that flash recorders, including Sony's, are simple drag-and-drop affairs using the Mass Storage Class protocol. However I think it might be worth my while to figure it all out and give MiniDisc a shot.

Hello, I'm a bit late to the party, but I'm considering a MiniDisc device for recording ambient sounds and other recordings in the field. The main reasons are: 1. I've seen measurements indicating that the mic preamps are significantly less noisy than most of the flash recorders available, excepting perhaps the Sony PCM-D50 (which is big, heavy, and expensive). Quiet preamps are necessary for recording ambient sounds, which are often quieter than live music. 2. MiniDisc recorders are small and therefore ideal for discreet recordings. 3. It would be nice to kill two birds with the one stone and get a portable audio playback device with good audio quality. Things are made a bit trickier by the fact that I use a Mac. If I had a new Mac I could easily run Windows on it too, but my main computer is a PowerBook G4 running OS X 10.4 Tiger, with no real possibility of running Windows. Obviously the MZ-RH1 is très sexy and the only model available new. Unfortunately it relies on a remote control for operation, and uses a proprietary lithium-ion battery. Lithium-ion batteries die after a few years, and the LIP-4WM will probably become unavailable before the device dies (I look after my things). I'd like the chance of getting a decade of life out of the recorder, so I'd love to be able to run it off NiMH AA cells. So, here's a list of things that are important to me: 1. Linear PCM recording, with the possibility of losslessly transferring that to my Mac for unrestricted editing. 2. Excellent mic preamps (present on the MZ-RH1, not sure about the others). 3. Operation on AA batteries, preferably with the gumstick battery physically removed if possible (for recorders that support both a proprietary battery and an AA cell). 4. Ability to use all functions without a remote. 5. Availability in France (I live in Paris). New-in-box would be great but I'd accept used if it's in good condition. Things that would be nice but aren't very important: 1. MP3 and/or linear PCM playback, using MP3/WAV files transferred from my Mac to the device. 2. A line-out port. 3. Line-in. 4. Recording in ATRAC-something-or-other, allowing me to record loads on one disc, then copy to my Mac in real-time by recording from the Mac's line-in. There's a big quality hit but it might be useful sometime. Things that I have no need for: 1. Compatibility with old MD format discs and codecs (I've never owned a MiniDisc so this isn't an issue for me). 2. Any benefits which are Windows-only. 3. Super-long battery life for recording or playback. 4. Optical in/out. I've probably missed something but this is already far too long. Any tips or pointers to get me started?