md user

Either - Or, Neither - All! - It crossed my mind that you may have discounted the option that BOTH means can be used - if you have two sets of microphone. Why? Because then you WILL be able to answer your question authoritatively - not based on predictions of technology. Many times in the past I have used superior 'technology' only to find that older-tech. performed the better! Also, you will have a 'backup-up plan' in place in case one method fails - you said that the recording was 'important'. [i always plan two independent methods when something is that important; or, to plan a risk profile on the one method with contingency plans ready.] Whatever you do, unless you're going into production, surely either method will yield great results! Hope it goes well. Regards, mdmad. BTW do we get to hear a sample when you've finished? Just a small sample ... it'll give an extra dimension to this thread, methinks!

Now I understand why there is less LP4 usage in the UK than the US (or Canada)! Our 'prairies' last for about, err, ... 20miles ... Just a bit of fun, mdmad P.S. Having said that, we do sometimes get trapped in traffic queues for about 4md's worth ...

Curiously, I recorded an opera in LP4 last night, and it was the single commentator's voice that was most artefacted and annoying! The opera itself was relatively good compared! Odd isn't it?!? mdmad.

Yep, looks good! BTW, are you a secret garage, no! loft-space DJ? What next? A 'Romahome' DJ? LOL. Regards, mdmad.

What happened to rainsire here? One minute selling an whole collection, next minute stopping the sale and buying ANOTHER unt? Wow! What a turnaround! Still, glad that you're still with us, rainsire! Regards.

Quite right. And I've started a new thread on LP4 on exactly this point - to discuss it further. Regards! mdmad.

Yes, I've just received a couple of samples of well-encoded LP4 of CLASSICAL music (thanks to sfbp ) I've always disregarded LP4 point-blank for any music, let alone classical - but am I being unfair/pre-biassed? (You see, I expected manifold artifacts &c.) Listening to them REALLY is enjoyable, much like listening to FM on an old portable radio - perfectly acceptable in the past, why not now? [Considering that the recordings came from the radio, I presume, this does seem rather fitting!] On this evidence, I'm certainly going to record some for those days out where absolute-critical listening isn't important - just the fun of RATHER GOOD music (and lots of it)! After all, I could put an whole opera or piece onto one disk! Anyway, what's your view; have you been similarly pre-biassed? Have you really given LP4 a good chance? Or maybe you're already using LP4 seriously? Tell us! It certainly gave me a smile to think that 66kbps CAN sound so good! It will give me yet another dimension to MD enjoyment! Keep listening to those MDs - even at 1/4-def! Oh!, and if you know of some good PC-processing/tips to optimise the LP4 'bit-allocation' - I'm interested! Regards all mdmad. [bTW, i've put this on the main board because I (and maybe others?) tend to ignore the MDLP section - not using that format much - so it might bring attention to MDLPs qualities.]

I'm intrigued, not having used SS yet, are you saying that SS does a better job of LP4 encoding than a deck or portable? From what i've read, SS does a worse job of SP - a bad omen? (I have a NetMD sharp, but have avoided loading up SS/openMG &c. - it would mean using Windows again - and I can't bear all that agony ... ) Regards, mdmad.

This thread is worthy of the main Minidisc board ... Unless you're selling it ... Anyway, Great Job! Truelly a successor of the C90-cassette player as Sony intended!

Previously, I have noticed 'glitches' in my realtime recordings onto SP-deck, when playing from PC into digital out. Identified as cpu-scheduling. (Doesn't have to be overloaded to do this.) Some programs demand full cpu attention momentarily irrespective of others, for example usb-polling, I think. In Linux this can be erradicated by defining niceness at -19. Don't know about Windows ... stopped using it at win98. Presumabely all Windows OS's on and after Vista can be prioritised (NT-based)? Nevertheless, I wouldn't predict that this was the cause for genuine usb-uploading (non-realtime) ... Hope it helps. 2cents' worth. Regards, mdmad.

And what to call it? mdPhone? auviPhone? Any better ideas ... for a bit of fun! After all, a cool product HAS to have a cool name doesn't it? BTW, what is the 'i' in iP*d, iPlayer, iPh*ne, iAudio(cowon)... etc. internet? Just wondered - one of those annoying/niggling things.

Now deleted. [Was an off-topic temporary reply.]

Naughty! "Please, can I have a go too"? Nah, it sounds too easy - they probably wouldn't even know that they existed! (Forget the C90-stack system gag then ...) mdmad.

I'm a run'in ... However, wait! I don't think that I'm 'seduced' yet! Why? Well, I've just had a test of it, and recorded the same music onto it with my MD player - but I'm still more impressed by the MD in terms of *absolute* quality - JUST! Yes, it sounds very clean [<0.1% THD is evident], the bass is clean and strong too; there is a 3D effect of some value (although I prefer binaural compensation only) - but SOMETHING *SMALL* IS MISSING! I cannot put my finger on it; you know where it feels kinda 'VIBRANT'. [it's not an EQ issue, methinks, as I've adjusted it always.] Personally, I cannot understand it; all the SQ numbers [THD, wow-flutter, power output &c.] of the T30 are better, but, if I didn't know which unit was plugged in, I'd still pick the MD. I should point out that it is VERY close, but maybe it's just that I thought that the later T30 would blow away the MD - although this may be pre-biassing of my judgement. (I'll review again once the novelty has worn off; when I've 'optimised' my use of it to give it a fair chance.) So, put that pitchfork away! (For the moment.) Yes, I know! Now I see why ... The little T30 is a marvel, at 512MB in its day, respectable, but the problem is: it's only the equivalent of 3 or 4 MDs at SP bitrates. So I may end up using it for podcasts at low bitrates, otherwise I'll keep having to shuffle its contents. My MD player isn't redundant yet! When you say 'almost', are you saying that you had a similar initial impression? Finally, this kinda adds to my term 'VIBRANT' above - even the medium of MD feels more 'REAL/LIFELIKE'. Maybe it's just because I grew up with ROTATING LPs and C90s and things - you know, where it took effort and motion to get recorded music playing! You saw it happening (and was impressed)! The T30 is just too blase - it doesn't even shake a little! (I think I'm starting to understand why intangibles/aesthetics/textures matter - life!) Overall, though, I am impressed by the T30 - it's the kinda player I should have bought years ago (went for a very cheap model instead thinking that they were all the same - this is what put me off music for a while); it does have quality sound, is small, and convenient; but, it was waiting for the situation now: many gigabytes of storage to prevent shuffling. It is also part of a new generation - kinda like the change from natural materials to man-made ones? (- better performing but lacking 'naturalness'?) Anybody had the same initial impressions? Anybody found the better way to use them (in terms of EQ, effects &c.). Am I treating it in an out-of-date way and so not maximising its potential? Advice welcomed! Keep enjoying the MDs! (He said confidently once more.) And thank goodness I'm not a traitor! (I thought it was risky mentioning DAPs on a minidisc forum after all the history between the media.) mdmad.

Right, makes sense.

Ah! I admit it, i've just bought, err a ... A DAP! Am i in trouble for mentioning this on this forum? Anybody else using err, em?! Your comments (for fun) appreciated...

Wow! I'm really impressed that your set-up is getting LP4 good enough to listen to opera! (Is it the Type-S treatment?) Personally, my recordings in LP4 are dull, noticeably artifacted (although, if accepted, forgiveable); my opera recordings so far have at least been LP2 - but only because SP requires disk changes (losing 10 seconds ...). Must get ANOTHER deck to do the [realtime] changeovers ... Still, it does seem that your research and experience has gotten these compressions to work well - that's the way to do it! Regards, mdmad.

Yes, I have had one or two similar (but not quite so good) purchases - typically

Good points. I should have said that the skipping was in the recording process - i.e. temporary losses of recording. Also, different players started to behave erratically when reading the TOC &c. This was, naturally, evident when playing back. Other disks I have never showed this erratic behaviour - concluded that the disk was 'failing'. Concerning the circular marks - yes, may be lubricant 'trails', some were definitely spiral (head returning?). The disk was a little old; I got it second-hand with a deck I bought (but not obviously THAT old). My main worry was, as the disk is DEFINITELY no longer reliable, and, being new to MDs, whether I should NOT expect 'indefinite lifetimes' from MDs; you know, where they claimed MILLIONS of plays, and re-recordings &c. It is important when using MDs for archiving AND use purposes. Also, could record-head alignment be at fault in one of my decks/portables? [Too early to tell yet being the first failure.] What is the reality about MDs? Just wanted to know from you experienced folks! Especially as I am 'INVESTING' in the technology! (This is my last music technology type - it's gotta last!) Still, really enjoying MDs! Regards, mdmad.

I know a little off-topic (just) but has anybody compared the quality of Type R SP@292 to [Atrac3+ @256 or @353kbps]? I'm considering buying one of those NW-A ranges - but they don't offer SP@292.. just wanted to know what to expect (I'm very pleased with SP). If this has already been discussed, please point me in the right direction ... Regards All, mdmad. BTW, I would have voted for SP@292 - but obviously not an option. Is it correct to presume that Sony considered SP superseded by the above, and so did not include it as native with SS on HiMD, hence the lack of this option in the poll?

Right, thanks. BTW, I presume that you have many discs, so that 1 going bad indicates that this should be rare occurence? I do hope so. Right now, a Tootsie Pop is more useful than the said MD!

I've just had an MD that started to skip. On examination of the upper surface I noticed circular scratches! (at a certain angle to the light). Anybody else found the upper record head to cause scratches? (Or maybe trapped dust between head and disc surface?) This is my first MD to show 'wear-and-tear'. Anybody else seen similar? Regards all mdmad.

For another (simpler) route, have you tried just playing an mp3 file via the PC's optical into your deck? (Soundcards with optical out are now cheap.) Personally, I listen to 32 to 320kbps mp3's all the time - great fun! The only requirement is: don't treat them 'too seriously'. In normal SP mode, I have not yet nor have been bothered to tell whether anything was lost in the mp3 conversion All in all, audiophiles will presumably want SACD's, or CD's MINIMUM - only then would I worry about such issues. Just a thought - it may save you time on one mp3 file; if you have many, then USB may be quicker overall. Long live the music (in MD)! mdmad.

Sorry to be ignoramus ... but what ACTUALLY is Type S? [Yes, I know its application to improve LP on Sony's] Is it an EQ profile? Just wondered. mdmad.