dex Otaku

Mine came with the filter on it. ::shrugs::

Yes, there is a program. It's called SonicStage. It's playlisting abilities are more or less full-featured, though access to it sucks and is highly unintuitive compared to any other music library app in existence. If you try using help in SS [which I can't get to at the moment due to a transfer from the HiMD to my computer being in progress] you should be able to find details in there on how to make compilations. Yes - NOT playlists, but compilations. Once you get started with it, it's relatively simple - it just takes more manoeuvring than it does with most other programs.

If you turn on the option in SS to rename files when editing tags, this problem will be fixed for you. Of course, SS has some weird conventions for renaming files, such as randomly adding numbers to the beginning of filename, even though there are no conflicting versions to number them against. Also: for those of you wondering, SS does NOT appear to alter the filenames of MP3s in the library. It seems to only rename its own files.

When I first got my NH700 I looked at the flap over the USB port and thought "first to go." Within a few weeks of open- and closing it with fair regularity, it softened up. I was no longer worried about this piece breaking, and I'm still not. What does worry me is the USB port itself, which is attached to the logic board inside the unit - meaning the board itself takes some of the strain of insertion and removal, not to mention the weight of those bloody RFI chokes dangling off that not-so-light-to-begin-with cable. In all honesty - Sony MDs are famous for having their 'phone plugs break; or rather, for having their logic boards break due to strain on the 'phone plug. I have been warned when using others' equipment to always plug the remote in, even when not using it - since its wider connector, with the added tab with remote lines, spreads the strain. The USB connector, however, has no other relief. Mine already has some play in it [vertically of course, perpendicular to the logic board]. I expect this will be the first part of my recorder to fail, which will basically defeat the purpose of having it. I'm more than merely careful with my recorder because replacing it any time in the near future is not an option for me. I expect that mine will probably last significantly longer than that of the average person using one as a player, even though mine gets used on an almost daily basis. Time will tell, of course.

Note that LP4 is of pretty dismal quality.

IMO, the difference between a well-encoded mp3 and HiSP is negligible most of the time. Both formats have certain advantages and disadvantages, but in terms of sound quality the only plus that atrac3plus has over mp3 is a higher-resolution sample width for each sub-band [meaning that artifacting, while stillpresent, should be more subtle, really]. For those of us who keep mp3 collections that are nearly all high-quality VBR [lame --alt-preset-standard and up] and at worst 192kbps - the difference really is negligible. In terms of portable use, I could in fact really care what codec is being used. As long as I can get a reasonable amount of recorded time on one disc, and as long as it plays with decent quality, I really don't care. Okay, maybe I do. I don't want WMA support. Keep WMA away from me. Not because the format in itself is shite, but because it's M$'s.

Please note that I am not measuring transfer times. When possible, I am running uploads in the background with moderate-to-high system load [a/v transcoding, for example, though eMule, Apache 2.0.52, Trillian, MUSHClient, Opera (with at least 6 tabs open at all times, 3 of which refresh periodically by themselves), Outlook Express, Foobar2000, Norton AV, Windowblinds 4.x, and answering machine software are all running concurrently at all times. Among other things.]. Test #1 - uploading 595 1-minute tracks recorded at HiLP. Result: no errors; split the transfer into several runs, of <50, 100, and the remaining tracks. Special note: All tests passed with heavy background processes running. Test #2: single 28-minute PCM track from MD80. Result: no problems even with moderate-to-high system load. Test #3: multiple 5-minute PCM tracks from recorded HiMD. Result: 20 tracks [the last being 4:54] transferred with no errors [light system load] Test #4: single full-length PCM track from recorded HiMD. Result: single track successfully uploaded with moderate system load. Special note: I don't think I will ever do this again. SS uploaded what I assume was the whole track, and then [at 96% progress] it completely bogged down the computer for a total of 14 minutes. Mouse-clicks would take up to 90 seconds to respond in any given app. SS also consumed available RAM until the system was running totally on swap [part of, but not all of, the slowdown]. For a while I thought I'd found a memory leak bug, but it recovered eventually and SS is now running normally since finishing the transfer. Related point: my SS temporary folder is on the same physical drive as the SS library folder. This is no doubt a part of the problem, as it seemed to occur when SS was copying the <1GB file to the library. Still - copying the file should not consume CPU -or- memory like this. As a result.. Advice: Never record your HiMD discs as huge single tracks. Yes, the transfer worked, but I've never seen SS behave that way before, even with completely-full, single-track MD80s, or near-full HiMDs made up of multiple PCM tracks. Test #5: 96 HiSP tracks of various length making up a full HiMD. Part 1: 16 tracks at once. No failures, light-to-moderate system load. Part 2: 32 tracks. Part 3: Remaining tracks, with high system load. At track 67 the whole system paused for about 1 minute; I switched to SS - it was sitting at 97% progress on the current track. After about 10 seconds it continued without further mishap. The rest of the tracks completed successfully I'm taking this all as a good thing. If anyone has any ideas on another nice way to torture-test this.. just shout. For now I'm working with the assumption that the bug has been taken care of. I will still back up important recordings first, out of sheer paranoia, but as I said - promising.

Basically this would be suitable for anyone who is accustomed to dictaphone/microcassette recordings. [off topic:] My first portable was microcassette - the quality was terrible, but it worked well, and I still have the tapes. I collected soundmarks when I went to France/UK in 1993 - and only got around to either listening to or transcribing them [to CD] two summers ago. It's sort of interesting to hear them, though. The quality is such that [even having tweaked the player] it sounds like the recordings were made over a mediocre-quality analogue long-distance phone line. So yeah, they almost sound like they're coming from overseas.

Looking forward to hearing this.

There is no way to do it without SS. The link you have been pointed to includes a method that doesn't upload the recording using SS but DOES use SS to control playback while recording in realtime. This is the method I use to back up recordings before uploading with SS.

LD uses an optically recorded analogue video signal, along with [originally] two tracks of AFM audio [audio modulated on the video signal, very high quality that would rival digital recording, really] and later had added to it digital audio tracks, starting with linear PCM. The original LD was an all-analogue beast, really. My guess is that the analogue video would have been "encoded" with the same lossless compression scheme [GY - R - B] used by most broadcausting equipment. If so, it would be capable of recording in the analogue a video signal of high enough bandwidth and resolution to actually outdo broadcast equipment. It's a shame they never made a recordable version [that I know of, at least].

I was doing something similar several years ago just using Shoutcast and some scripts. Why is this such a big deal? It's not new in any way, shape, or form. edit: okay, using RSS for it is a neat idea. But it's still not really new.

Good luck with your recording. There might be an ersatz archive here soon. Some of us like to exchange recordings - I'm sure we'd love to hear some of the things you captured or worked on. Oh - and welcome to the board.

How about, "There is no way "straight from the box" to use HiMD's USB audio capabilities with a Mac."

There's usually little discernable difference between HiSP and PCM. I use HiSP for general recording quite frequently, though for important stuff I stick with PCM. This was my main reason for holding out for HiMD; there's something about being able to get recordings with nearly the same quality as DAT [i.e. uncompressed] on something that fits in your pocket and runs off a AA battery... Compared to your R30, there have possibly been advances in the quality of the mic preamps. HiSP itself isn't such a revolutionary thing, either. It does a good job under most conditions, though. Probably the biggest difference between your R30 and any of the current models would be the user interface. The days of buttons and switches that actually do something are gone - most functions are menu-driven, and some are a pain because of this [like having to turn on manual record levels through menus after every 'STOP' in a recording session.]. Anyway. http://dexotaku.ath.cx/sound-art uid mdcf pw mdcf mostly recordings made with an NH-700

If recording is your deal, then the NH1 has only one advantage as far as I'm concerned: date/time stamping of tracks. Otherwise, use of AA batteries alone is a good enough reason to give advantage to the 900 or lower models. I have a 700 and it meets my needs perfectly [though it might be nice to get the better remote eventually].

Used as an analogue device, HiMD is totally Mac-compatible. If what you seek is the ability to digitally transfer from HiMD to your Mac, though - think again. Only one piece of software [sonicStage] does it, and it only does it on the PC. One user reported that trying to use SS under VirtualPC was like pulling teeth, as well. So: for digital transfers - PC only. For analogue transfers - works the same as the MDs that people have been using with Macs for years do.

Oh.. another thing.. before trying to record from the HiMD, make sure that AVLS is off; that the EQ is off; and that the volume level is set to around 24/30.

This depends on what kind of cassette recorder you have. If you have a component [stand-alone] cassette deck, this should be simple: Just plug a 3.5mm - dual RCA cable from the headphone/line out of the HiMD directly into the inputs on the back of the cassette deck. Put a tape in, play the HiMD, set the recording levels for the tape, then start recording. If you have a midi system or similar, then you might not have the option of plugging an external device into the tape deck. Do -not- plug the HiMD into the microphone inputs found on the front of some cassette decks. What you want to do is treat the HiMD as simply a line-level source, same as any other audio equipment.

Why not make real right and create our own bluray uncompressed analogue [or, well, 1st-order compression, G-RB] video format? LD was kind of a pani in the arse to handle but it sure was beautiful, picture-wise. HDTV looks like garbage to me. I keep going places and overhearing "average consumers" touting its superior quality, but then, two facts that they never seem to recognise: 1) something 85% of the current programming on HD is sports [and due to lots of fast motion looks even -worse- than it could] which I'm not remotely interested in paynig thousands of dollars to watch, and 2) it still looks bad. I watch it - and I can see the compression artifacts all over the place. This is supposed to be better?

Since upgrading to 2.3 [and I'll point out here that unlike many of the other users out there who ask for assistance with SS, I have never had any problems installing or using it other than the lost uploads and its deficiencies in transcoding certain mp3s].. no lost uploads. Mind you, I have only uploaded 6 tracks of less than 5 minutes each since upgrading. For now I am running with the assumption thet the problem still exists. Absence of evidence != evidence of absence.

If you want to make immediate copies to CD-R, the most practical solution would be a notebook computer with decent audio interface and CD-R drive. Yes, it costs more, but recording straight to the computer would eliminate many otherwise superfluous steps in the process of using an outboard recorder. If you need immediate access to the recording after it's been made due to time constraints, I would say that HiMD is not the format of choice. If you have some leeway in terms of a few hours to do transferring and editing elsewhere, then it would be a suitable choice as well as [obviously more] cost-effective.

All your points are true, of course. Thing is, the original question was about what we'd recommend fora specific application. Even having never held an R-1, I'd suggest that it would be more suitable for portable broadcast recording than -any- form of electromechanical recording [analogue or digital]. There was also no budget specified, nor has it been claimed to be an issue. Which makes, IMO, the more important criteria that the device work, and work well for this specific purpose. Once again, I can't actually attest to the usability of the R-1, but by virtue of the advantages inherent to its design [using flash, being small, &c.] I would say it's definitely the more suitable device. This isn't a matter of MD or HiMD sucking. Nor has it been made an issue of cost vs. performance [which, it could be argued, would still be worth paying twice as much for]. My assumptions about SonicStage are mainly based on the number of support threads here and on T-Board from people who are hopelessly lost with it - destroying libraries during upgrades, simply having upgrades not work, repeated crashes, fresh installation that don't work right off the bat, the fact the SS is shite to begin with, &c. If what you want is prestige and hacker mystique [since it takes far more steps than should be necessary to get to your audio with HiMD -or- MD] then go buy the HiMD recorder. If what you want is something that works for your purpose, the R-1 [or whatever other flash or non-flash recorded that, basically, doesn't use SonicStage software, since that is the -real- issue] might be a better choice. And yes, throw SS on a HiMD disc. That's assuming that at the other end, they're not using Windows98 [still very common]. Its also assuming that you have the half hour it will take to copy SS off the HiMD, and then the time to install it, time to rip, time to convert, before you could send your audio - which with something based on flash [assuming a reader with drivers at al, as with the HiMD/Win98 issue] would have already had you finished your task before SS was even done installing. It's simply a matter of suitablity to the task. If someone wants to drive around town, never on the highway, never in snow, never off road - why sell them an SUV when a sub-compact suits the purpose? Likewise, why sell someone on the merits of a delorian when what they need is the SUV? As for SS's trashing of tracks being a myth, with the amount of transferring I've done my estimate is currently that about 3-7% of tracks get trashed on my setup. Others have reported the same problems occurring in the same ways. That doesn't seem like a myth to me.

The ability to transfer recordings with no special software [meaning it can be do e literally anywhere there's a computer and flash reader] pretty much as soon as you've hit 'stop' - this alone is enough reason to go with a quality flash recorder. Build durability, ease of use, no connection to proprietary software, lack of moving parts, &c. are also good reasons. Cons: bad battery life [Marantz] by comparison [though in all honesty, look at what you're getting - phantom power and all]. Yes, they're more expensive. The thing is, something like the Marantz is built duty and purpose-specific, to be used by professionals who can't afford to waste time mucking with going through menus to change options that shouldn't be in menus, hoping that when the bumped the recorded, they didn't lose part of their recording, &c. But then, that's just my opinion. Like I've said, the CBC here use MD for almost all portable audio recording. The real throwback guys use stuff like Nagras with open-reel tape [knowing that open-reel is still the only truly accepted archival format out there, among other things]. kurisu, the whole issue I have with professionals using HiMD is mostly based around the fact that it requires SonicStage. But - what if you don't have a noebook computer? What if you're in Norway, and your SS system is in Canada? Are you going to carry around your CDR of SS to install on every computer you use so you can get to your audio? Are people going to -LET- you install SS,which is already well-known for its ability to munge installations and basically wreck otherwise-functioning windows configs? Or would they be more likely to let you slip your flash card into their flash slot, to copy your file faster than HiMD even can, let alone will, and then send it to wherever you want without ever needing to install other drivers or management software?

I tend to mistake journalists for broadcasters, I guess. I forget that the need is to have the recording, no matter how bad it ends up because of the shite equipment you used.