dex Otaku

Excellent, however, they need to be something that can be trimmed precisely after the fact to match beginnings and ends perfectly to compare. Test tones and the like would be a good choice due to their absolute predictability, not music.

It's made for recording film sound - even standing in the rain. That kind of price is pretty typical of such equipment.

DVD-A is a multiple-format standard, actually, encompassing PCM [anywhere from mono 16-bit 44.1kHz to 6-channel 24/48 to stereo 24/192, different channel combinations at different rates and bit depths being possible as long as they don't exceed available bandwidth], MLP [lossless compression under more or less the same constraints], AC3 [stereo to 6.1-channel , but poorly suited to music mainly because the audio industry has no universal mastering standards as the film industry does, and part of AC3 encoding is the requirement of following Dolby's standard which includes telling the codec what the peak level of the center channel is, which determines playback levels of all channels by declaring what the normal headroom is compared to the dialogue level standard for theatres], DTS [usually just 5.1], and likely still MP2 [the standard used mostly in Europe for DAB and DVD].

I don't know what standard you're using for measuring the gain of tracks, aeriyn, but the only one anyone I know uses for digital audio is dBfs [full scale] where 0dBfs is the maximum amplitude recordable without distortion. I've never heard of anyone measuring things the way you're doing it. [And that's with 14 years working with digital audio in various ways] Where did you find this method? And what is it based on? Considering the dynamic range of 16-bid audio is 96dB, how can something recorded in it have a "gain" of 100dB?

There are actually a few indie labels popping up around the world that are choosing formats like the lame VBR "--alt-preset standard". One fairly prominent company in the UK has put their entire catalogue online at 50p/song in the above format. Said label was home to many of the punk and alternative greats of the 70s and 80s. So - not everyone selling music online is completely insane in terms of expecting people to shell out too much money for absolute crap quality [my opinion of iTunes music store and Connect].

The usable capacity of an MD80 that is HiMD formatted is 290MB.

I can't even actually answer these questions, as I'm only one of the users. The telling bit is that, even not knowing what specific OS version, hardware, or other software is being used - the problem is experienced identically by those who experience it. Which would suggest to me that the problem is with the application that experiences the error, not anything else. That doesn't make me correct, of course. I only have a certain amount of intuition from being a PC tech for 15 years to go on. BTW, regclean works under XP as well. RE: creating test files - I have set my HiMD to record in HiLP with 2-minute auto track-marking, left it running connected to the radio, then transferred the resulting [200+] tracks. I have done this more than once. Naturally, SS never lost a track. If I bring something home that is totally irreplacable, though - SS gags and trashes tracks. say, nito... why don't you start a thread in the tech topics forum asking people to submit the above info if they experience SS trashing tracks. That way we could have somewhat of a database to go with.

What format are the files you're trying to transfer?

People have been asking recently whether anyone has actually compared HiMDRenderer's [HiMDR] output with that of Sony's wave converter [sWC] and Total Recorder [TR] to see if they are all identical. The second half of this comparison would be to check if they are all bit-for-bit matches to the original source, to see if any watermarking or other processing is taking place. There are some slight problems with this: 1) You can't upload and convert [with SWC] something recorded on HiMD from a digital source. Meaning there is no way to make a comparison between all three with something recorded via optical-in. You -can- compare TR's output with HiMDR's, however. 2) You can't upload tracks put on HiMD from ripped OMA-WAV tracks. Period. Meaning the only method to get these off the HiMD is TR, so no comparison is possible. 3) With analogue-source recordings, bit accuracy can be compared by all three methods; however, there is no way of knowing if what SS imports is actually what was on the source, because even the TR method relies on SS's controlling and playing back the disc. We can only assume that if all three matched, SS is not modifying the audio in any way. lastly, #4) I have no way to test recordings with the optical in, for two reasons: first, because I have nothing with optical out, and second, because I lack an optical cable [and the money to purchase one]. Did you know that Canadian models, by default, do not come with the optical cable? Furthermore, a compatible optical cable is something I would have to order from Minidisc Canada [$15] as the only place I've found them locally is Radio Shack - at $40CAD for the same cable. Comments.. please..

Replacing it seems the obvious answer.

Check this out: http://www.aaton.com/products/sound/cantar/index.php Oh yes. Hard disk recorder with SMPTE jamming, 8 tracks recording, 18 inputs..

You could start here: http://minidisc.org/portable_table.html This is an equipment browser that shows the features of different units. Also, you could browse through some of the microphone-related threads in the live recording forum, here: http://forums.minidisc.org/viewforum.php?f=18 I'm not sure that you'll find a recorder with microphone input for less than $200USD, but then, I'm not really well versed on what the prices are in the US. I would actually recommend looking at the equipment browser I linked to above, then checking for some of those models on eBay. For standard MD [not HiMD] equipment, this is probably your best way to go to buy equipment on a budget. I'd love to hear some of the recordings you end up maknig of birdsong and such. Good luck in your search. Cheers.

I could eventually get around to updating it.. to reflect the newer HiMDRenderer as well as the wave converter .. and some screencaps might be advantageous to those who have read the instructions and are still unable to grasp the instructions.

ds13: 1) In theory, yes. The data should be the same. As has been stated elsewhere on the fora, this is a topic of minor debate at the moment, as some suspect that Sony are watermarking audio coming from HiMD. My own assumption is that the audio should be identical from source to destination if digital transfers are used. 2) There are no linux utilities. Nor are there 3rd-party utilities that can do the extraction. This would require either: * reverse-engineering Sony's DRM and encryption as well as their protocols for accessing the units via USB, or * liscensing the technology from Sony, at a probable high cost tartan: No one to my knowledge has done an -accurate- such test yet. The problem is mainly that all three methods of conversion will not have the exact same start/end sample positions, which makes accurate comparison somewhere between difficult and impossible. Perhaps it's time for me to run another ad-hoc test suite to settle this issue.

My point was more that people often - and I mean VERY often - don't use titles that are tha pertinent to the post.

I've never used the digital in on any MD or HiMD, let alone had to rely on its resampling, so I'm not the person to ask. A better solution might be to get an inexpensive digital I/O interface for eir computer, assuming e has one, and for em to send you a CDR with the audio on it. That way no resampling or AD-DA conversions would be involved.

Bits [as used here] refers to the quantisation depth of linear PCM recording. Most lossily-compressed formats rely on converting PCM to a completely different domain - from that of time [samples per second, linear PCM] to frequency [intensity @ pitch, in bands and sub-bands, as used by basically all lossy formats]. When the engineers say it's 20 bits, what they meaning is that the native resolution of the compression format is sufficiently high that it can reproduce 20-bit dynamic range when converted back to PCM. I can't speak as to CORE compression, I'll have to read up on that one. It sounds to me like it might use something similar to ADPCM or non-linear quantising. DVD audio has multiple formats, from AC3 [which is a lossy compression method quite different from the rest, but still uses methods related to the rest] to DTS [which while it has been updated is one of the oldest formats still being commercially used, coming from around the same time as the original ATRAC], PCM of various bit depths and channel configurations, and MLP [meridian lossless packing]. SA-CD uses Sony's bitstream digital, which is a lossless, uncompressed format unrelated to PCM, based on another known as pulse width modulation. It technically also has no bit-depth in the sense we're talking about [it is a 1-bit system]. There is always a bit depth in PCM recording. There is also always a bit depth on A/D conversion for compression to lossy formats - however, the lossyformat itself, the format being stored in, does not have a bit depth in the traditional sense, because it is NOT PCM. edit: Looking for info on CORE audio and digi beta. Can't find a reference to CORE audio anywhere on Google so far. Digi beta's latest incarnation lists its specs [taken directly from a Sony product info PDF]: 48 kHz (synchronized with video) 20 bits/sample Frequency response (0 dB at 1kHz): 20 Hz to 20 kHz +0.5/-1.0 dB, Dynamic range (at 1 kHz, emphasis ON): More than 95 dB, Distortion (at 1 kHz, emphasis ON, reference level): Less than 0.05%, Cross talk (at 1 kHz, between any two channels): Less than -80 dB,Wow & flutter: Below measurable level I've come across the same spec on every info page re: digi beta, which would seem consistent with what I remember about at least one of my contractors' [CTV] use of them from about 1995. The consistency in format was important at the time because D1 through D3, Hi8, BetaSP, digiBeta, and basically all videotape formats being used all conformed to the 48kHz, 16-bit standard of "analogue" mode on DAT, which was later extended to 18 and 20 bit. Where can I find this info?

I am in complete agreement [especially having said all the same things before myself]. Again, in complete agreement.. again, having said the same before. As I've said in the past - I bought my HiMD specifically for recording. I didn't expect or want to use it as a DAP. However - there it is, I may as well use it as such. I'm so happy with how it works as a DAP that I actually gave away my portable mp3-CD player because I just couldn't see myself using it any more. Still - I understand its quirks very well, and what it is and isn't good for. I do know that the average person would find netMD and HiMD a pain in the ass to use as a DAP, mainly because of how slow they are and having to deal with Sony's b*llsh*t DRM system - and oh, yeah - SonicStage. Yesyesyes... the thing about Amiga though.. as with Mac, in all honesty.. is that it attracts a small but extremely devoted following who also tend to be rather vocal and defensive about the format. And the proper word is 'orphan.'

I can't recall the exact locations of the articles, but they were linked from http://www.minidisc.org . They were mostly technology-related articles relating to HiMD's "new" DWDD techniques if I remember correctly. I came across them while researching whether to purchase a HiMD back in June-July.

Uh. Hmm. 1) No. Track size makes no difference. 2) Yes. 3) As I only have the one that fits, no. However, see below. 4) on-board [Nvidia Nforce2-based motherboard]; however, see below. 5) None exist as consumer devices. 6) The extra chokes would not fit the USB cable. Furthermore, they would likely have no effect. 7) The media is not the problem. See below. Your suggestions are somewhat helpful and show good troubleshooting ability. However - I have tested my HiMD as USB media sufficiently to be -very- certain [as close to absolutely certain as a skeptic like myself can be] that the USB cable, USB port, &c. are not the problem, and in fact have nothing to do with the problem. The problem is SonicStage. Plain and simple. It actually -does- the transfers, then for whatever reason screws them up. I do not for one second believe that this is caused by my USB controller, cabling, or other software I might be running, say. Especially since it happens to other people with completely different equipment; the common factor among all is SonicStage.

MD and HiMD are not supported on Mac. You could try using Virtual PC but the one reported attempt we've had here was that it was unbearably slow. MD itself does not support digital upload - with the exception of home decks, which have optical outputs. Also: MD and HiMD as yet have no SMPTE support, meaning that synchronisation to your video tracks must be done by eyeballing things in your editor - not an uncommon situation for low-budget productions, but at the very least, be warned not to expect SMPTE support. As long as you don't mind doing analogue transfers [using standard audio cabling and a sound card with line-in] you can use any MD or HiMD with your Mac. HiMD supports linear PCM [i.e. uncompressed CD-quality] recording; MD's highest-quality mode is ATRAC SP [292kbps] which is of very good quality, though compressed nonetheless. Cheers.

Try disabling all USB-related software [webcam stuff, &c.] .. and by disabling I mean closing it completely - if necessary, use the windows tasklist to kill the processes. Do you have access to another computer you could try downloading from?

Do not expect Sony to ever make upload possible with MD. If they didn't enable it with the HiMD units, they're not likely to ever do so. In terms of time savings, due to the track-trashing bug in SonicStage [which randomly trashes the occasional track during upload] the only safe way to upload is to make a full backup of your tracks [a realtime process but also fully digital if you use software like Total Recorder] before using the SS upload method. Time savings = 0. As far as an increase in sound quality goes.. If you have a unit with a true line-out on it and a good sound card with quality ADCs, the difference is likely to be extremely minimal, actually. The main difference is in fact a comfort factor for those of us who are anal-retentive enough about our signal chain to feel that any DA/AD cycles are anathema. Seriously, though - whether there's a noticeable improvement in quality is highly debatable. The vast majority of recordings made on MD / HiMD are of insufficient fidelity in various ways [noise floor, dynamic range, frequency response limited by mic, &c.] for the vast majority of people [including golden-eared engineers] to tell the differences if there are indeed any to notice. The biggest improvement comes with HiMD's ability to record linear PCM. Otherwise the main advantages are not really in terms of overall recording quality; rather they are to do with improved track organisation and longer recording times [i.e. a HiMD-formatted MD80 holds 2:20 @ HiSP; a 1GB HiMD holds 94 mins @ PCM and 7:55 @ HiSP].

I imagine it would be, but if you look around the fora for a couple of minutes, you'll probably realise that 80% of the titles are completely useless, which would make the title-only search almost completely useless.

Does it whistle when it's hot?