dex Otaku

nito: re: deletion on 2nd attempt - this is a well-known "feature" that Sony threw into SS. Transfers are only allowed once with recorded tracks. SS also does the same if you attempt to transfer tracks that were copied to the HiMD using SS [even from the same computer]. Also: there is an option to delete tracks after uploading. I have this off by default. re: tracks getting trashed - I have had this happen a number of times [Jadeclaw and I were the first to report this issue on the fora] and SS has never crashed when it happened, I have never unplugged the unit, &c. SS simply reports an "Unknown Error" and then procedes to finish the rest of the tracks you selected. Try searching the fora for "SS trashing tracks" or something.

I use a pair of Sound Professionals TFB-2s and their sound is quite stunning, to be frank. Note that in-ear binaurals [which contistitute true binaurals since they not only sit in you ears, they point out rather than forward] are not optimal for recording in stereo to be played over loudspeakers. The fact that they point out rather than forward means a signficant difference in channel phasing compared to what is usually played over speakers. Also, there is the issue that what you hear really -is- what you get; if you move your head in any way, the whole recording perspective changes. This can be severely disorienting when listening to it later. If you're very patient and can sit still and quiet for long periods, this isn't a problem. I tend to go out and meditate, myself. I've made environmental recordings as well as "bootleg" type recordings, and the quality is way beyond what I expected from something so small. Sometimes things sound a bit bizarre through speakers, but they sound great through headphones. They were $85CAD and so should be around £40 I'd expect. Reactive Sounds also has a line of high-quality "binaurals" that make excellent general-purpose mics. They have a presence of this forum, as well.

Incidentally, sallymae_hogsby - the reason Sony don't support Mac is simple numbers. Mac has 2% or less marketshare desktop-wise [where I live it's actually less than 0.2%]. Developing the software would cost no less for Mac than it did for PC, since almost no [software] components can be shared between the two. End result: high development costs for an extremely small potential market that could never possibly make returns on the initial investment. Which is the same reason so many other commercial software packages never make it to the Mac: high development costs for negative returns.

Right-click the track in the library, select "convert format" then select "openmg audio (atrac3plus)" and choose 256 kbps from the dropdown list. You can do this with any track in the SS library, btw. You might also consider reading your manual.

Haven't heard either way - but then, I wouldn't touch MusicMatch with someone else's 10-foot pole, let alone one of my own.

MO discs of the type used by MD cannot be double-sided. There's a magnetic head on the top and a laser below.

What wrong with cardigans? I've been wearing them since I was 14. In fact, I'm wearing one now. Mind you, like almost everything else I wear, it's black. I had no problem migrating.. I had no MD equipment or discs of my own before. I got a fresh start with HiMD as a result. I never use netMD mode - though if I needed to run something off for a friend with standard MD equipment, I like having the option. I also like the 2:20 runtime of standard MDs that have been reformatted [and using HiSP of course]. Basically, you have to choose to make the leap.. or not.

All MDs record in atrac. SP [standard Play] mode [292kbps] on modern MD equipment - as the codecs evolved since 1992 - far exceeds mp3 128kbps in quality. Arguably, if you want a near-direct equivalent, SP is more like mp3 @ 320kbps. As I said, all MDs use atrac of one version or another. HiMD uses a slightly newer [but not necessarily better due to its lack of maturity] version called atrac3plus. Please check out the FAQs on http://www.minidisc.org . There is also an equipment browser there which lets you compare features between models. In terms of what model to get, what kind of recording do you need to do? And what is your budget?

I'm actually quite fond of CD Architect for CD-DA creation, however, it lacks many key features that make Nero my mainstay. So. I make them in CDA and burn a master, then do the rest with Nero. Irony?

Good god. What are you people talking about? PCM = linear pulse code modulation. This is uncompressed audio. Period. ATRAC = lossy compression. Period. OMA = a container format that wraps a bitstream of whatever format [say, PCM or ATRAC of whatever version] with DRM and encryption. Period. OMA PCM = straight linear PCM audio that has been encrypted and wrapped with DRM. The audio itself is still standard 1.4Mbps PCM. No ifs ands or buts. No ATRAC. Period. Where did you get the idea about 1411kbps atrac3+? The National Enquirer? Incidentally - first of all, a CRC is made up of more than one bit [usually a whole word of 16 or 32 bits, in fact]. Second, if you were adding one bit to 1411kb you would end up with 1411001b. God. Where, where, where do you people get these ideas? [slaps forehead in dismay]

Look in the netMD discussion forum. You should always try searching for what you're looking for first, btw.

Anything going to/from HiMD goes through SS. If you rip a CD with SS [or SimpleBurner] it gets encoded by SS's codec. If you transcode an mp3 or [non-DRM'd] WMA or WAV file, it gets encoded by SS's codec. Basically, anything going to HiMD from your computer gets encoded by SS's codec. Unless, of course, you're using OMA PCM [which is straight PCM, i.e. uncompressed, stuck into the OMA container format for DRM purposes]. Um. Hmm. 'Lossless' is not the right term, there. If you recorded on HiMD in any of the atrac3plus formats, you're using lossy compression, so there's a loss on decode to PCM. If you recorded in PCM, there should not be any difference between what's on the disc and what gets to your computer. So - more accurately put, and note that this isn't proven fact but rather my own hypothesis - with atrac3plus audio there should be no significant difference, if any at all, between what is decoded from the player and what is decoded by SonicStage. With PCM audio there should be no difference as no decoding is being done. However: Note that this is sort of under debate right now, as some suspect that Sony are watermarking audio that has been recorded on HiMD and copied to the PC with SS. While this has not been proven either way, chances are that this would be implemented in the codec itself [so that any method of copying carries the watermark] which means that if this is the case, -ALL- audio being decoded by SS's codecs would be being modified in some way, whether PCM or atrac3plus.

Nero actually works very well. I don't know what came with your computer or burner, but I recommend Nero over most programs as far as reliability and function are concerned. I'm not aware of what's out there for OSS burning software, though.

reefbeef: playing HiMD via USB means the audio is being decoded by SS. No real comparison has been done between the hardware and software atrac3/plus decoders, so I can't really say if one is better or not. I would suspect that the software decoder is likely to be of higher quality than the encoder, though - among other things, it's much easier to implement the decoder itself since its standard is basically set in stone. If there is any noticeable difference between them, I'd be surprised. thepootleflump: it's not that bad, really. I doubt I'd be able to tell the difference with all material. I don't really have a way to fully test this myself as I have no equipment with [optical] digital outputs. Honestly, I don't mind HiSP as it stands from SS - I don't expect miracles from a portable player anyway, and HiSP through SS is transparent -enough- that it doesn't cause me severe listening fatigue over extended listening sessions. By comparison, 192kbps mp3 from most encoders -does-.

Rather than repeat myself.. check out this thread for a couple of recommendations: http://forums.minidisc.org/viewtopic.php?t=6765 What's your budget?

Woo. Not much of a budget. Still, a pair of inexpensive binaurals should serve you well. Check out those offered by Sound Proffesionals and Reactive Sound.

Answer #1: Sony .. #2: it's probably optimised for speed, not quality

I would recommend looking at a mic such as: http://www.soundprofessionals.com/cgi-bin/...em/SP-ECM-MS907 .. for general-purpose usage. I would actually recommend against using such as the AT-822 for anything that might be downmixed to mono [as most interview-type recordings are]. M/S stereo mics tend to be the most reliable and versatile kind, IMO. You can even take two of them and record [to 4 tracks] a perfect quad mix for use with DVD soundtracks and the like. The fact that they also have a forward-looking "middle" channel means that mixdown to mono always occurs properly and without phasing or comb-filter effects [as can be experienced with the AT-822 because of the Y pattern it uses].

Considering the fact that SS is for writing to MD / HiMD and Sony's other media, and considering the fact that it maintains a database of tracks and where they've been written to [what discs], you'd think that this would have been a good thing to include [if not, in fact, a priority] so customers could maintain their own catalogues. Sony loses again. Incidentally, what I've done for making a tracklist/disc booklet is actually do screencaps of disc contents. Inefficient, to say to least, but hey - it does work.

MD and netMD cannot 'upload' to a PC digitally. You have to copy your minidiscs to the computer by analogue means, which it sounds like you've already plugged yourself in to do - so you're partway there. SonicStage is for putting music -on- to netMD, which won't help you here. If you had a HiMD recorder, you could also use it to upload from HiMD to the computer, but alas, you don't. Audacity [http://audacity.sourceforge.net] is a good open-source audio editor [meaning free]. Basically the procedure for getting your music into the computer is the same as you would use to record from any stereo source - plug it in, record the tracks using an editor, edit them as you please, save them [of course] and then burn them to CD. That's a rather brief rundown on how to do it, but if you look it the MD/netMD forum here, you'll find more specifics on how to do this.

The complete package [no bonuses at all] here in Canada at the beginning of August was: the NH700; USB cable; basic displayless remote; crappo earbuds; 1 blank HiMD; felt pouch for the HiMD; AC adapter; SonicStage CD-ROM; 700mAh NiMH battery with case; manuals &c. I believe that's all.

It's presumed to be a bug in SS. I can't see why any company would design a feature into their product that defeats its purpose. There is no other software to upload from HiMD. SS is it, period.

I might be off on this by a bit but A PI-233 will probably only be capable of encoding audio in realtime or only slightly faster [i.e. 2x]. When I first started playing with mp3 it took 2 days to encode a full CD. Mind you, that was in about 1994.

While I don't dispute the effectiveness of the testing method, I would assert that using SonicStage as a reference codec for -anything- basically invalidates the test completely. It's well established that the quality of the SonicStage codec is not representative of what atrac3 is capable of. Delicately rephrased: it's well established that SS's codec is basically shite compared to the hardware versions. On the other hand, if the purpose of the test is to compare codecs that people are likely to use for ripping and encoding music to put on their portables.. since SS is the only choice for netMD / HiMD users, and since the SS codec is what people will be using, then .. I love it when I defeat my own point. =

Uploads [from HiMD to computer] as well as downloads [from computer to HiMD] are done with SonicStage. Look here for suggestions on HiMD uploading: http://forums.minidisc.org/viewtopic.php?t=6329 It's dated now as the Sony WAV convertor wasn't out yet when it was written. Still.. it might help a bit. I'll make the suggestion I do to everyone, of course: back your recordings up first, before transferring them with SonicStage. It is now well-established that SS randomly munges tracks [unrecoverably] during uploads. The link above has suggestions for how to back up your recordings as well. At any rate, the simplest version of what you want to do is: 1) back up your tracks [see above link for suggestions] 2) transfer them to SonicStage [if you need help with this, read your manual] 3) use HiMDRenderer or WAV converter to free your material from the evil clutches of SonicStage 4) edit and enjoy.