dex Otaku

Before you continue, I'm going to make certain assumptions here based on what I've been reading everywhere so far. Assumption #1: Sony releases the wave convertor program. Assumption #2: The wave convertor is limited to taking recordings that were made -only- from the analogue inputs of recorders, which is what things suggest to me fo far That said, Points about SCMS and/or Hi-MD in reference to its upload capabilities: * SCMS is entrenched almost industry-wide [at least in North America] and is well-established. It is easily bypassed by those who want to make the effort to do so, but this usually requires at least one additional piece of equipment to strip/reset the SCMS bits. Otherwise, when considering -only- consumer audio equipment [not computers], SCMS does more or less work as intended. * SCMS follows a certain philosophy regarding what to allow copying of based on what the material's source was - firstly either analogue or digital, and secondly whether professional [sCMS-free] or consumer equipment. * Running with assumption #2 [which I have no confirmation as being correct, I'm just taking what I've read Sony people having said literally word-for-word], Sony is not complying to SCMS: what has been stated so far is that "recordings from analogue sources can be converted to WAV after upload"; taken literally, this means that anything from a digital source can not be converted, regardless of the state of its SCMS flag [which would be 00, i.e. original recording - same as recording straight from an analogue source - if taken from a "pro" outboard A/D convertor] * This would suggest that Hi-MD either: a) differentiates analogue vs. digital source recordings in a way -other- than SCMS, possibly if not probably not even implementing SCMS at all, or differentiates source in some way -in addition to- SCMS * Given the DRM initiatives that the big companies are pushing at the moment, it's almost safe to say that SCMS is being deprecated in favour of the newer, more highly-restrictive systems Taking all that into account, I'd say it's time for us, the users of said equipment - and many of us here are amateur, professional, or 'enthusiast' recordists for whom the chief purpose of owning an MD or Hi-MD recorder basically falls into the 'professional' category - to send them a clear message about what we think of their shoving DRM down our throats when for all intents and purposes it shouldn't even apply to the majority of us. Time for another petition, now that things are becoming clearer? Or should we wait for the WAV converter and see whether it complies to SCMS or not? I'm probably reinventing the wheel by posting this, but the other messages I've read here that related directly to this were old already. So this, perhaps, is the start of an updated single conversation regarding this. Ah yes, and my last points: * std-MD conforms to the SCMS standard * std-MD can be accessed randomly, as the medium itself and track system would imply, as well as the fact that NetMD is possible * Taking both of those into account, why not allow uploading from standard MD media? Prefab [non-writable] discs are generally SCMS-compliant. NetMD recordings -should- be SCMS compliant. And recordings made from digital or analogue sources -are- SCMS compliant. So why not allow users the chance to upload and archive SCMS-00 [most likely first-generation] recordings? It should be easily possible. If they're going to allow it from Hi-MD media, why not std-MD? This seems like the most ridiculous thing, to me. Anyway, sorry for the length, and cheers; we should put another bug in the industry's ears. Derek BF Gunnlaugson [dex] - http://dexotaku.ath.cx sound editing & engineering / field & environmental recording / audio format transcription, restoration & archival / videography / video editing / simple post-production / still photography / image scanning, restoration & archival / written copy editing / computer repairs and optimisation

You're quite welcome. Did it work?

From a digital source, the best ways to record would either be in straight LPCM [uncompressed] or for more recording/playing time, in Hi-SP mode. Actually, regardless of the source, I'd recommend one of those two modes for the best sound quality, assuming you're using either Hi-MD media or Hi-MD formatted std-MD discs.

From what type of source? Analogue, digital, or from your 'puter?

I was speaking [of course] of what I'll be doing until the wave convertor program shows up. As for there being no digital amp, with the way I've been reading things both here and elsewhere, that almost sounds like it could turn out to be a -good- thing.

Excited, yes. Despite the limitations of Hi-MD, my choice was to either buy a low-end NetMD with analogue ins or a low-end Hi-MD. Given that the Hi-MD basically functions as the NetMD, and was only about $20 more, and records linear PCM, and fits more on standard discs as well as having the 1GB disics.. even if I'm stuck with doing analogue dubs, it seems a step up from any of the std-MD equipment I"ve been using for several years already. Unless the digital amp is complete crap, of course. I'll be running some tests on the analogue side to see how it fairs. I don't have professional measurement equipment, but I know how to state what my reference is [M-Audio Revo7.1] and use it as the basis for measurements made with real analysis software. I'm just itching to get cracking at it.. Especially to compare recordings made by analogue means on the Hi-MD as compared to same-bitrate files encoded by Sonicstage. I'd like to see what fares better, even given the compromised qualtiy of micro-version A/D convertors. And yes, I hope the Hi-MD media shows up soon. I doubt anyone where I live will carry the stuff; people here generally have never even heard of let alone seen MD equipment unless they work for CBC or do field recording. I did order a box of 10 std-MD discs [sony Neige] for immediate use. Given that almost everything I record is done in tiny chunks, I'm not really that limited by having only 24 minutes with PCM.. and certainly not by the 2:20 Hi-SP length. Everything I do is immediately dumped to my PC and then archived and wiped from the MDs anyway. Here's hoping that HHB builds a fully decked-out Hi-MD recorder for pros. I could see a -lot- of people I've met switching from DAT if they knew it was as durable as the HHBs seem. And had clean preamps, quality A/D and D/A converters, SCMS-free digital outs, etc. Especially if there was a SMPTE version. It really makes me wonder that Sony isn't pushing a pro version. In the TV industry up here, MD had almost entirely replaced cart tapes by about 1994... --- Side note: I have a cheap Samsung MP3-CD player [one of those CD YEPP things] which works fairly well considering how inexpensive it was. Since I have most of my CD collection on CD-R as lame VBR encoded MP3s, it works quite nicely, especially during travel. I like being about to take a couple of weeks' worth of music in one 24-disc CD wallet, and I don't mind the removable media idea, as opposed to HD-players. The more I've thought about it, though.. When I first considered Hi-MD I didn't care a whit about using it as my portable music player. Thing is, in the past several months I've actually switched from using my CD-Rs to using a handful of RWs that I just write over with whatever I want to listen to [usually while travelling]. Hi-MD or even just plain NetMD is a perfect replacement for that.. so I have a feeling that I'll be using my new unit as my portable player after all.

My MZ-NH700 is being shipped tomorrow [got delayed by an error in the order]. I'll put some review-type info up for everyone when I finally get it. I realise that this is the bottom-end portable recorder in the Hi-MD line, but hey, some of us are on strict budgets. Also coming is my Sound Professionals in-ear binaural mic. [One of my key interests being field and/or environmental recording]. Stay tuned, it should arrive on Monday if all goes right. You can bet I'll be running my usual battery of tests on it, both measurements and listening tests of course.

The easiest way would be to test the MD recorder with more than one mic, with known sensitivty ratings. Or to test the one mic with more than one recorder. You need a basis for comparison, basically.

I'm hoping you're right, and that .. say .. someone in the linux community finds a solution to this rather quickly. It would be nice to see OSS that makes simple imports directly from disc to editor in a single, quick pass possible.

You should be using the line in on your sound card, not the mic in. That in itself might be the problem. Recommended hookup method is using a 3.5mm stereo cable from the headphone out of MD to the line-in on your computer. I'd set the volume control on the MD to a couple of notches below full. Make sure any equalisation (such as the 420's Digital X-Bass) is turned off. Make sure the computer is set to record from line-in as its source. If you're usnig a PC (if you have an SiS sound chip this is likely the case, so I'm assuming you're using a Windows PC from hereon in) you can select the recording source in the main volume control program that is part of Windows. In the volume control app, go to the 'options' menu, select 'properties', then select 'recording' under 'adjust volume for' .. then click OK, you'll get the volume controls and selector for recording rather than playback controls now. Open your recording application on the computer, start the MD and make sure the levels are not clipping, i.e. reaching or exceeding the top of your recording app's meters. If it's clipping, turn down the levels for line-in in the recording volume control used in the last step. Try recording a sample clip, then play it back. If all has gone well, you should have a clean recording. Cheers.

I still have no welcome. Waaaaa! Okay, kidding. But funny, I feel like I'm getting to know some of you.

This is a long shot, but do these Sharps have digital amps? I have read that because of the modulation method used, some sound cards can't properly sample the output of some digital amps. Perhaps this is your problem. Otherwise - What model MDs? And what kind of sound card? And how are you connecting them? [i.e. headphone out on MD -> line in on sound card, or line out on MD -> line in on sound card, etc.] Any more info on what you're using and how you're using it would be useful in figuring this out. Cheers.

I went and read the review, sounds about right.

I am leery of SACD. I agree with the AES that 1-bit SD is not a good format. I can't find a link to their paper [presented at the 110th Convention, 2001 May 12–15] but if you want a copy I can put it on my server for you.

90 and 120 refer to the angle-width in stereo of an MS microphone [mid-side]. Changing the angle shouldn't alter levels that much. It only alters the apparent width of the soundstage. Specs for the MS907 say, "Maximum Sound Pressure Level Input: more than 110dB SPL" which is fairly high, actually, but still - you might end up with distortion in your recording from the music simply being too loud for it to cope with. What it RSHVC?

You could be either a) overdriving the mic [exceeding it's max. SPL] or overdriving the mic input [which doesn't have a lot of headroom on portables like MDs]. If you're using a MS907 then a battery box won't help you since it's only powered by its internal battery. [***I might actually be wrong on this, some mics of this type can detect external power and bypass their own battery in favour of it, but I haven't known the 907 to do this, and I've used them a lot] If the problem isn't that the mic is being overdriven [and is that the mic preamp is] then an external preamp would likely fix your problem. Most external preamps are also battery boxes, and include gain and/or level controls. Sound Professionals have a very decent portable preamp that runs off one 9V battery and plugs into the line-in on your MD, skipping the [clipping] mic preamp altogether. The line-in has a lot more headroom.

The sensitivity switch on most MDs basically is a high/low compression switch. AGC = a form of dynamic compression. My experience would put it this way: High sensitivity = hard knee, high compression with limiting. Low sensitivity = soft knee, mid-compression with limiting. Unfortunately you're stuck with these settings with no control over the ratio or threshold of compression. This means you get the artifact of apparently 'raised levels' during quiet passages. What in fact is going on is that the gain is set fairly high in either case [more notably with high sensitivity] which makes the compression/limiting very obvious. Outboard compressors that do a decent job aren't that expensive, but you have to remember that even these don't have infinitely short response times and can drive your recorder in clipping during sharp transients as they catch up with input levels. The best solution would be manual compression in conjunction with manual record levels. Onboard DSP is already capable of this, should they choose to implement it, which is doubtful. My solution is usually to leaves lots of headroom while recording. If you can count on a S:N ratio and dynamic range in excess of 80dB with even the worst portable preamps, it's easier IMO to just have your levels manually set so that the loudest average/normal peaks are around -20dB to start. 20dB is quite a bit of headroom, and with a noise floor that's still 60dB below average level, there's enough room to play with that you can make good recordings without the horrible artifacts of AGC -or- the inconvenience of lugging around extra equipment that needs AC power. I then add compression digitally during post-processing if I feel it's necessary. Cheers.

Different condensor mics have different bias voltages, yes, as with ribbon mics if I'm not mistaken. Dynamic mics do not require any form of power to work, howewer. Most non-dynamic studio, stage, and broadcast equipment are made to work with 48V power. Some mics have their own power supplies for 200 or or more volts to the mic. Portable equipment is usually made for the 9-12V range. Most of what we use with MDs [i.e. mini and micro electrets] fit in this category, but still work reasonably well with only 1.5V. Adding more bias voltage [especially fitting into the ideal range of the mic] increases headroom and lowers distortion [edit: it makes it possible to record louder sounds without clipping distortion, thence increasing your dynamic range]. Hence the purpose of battery boxes and pocket preamps. Cheers, D

People have been repeatedly emphasising how slow MO media are since I started reading here. Sony's choice of using USB 1.1 is a mystery to me, but I don't think it has anything to do with how quickly the discs can read or write. See http://minidisc.org/hi-md_faq.html#r_q104 Perhaps the real issue is Sony's DRM? Encrypting/decrypting and transcoding? I don't know. I have no experience with Sonicstage yet. All I know is that the stated specs don't reflect the opinion that the speed of the medium is severely bottlenecking even USB 1.1. [Funny note: Sony's product literature on the web mostly say that Hi-MD uses USB 2.0] Thinking.. Stated data rate is 9.83Mbps .. USB 1.1's is 12Mbps .. standard PCM is 1.4Mbps .. so even writing PCM back to the disc should be possible at faster than realtime speeds. Of course, write speed and read speed need not be the same, but write speed must be at least the 1.4Mbps for PCM to work.. which would not be fast enough for claimed "100x" transfers of even 48kbps content. Still seems like a software issue, to me.

Oh, and sorry if I'm seeming hostile. I'm not meaning to be .. maybe I'm just being a grumpy pooh today. Ah oh! Sarcasm! I must indeed be a grumpy pooh if I'm taking things so literally. Phbbbbbbt. Truce?

Every DVD I have [with the exception of one of the Harry Potter films, which uses 384kbps because it has 4 soundtracks on it] uses 448kbps. Not that this is definitive, but my rendering software [Vegas 4.0, which I used last year to engineer, master and render a 5.1 soundtrack for DVD] claims that 448kbps is the standard rate. And lastly, The maximum bitrate of AC3 is 640kbps. If you don't believe that, I can send you some material made at that bitrate.

Really, now. ATRAC is over 13 years old. The standard for MP3 itself is older than ATRAC. And AAC and OGG are both newer. It would stand to reason that as time goes by, things improve. ATRAC is not known among anyone I know in the audio community up here as the highest quality thing around. Most people I know who care for quality are sticking with AAC and OGG, and lastly lame MP3 for compatibility with cheap hardware players. All of which generally sound better than ATRAC for close listening. On the other hand, for first-generation compression of field recordings [what *all* of the people I know who use MD use it for, without exception] ATRAC is an acceptable compromise simply because MD is such a handy format. Not because it sounds best. And don't compare ATRAC with DVD-A. DVD-A can support up to 24-bit quantisation and 96kHz sampling rates depending on the number of channels used - no compression format can compete with -real- high resolution recordings.

I know this post is oldish but the standard rate for AC3 on DVD is 448kbps, not 384kbps. AC3 also does a lot of shifty bit-allocation things that make it basically as comparable to ATRAC or ATRAC3 as either is to AAC. They were designed for different purposes. Furthermore, Sony made ATRAC completely independently of Dolby's research. They found out that Dolby had already patented certain things that ATRAC could have been considered to be copying, and negotiated a liscence with Dolby rather than deal with the probability of a lawsuit.

I've done this a number of times [being the one running the sound board] and have to warn that every peculiarity of the mix goes straight to the recording medium - i.e. jumps and dips in volume from the engineer rushing to catch up with the musicians, etc. I tend to prefer live recordings that use a mix of the board sound and at least one ambient microphone to pick up the room sound/crowd. Live recordings without a crowd mic can sound extremely odd. If you know the sound engineer where you're going to be recording, I'd check to see if the equipment they're using has multiple mix buses - that way the engineer can use one mix for the PA and route that along with an ambient mic or two to another mix to take out for your recorder. I've gotten very pleasing results this way, though it has to be monitored at first to make sure the ratio of board vs. mic is okay.

I ordered an MZ-NH700 from them [i'm on a budget] and have been told it would be shipped to me when they receive their first shipment. I know others who have purchased from Minidisc Canada before and all of them have given good marks on their customer service and shipping turnaround time.