Jump to content

ZosoIV

Members
  • Posts

    264
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ZosoIV

  1. Excellent work! This finally puts to rest a question that I've seen pop up occasionally since the old MD boards were more popular, and one that has always bugged me personally, given my disappointment with (and eventual sale of) the 20ES. Any sound quality difference must therefore be due to more revealing components, a lower noise floor, etc. - which may explain why I liked the JB940 better. Perhaps it was "glossing over" some of the artifacts I would occasionally hear in louder passages with complex material? Either that, or my unit had something wrong with it, perhaps corrupting the decoding end of things.

    If money were no object, I'd still spring for the 555ES, simply for the ability to use LP modes with radio recordings. However, the 20ES may be a dark horse - a deck sometimes overlooked due to being older, not spelling out its ATRAC version clearly, etc., but one whose audio circuitry is on par with revealing DACs and CD players. The prices commanded for the 555 in relation to the 20ES certainly would suggest as much!

  2. How about the (IMO critical) diagram on page 43 (of the original, in PDF pages it's page 39)?

    Would it be too much a stretch to guess they copied the service manual pages from an earlier model (and I don't mean the 22ES), and forgot to update those details?

    Could very well be. Again, I think somebody would actually have to pop open the 20ES to really solve the puzzle. I also found it dumb that Sony numbered the earlier 22ES deck, which did have Type-R, higher than the supposedly later 20ES. I don't think the 22ES was meant for the US market, however....

    Tyep-R or not, the upside of the 20ES is that it did have really good ADC and DAC chips. It's possible that they are so good, in fact, as to reveal problems with the compression codec that are otherwise masked with other decks.

  3. The service manual for the JA20ES clearly shows the CXD-2656R.

    The JB-920 clearly shows CXD-2654R, as do the W1 and 520. However the 530 and 630 have the CXD-2656R. So I think it's safe to assume that the 2656R (never seen 2655R) is the defining element for Type-R.

    I also don't seem to find the service manual for the JA22ES, but it may well be that the 22ES came before the 20ES (however the references on minidisc.org seem to show they were both released in mid 1998, and the 20ES's service manual is dated internally 6.1998). Several translated pages of Sony's mention the 22ES quite prominently as featuring Type-R, so I would guess it also has the 2656R.

    Oddly enough, the service manual for the 20ES only mentions the 2656R once, in the last section, which lists parts by serial number, but mentions the 2654R 33 times elsewhere. I'm not sure which to believe, given my experience with the compression artifacts. We'd have to see if somebody with the 20ES would be willing to pop open the hood and see which chip is really in there. Anybody willing to try?

  4. Well, use them in SP! That should fill them up in no time and you can get mine. :)

    That shouldn't be a problem - I've never liked LP2 (let's not even talk about LP4!) for home use. I'll have a better idea about buying your discs next week, when the deck arrives. How well I like the sound quality will determine how much it will get used. If my past recollections are correct, it may indeed become the main source in my rig.

  5. So, it does look like the JB920 is of the same ilk as the JA20ES, although the JA20ES specifically states it has "Type-R" which in my mind is post ATRAC 4.5 (thus superior). I have recorded and played back from the JA20ES and the JB940. The JA20ES is a much nicer machine for SP recording and playback. I can't speak for the JB920 unit, but I suspect it has a good sound quality ...

    I've always had this sneaking suspicion that the 20ES does not have a Type-R chip, but rather, the MD portal has incorrect information on the chip versions. I've always felt it to be ATRAC 4.5.

    I just looked up the service manuals, and the JB920 and the JA-20ES both have the CXD2654R - so either the 920 also has Type-R, or more likely, the first Type-R deck was the MDS-JA22ES, which is at least referenced by the Sony announcement at the time to specifically use the new Type-R algorithm (http://www.minidisc....nouncement.html). I cannot locate a service manual for that unit. However, the service manual for the JB-930, which used the same deck format as the JA33ES and JA22ES, cites the CXD2656R as the codec ASIC.

    Does the deck itself, literature, or box actually state "Type-R" anywhere? I once owned a JA-20ES and it made no mention of ATRAC version on the nameplate, as newer models did, nor did I find any mention in the manual, which can be downloaded as a PDF. I did not, however, have the original box to see what was printed on the outside. I was also able to hear artifacts that I only could reproduce when recording the same signal digitally with an ATRAC 4.5 portable (MZ-R900), but not the Type-R deck that eventually replaced the 20ES (JB940). In fact, the artifacting on some tracks really bothered me on the 20ES, similar to my experience with other pre-Type R units, but I had to strain to hear any differences between the 940 and the source. That's why I ditched the 20ES.

  6. I've always found it curious that the 50ES is rated higher (at least subjectively) by users than the 555 which has a Type-R chip. On my equipment, ATRAC 4.5 was always noticeably worse in terms of high-frequency artifacts on certain recordings than is Type-R, and the latter seems to have a much "airier," crisper treble presentation, better transient decay, and a quieter background in general.

  7. Thanks for the heads-up! I just recently paid for a MDS-JB940, however - somebody on Head-Fi was selling one, in mint condition, along with 94 used discs. The $150USD asking price made the deal even better! Looking forward to a long-awaited return to MD when the parcels arrive later this week.

    I still can't believe I ever sold my original deck in the first place, back in 2006. All is well, however - now that MD isn't "cool" anymore, it cost me much less to "buy it back," even adjusted for six years of inflation, and I had nowhere near 94 discs on my person when finally selling my original lot of discs in 2006. I find the format to be no less useful in 2012 than it was back when I got into it in the 90's - for home recordists, it really was the peak of consumer audio technology.

  8. I've been out of the MD loop for a while, but since building a bunch of tubed audio gear by hand and ending up with a really killer setup, the remaining empty spot on my rack might benefit from an MD deck. I still do home recording, and feel that playing/recording music through the computer seems to choke all the fun out of it - I am a thirty-something who grew up with LP's, tapes, and CD's, after all! And there's still no better home recordist format than MD, dead or otherwise. Having owned some really great decks in the past (including an Onkyo Hi-MD) and stupidly selling them around 2008, I'm not sure if I will ever be able to get my hands on the few I'd really like to own, but here's some ideas:

    MDS-JB980

    MDS-JE780

    MXD-D400

    Onkyo MD133 or 105 (Hi-MD)

    Special emphasis placed on the 980 and either Onkyo deck. I'd prefer a Type-S deck to be able to record things from the radio in LP2/LP4 and do so in the highest quality possible, though I would certainly consider a late Type-R deck like the JB940 or JA333ES.

    Just think, somebody could give their unused deck a good home and buy an RH1/M200 with the money....

  9. I'm thinking of parting with my JA20ES, as it mostly sits unused in my closet. I acquired the deck second-hand via eBay, but never found much use for it, as I had already moved beyond using MD's to dub my LP records or make compilations (for the former, I've been using a MacBook/Audacity with 96/24 PCM). Physically and mechanically, the deck is in awesome condition, and every function (including the first-thing-to-break fiddly AMS knob) works as new. This was one of Sony's best ES recorders, the first Type-R deck which really made MD an option for high-end recordings. I've read that the DACs on this unit are somewhat better than those that followed, as they are current-pulse (as opposed to hybrid-pulse). The internal signals are handled as 1-bit, super-high sampling frequency PCM, similar to the DSD used on SACD's. The deck has selectable anti-aliasing filters, a selectable bit-depth output (16, 20, or 24-bit), and tons of optical, coaxial, and analog ins/outs. Even as a stand-alone DAC (inputs are easily monitored without a disc by hitting the REC button), it shines.

    I'm willing to give this deck a new home, either for money OR a trade. You see, I could definitely find a use for an RH1 or NH1, as I loved how they sounded as portables (SQ is something which my otherwise useful iPhone is not so great at). So, I'd be happy swapping my deck (with remote and manual) for a nice-condition NH1 or RH1 (preferably the latter, as I prefer listening to high-bitrate LAME mp3's as opposed to ATRAC).

    If anybody is the least bit interested, post here and I'll upload photos. If there's no interest, I'll not bother and go the eBay route (though I'd rather see this gem end up in the hands of a fellow MD aficionado).

  10. In fact, USB sticks have come down so much that for most uses, even a hard drive isn't always necessary. Case in point: I think the online retailer New Egg still has a 32GB flash drive available for $73 (after rebate). Unless you're backing up your entire computer, 32GB should hold a ton of files/music/backups while taking up no space in your pocket and transferring files some 10-20x faster than Hi-MD. Plus, at $73, we're talking about $2 per GB, a opposed to $7+ for Hi-MD. Hi-MD's are best saved for music, IMO.

  11. Gapless playback has nothing to do with there being "gaps" of silence in the file itself; rather, it's a problem on the hardware side. The hardware (or software) player must "know" that the end of the file has a 576 sample delay and begin to cache the next file, otherwise, a gap will sound between them. ATRAC is no more inherently gapless than MP3 or any other format, it's just that Sony had the good sense to implement gapless playback in their hardware decoders long before people had high-quality MP3 encoders like LAME to encode albums like DSOTM with.

    As most people nowadays listen to crap music and not "concept albums" such as those by Pink Floyd or the Who, gapless playback apparently wasn't big enough of a problem to get "fixed" on most hardware players until about 2-3 years ago. Yet now I have a 2008-vintage Sony NW-616 flash player that can't play anything gaplessly - go figure.

  12. At least you still can walk into a place and find something related to MD/Hi-MD, like units (albeit used) or blanks! Here in the US, MD seems to be all but forgotten on the high street and only occasionally turns up in pawn or used gear shops. Most people wouldn't know what they were if they did see one.....

  13. My RH1 has become undependable. When pressure is applied to the area around the rubber foot under the right side of the screen, it shuts off and restarts itself.

    I am debating getting a second RH1, but my NH1 still works fine. Also, the RH1 still uploads properly. I have a bunch of classic MD recording that I still haven't uploaded so I need a functioning RH1.

    I could get by recording on my NH1 and just using the RH1 for uploads. But, I am wondering:

    1. The RH1 recordings sound great. Does the RH1 record higher quality sound than the NH1, or are they the same in this regard? (I am aware that the RH1 has convenient recording features like remembering your settings, but I am asking only about sound quality.

    2. Are recordings made on an NH1 uploadable to mac?

    3. Does anyone know of a good source for RH1's? The best I've found has been old faithful www.minidisco.com (they have the M200 model)

    Thanks in advance...

    1) Should be the same - the innards of the RH1 and NH1 probably aren't much different.

    2) No - only if you run Windows via Bootcamp or Parallels. (Edit: Do you mean recorded on the NH1, uploaded on the RH1? Then, yes).

  14. There's one seller in particular who regularly lists MD and Hi-MD stuff for quite high prices. The items are often bundled with a couple of cheap mics, a cheap case, some discs, an extra battery, etc - so it looks like you're getting a lot for the money. $175 for something like an MZ-R900 is pretty ridiculous these days, however. Same goes for used MZ-NH700's - I've seen them go for $225.

  15. Looks like somebody was aiming to either 1) make multiple copies of one source at once, or 2) use the thing as some sort of ghetto MD changer.

  16. MD and Hi-MD's strength is in making personal compilations, so I probably wouldn't bother. I only ever had one pre-recorded MD, a Mozart one from Naxos, and that was a bit dull really. Buy the CD and you can do what you like with it, make lossless or compressed versions or whatever, but you get to choose what goes on your compilation, and still have the CD quality original as backup.

    Well said - that's exactly the reason why I never understand how MD never took off in places like the US. It's the perfect medium for making compilations and mixes.

  17. Like I've said before, there are still cylinder players and records from the late 19th/early 20th century that still work. Same goes for 78's, wire recorders, 8-track tapes, and so on. People still collect and listen to those, so MD at least has some chance of retaining users/hobbyists long after it is completely forgotten by the general consumer.

×
×
  • Create New...