Sparky191

Yes but you're recording them to WAV. (ATRAC >>>WAV) So it doesn't matter that they were once ATRAC. Unless you some technical information that proves otherwise. You're still transcoding it once you encode the WAV to something else. It doesn't make any difference. Other than you'll be putting them back into a proprieterty format again, and likely have the same problem again in a year or so. Which doesn't make sense. Also you're missing my point. I was replying on this post. If its done right there shouldn't be any difference. You've answered your own question. You can only record them back in real time, regardless of which player you use. The HiMD have the advantage of USB playback though. I guess it depends on how important SQ and the cost of your time is.

It also makes it much harder to crack the encryption if its locked in hardware and not availible in software.

I assume you've all seen this thread http://www.atraclife.com/index.php?showtopic=440 Not immediately relevant to HiMD/MD but might spark some ideas. Maybe not.

I think this such all be qualified by saying transcoding can give you poor results. But if you can't hear the difference does it really matter. (it would to be me I wouldn't do it) However a lot of opinions on SQ are subjective, so it really up to you to decide whats acceptable to you. However its important to note that in the future you may be come more demanding and transcoded, or low bitrates may no longer be acceptable. So it a form of future proofing to try and achieve the best SQ from the start. However if in the future you decide you need to recode your library, to improve SQ, perhaps for a favorite album etc. You can always keep the original files on MD as a backup. Personally I think and MP3 encoded with LAME and high quality preset settings (theres many different possible settings - all hotly debated) can equal the quality of ATRAC. But perhaps create slightly larger files to achive the same SQ. While ATRAC has it advantages, its a proprietary format like Apples' iPod only ACC format. MP3 is much more widely supported, and is a good compromise between SQ and size. Many people choose to archive from the original source as lossless, FLAC or WAV as this allows you recode without transcoding. But it does means you need a huge amount of disk space. Another point to note is that on a modern computer it doesn't take long to rencode a CD. So you could easily do 100+ in an afternoon. Retagging is a pain, but it would only take a few hours. The effort required to record in realtime 100+ MD's, split the tracks, recode them, and tag them is huge. You'd be literally months doing that. When you consider you could pick up 2nd hand CD's for very little. You have to compare the time + cost of both methods. Of couse if your MD's are primarily live recordings, then you've no other option. But the quality encoding from CD is excellent, and you have the CD's as backup. I started recording and encoding my cassettes and the time and effort involved just wasn't worth the results. Now I'm picking up 2nd CD's when I can, and only recording the best and/or the rarest of the cassettes.

Ok my mistake. I should have said most "people" don't want disks. For many MD users the attraction is the disks. But you're in the minority. I say you're because while I use MD/HiMD Having a bunch of disks does not appeal to me, and is not the attraction. In fact its a hassle.

Same with US sales. (US delivery only usually)

If you use a HD as a backup, you should still have a backup of the HD. Especially considering the effort you'll make to get it on to a HD in the first place. The easiest why is to use a 2nd HD. They are very cheap, and it would extremely rare to have two different HD fail at the same time. I use one internal disk, and an external disk. The later is often offsite, and only brought onsite to do a backup.

AFAIK. No. AFAIK (and I'm a bit hazy on the details) iRivers H120/140/320/340 come close, but of all your requirements they lack the editing features, or ease of recording. They do record to WAV or MP3 and have analog line in/out and in the case of the H100's Optical line in/out. Most HiMD don't even have that. SQ of HiSP/HiLP isn't too demanding. I think more critical tastes would have problems with the SQ of the iRiver recordings and the lack of level monitoring. I'm not a technophobic. So I don't really understand why people have an adversion to computers. Its a tool to me like a hammer or saw in my shed. That said I choose to use a HiMD to record my cassettes rather than a computer. But thats because its difficult to move my HiFi and computer together. I also think HiMD does a decent job of putting in track marks automatically. The transfer times are a PITA though.

ATRAC is audio compression algorithm. Another one is MP3 and another one ACC (iPods) for example. There are different version of ATRAC as it was improved over the years. ATRAC1, ATRAC3, ATRAC3, ATRAC3+. From that you will see that ATRAC3+ is the latest one. Most common ATRAC3+ bitrates are 352kps 256kps (HiSP) 64kps (HiLP PCM is not a ATRAC format and is an uncompressed format of the same quality as a CD. WAV is more or less the same. HiMD can also play and record this format. But it has nothing to do with ATRAC. These might be helpful.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATRAC or http://www.minidisc.org/hi-md_faq.html#_q93

I see lots of disks with HiMD compatible in big text and smaller writing you realise they are standard disks. I would be easy to make a mistake and buy them thinking they were HiMD. Its that kinda sly marketing that has turned people off MD. Beside no one want VHS tapes, they want a HD recorder. Likewise no one wants disks for their music player.

MD technology has been around for well over a decade and HiMD exploits the physical characteristics of heating the the medium with a laser to squeeze more data on a disk. Up to 2GB is theoritically possible. Its not really "amazing, bleeding edge" though. It all based on existing technologies. Sony kept it at 1GB to keep it backward compatible with MD. Put into perspective with flash drives of 4GB and hard disk technology now achieving 1/8" drives at 60GB its simply not enough capacity to compete as a "player" in the market. Slow transfer speeds are also a significant disadvantage, as is the software. Theres no reason why they can't put all the MD recording functionality into a Hard disk or flash based device. MD had a head start of 9 years on the iPod and the market simply didn't go for it. Too expensive, too restrictive. Sony needed to flood the market with a cheap MD and make the media widely available. Instead it choose to profiteer. The market turned its back on it. There is nothing (currently) to match MD for recording. Thats why it still lives. However its a tiny section, of the portable music market. But theres no point in keeping harping on about recording. Everyone knows MD is great at recording. But the reason its not in Best buy is because 1) few people want to do that. 2) there are better music players.

My understanding of it, is that the iPod DRM is applied in the ACC files that you download from the iTunes store. Files you add yourself are not themselves not subject to DRM. However DRM is applied in effect to everything in the iTunes/iPod because its designed so you can't sync the iPod to different libraries, with other PC's and/or other users. To a user who just downloads their own music it doesn't really effect you. Obviously there are ways around this, but out of the box to "normal" user thats how it is. However until recently SS applied it to all your tracks and you had a limited number of times you could tracks on your MD. You also couldn't upload your recordings, and then they changed it so you could only do it once. The latest version have obviously changed all this. But it was so awkward and bug infested at the time, that many user lost patience with it. On many forums if you talk about MD, someone almost always posts who experienced the woes of NetMD, and rants about how bad MD and SS is. That has to put people off. No matter how good HiMD is now it will always be associated with NetMD and earlier versions of SS. It doesn't matter if DRM is in the file format or not. If the only way to get the music on the player (iTunes/SS) is DRM bound itself. If its done well like the iPod, users don't mind. If its done badly, SS, then you lose customers. However (this is an important difference) doing it this way allows the use of a tagged Database on the player and the computer which adds a bunch of functionality. Playlists, etc. On the players that don't do it this way, and are pure UMS devices, using folders and files for navigation, like iRiver and Cowon, their tagged Database system are noticebly inferior, if they even exist. Since the iPod is 85% of the MP3 market, you can infer that DRM and lack of UMS for music isn't holding it back. Apple needs DRM to get the content which is another issue again.

I'm sure you'd sell them as easy (for the same price) without the charger, and MD disks and without the internal battery. Yes you'd have to repackage them, but I'd have thought you could sell the chargers, MD disks and battery seperately to cover that. Maybe Sony won't allow that though.

Its always been an issue with River that they don't fix firmware issues and change features for no good reason, even between the same product in different regions. Once bitten twice shy. So many people who owned the H1xx series didn't upgrade to the H3xx series, in fact it caused a scramble for the last of the H1xx units. That had to hurt. More competition now from all sides too.

The newer Senn 350/450/550 are meant to be less bassy and more trebly than the older 300/400/500. That might explain the disparity in opinion.

Well I'm convinced. I'm going to transcode all my HQ LAME VBR MP3's and 224kps ACC to low bitrate ATRAC to hear how better it is.

AFAIK any transfer of a lossy source file, you can do to another format will involve passing it through a decoder/encoder, or transcoding it at some point. You can't avoid it.

I struggle to get a good seal, the same on both ears with my hje50s. Even when I have a decent fit (for me) I wouldn't say they were overly bassy. Maybe I never get a good seal though. But then everything seems bass lite since I stopped using my old Sharp MD. Sonically I prefer my Senn MX500's to the hje50s. Though the hje50s are probably more accurate.

My over simplifcation is from going into shops and asking why do you not stock MD/HiMD any more, and they say "because we couldn't sell them, everyone one wants MP3 players, and also the MD/HiMD are too expensive". Thats good enough for me, and I agree with them. Lots of MD users are having the same experience. My point about the iPod is that it has DRM restrictions and it hasn't been a problem for its sales. Sony Net MD was badly recieved not because it had DRM but because it was extremely badly implemented. You and the big business may think it was their master strategy and grand designs. Personally I think it simply a matter of bad design. Personally I like MD despite Sony best attempts to wreck the format. As a player only unit, its been surpassed IMO. Most players (in my experience) allow UMS for data. its only music that wrapped in DRM. Same with MD. On my Zen Micro the last firmware updated added UMS for music aswell. It already had UMS for data. Re: UMS for data is pretty much the same with pretty much any other MP3 players I've used. But I don't know about every player on the market. Why not just tell us the one Mp3 player (or 20) you've found that doesn't have UMS for data, instead of being awkward. Baffling Dunno whats with the attitude, to be honest. No ones here unless they are into MD, and are interested in discussing it. Its not a pissing contest, most people just want to help each other out. For that reason I think its good not to rubbish other products just because they are not MD's. But to look at what makes them different. I think the crux of the matter is here. Consumers aren't automatically "naive" and HiMD isn't comprehensively superior to MP3 players. Just because MD suits your/our needs doesn't mean it best suited to everyone elses needs. In many ways MD is old technology and the sound advantages aren't there if you use a good MP3 player and the right codec, encoded properly. For example ATRAC is only getting losless now, and its not available on any portable device. ACC lossless has been there for years on the iPod. Then you've WAV, FLAC, LAME, OGG, etc.

I think its part of the reason. Usability was the main reason. The iPod has DRM restrictions.

I'd assume Best Buy doesn't carry it because it doesn't sell well. End of story. Lots of Sony stores have stopped carrying it aswell, likely for the same reason. DRM has nothing to do with UMS. Do you mean folder file based navigation vs ID tagged? Thats a design difference nothing to do with DRM. Most DRM (that I'm aware of) only effects music bought online. Mainly to allow them to sell it to you in the first place. Sonys SS DRM can be applied to all your music, including your own recordings, and your own rips from CD's. Only in the latest versions of SS has Sony allowed you to turn this off. Thats a funny kinda heaven. A lot of players from iRiver, Cowon and creative have only recently added support for DRM files to allow you buy music from online sources. Sony MD has had it from day one. Which flash mp3 players don't allow you to use them as a data drive?

Equally are the codecs in the hardware being improved. I'd assume for older codecs to be backward compatible they won't be improved. Only the new ones, Atrac3+ tec.

That said, its nice to see people being enthuastic about the format. Even if it seems I'm having a handbag fight with them. I'm not, just like a good debate. Just wish there was less of the Rose tinted classes. I posted somewhere else that theres two main reasons to use MD/HiMD. 1) SQ 2) Rec SQ Does the mass market want this? Sadly I don't think so. No ones pitching this to people anyway. Would make a great marketing/sales campaign.

Quality? Lots of people left MD when they experienced the quality of Net MD and the versions of SS that accompanied it. Add to that the nightmare of Sony's DRM. You also have the issue of native MP3 support. Sony just weren't giving people what they wanted. This is prior to the iPod. Apple come along and have a proprietary format, ACC, and DRM control. However it all just works. Unlike MD and SS at the same time. The market voted with its wallet. Its only with the 2nd gen HiMD and SS 3x that Sony have relented their crazy business model. Most people were comming from cassette walkmans, and CD players, and most portable devices do not have very good SQ, even the CD walkman. So low bit rate MP3's or better again ACC sounds as good to most people. The majority of people are not into Hi-Fi. Once its good enough thats all they need. Also the majoity of people don't record. So they are simply not into those features. Most people don't even change the rubbish earphones they get with their portable players. While Apple are great at selling and marketing smoke and mirrors. Its obvious the iPod fills a niche for people. It what they wanted. Easy to use, fast transfer, large capacity and product support. Its a niche MD/HiMD with its current feature set, can't fill. Sony seem unwilling to make any effort with the format. With recordists, and people interested in SQ. MD still has a place. Is that market big enough for Sony to keep making the format? Who knows. I've noticed on some of the HiFi forums, where you get a lot of MD users. A lot of them have become ex MD users, switching to lossless, FLAC, ACC on HD players like iRiver, Cowon and iPods.

The process is illogical. Nothing subjective about it. Transcoding reduces SQ. Encoding from an original CD or WAV recording to ATRAC makes sense. Transcoding a MP3 to ATRAC doesn't. The only reason you would do that is if you don't have the original source, or you have it already ripped to MP3. If thats the case and you have 40+ CD's of the stuff, and you have any interest in SQ (given that you mention the 'phones I assume you do) then you need to buy a better MP3 player, or re-encode it to ATRAC. Not transcode it. If the issue is capacity and you simply want more music on the device, then a large capacity HD is the way to go. Given your requirements Seems odd to choose a HiMD, which sounds best with ATRAC not MP3 and isn't best suited to large music libraries. Small capacity and slow transfer rates. However if you are happy with the sound of transcoded stuff to HiLP, then who am I to rain on your parade. But you posted here to discuss it. You left out some critical info. What is the source material, and whats the MP3 player.