The Low Volta

I believe I read here on MDCF that CBR and VBR MP3's van cause SS to behave strangely or to crash it... try converting your MP3's to non-CBR's and try again... if it persists, let us know BTW, I'm definitely no MP3 expert, just repeat what I've read (as I don't have/use MP3's) but give it a try... Greetings, Volta

that isn't an opportunity, that's a steal... but I would really make sure the seller's legit (well, not really necessary for such a low price) cause normally it costs $70 and more (on e-bay)... sorry to say this, but I really don't believe someone would sell their (working) rm-mc40elk for so little money... if you believe it, try it and let us now, you could have done the deal of the century! greetings, Volta

when you go to tools/options/transfer/himd/transfer settings you can set SS to "transfer tracks always in a specified bitrate" or to "transfer as they are if this is a format understood by the player"... it would seem to me that when you check a specified birate, the MP3's should be converted even when using Hi-MD mode...could be usefull to check this out before you revert to using Net-MD-mode I would give it a try, but I've got a NH900=1st gen so I can't play MP3's as MP3's and they are always converted...besides, I don't have any MP3's Volta

an older type of MD has less space when used as a non-HiMD disc than when you format it as Hi-MD so yes, you'll lose space Volta

if you insert a non-1gig disc (60/74/80 min Minidisc) you should find the 'discmode' option in the menu somewhere Volta

just as a slight remark I wasn't trying to get the best result I could possibly get, I was just quickly testing (without doing to much effort ) whether it worked... of course it did, later I noted down the settings as a report of the test, not as 'best practice'... so, Dex indeed, 18/30 and adjusting the TV seems logical...BUT the main thing to remember when recording TV: make sure you know what's on! I accidentally taped 5 Shakira songs ! greetings, Volta disclaimer: I have nothing against Shakira or her fans... but I personally do not feel the need to actually listen to her music and will avoid it if possible

tuner remotes (like the one that comes with the NH800) only work for players that have a 'tuner' as one of their features so the NH800 only, putting a tuner remote on a NH600D will just give you the remote functons, but not the tuner... IMHO, the Rm-mc40elk is a bit of overkill for a NH600D, as it really shines in (stealth) recording situations, which you won't be experiencing with a download model only... greetings, Volta

you don't happen to mean the left one is shorter by about 12 inches? this is the easy to wear neckstrap type of earbuds they are dumping on the world nowadays... (get Sennheise MX450's if you like a better sound and symmetrical buds for little money $15) Volta

for speech (interviews, lectures...) I use a Sony ECM-C10 through mic -in on my NH900 and that works fine (but only for speech!). It cost me about €40 so $48 but that was already some time ago greetings, Volta

please read the rules for psting n the software faq's and post according to these (with full system specs and a decent description of the actual problem) otherwise it would be very hard to help you 'cause I'm sorry, but right now I really don't understand what you're saying - recording on SS? downloading (PC->MD) or uploading (MD->PC) - analog recordings on a NH600D I thought this was a download only model without a line and mic in, so hat would mean there's no possibility to record analog with it greetings, Volta

please read the rules for posting and post according to them (with full system specs and a very precise description of your problem) as this really is way to vague for anybody to help greetings, Volta PS: there is no way it will work on mac except with virual pc

just take two thin tubes in wool/cotton, pull the BMC3 elements through each one of them, attach the tubes to the arms of you glasses and make sure the elements are in place (use doublesided tape if you have to)... behind your head, where both tubes connect, place a bead or an elastic band or something to keep them together and lead the cables into the back of your shirt... like on this pic here lended from Soundpro's I really don't see why they would have to build them from scratch just to mount them in croakies... this really looks like something you can do yourself greetings, Volta

I love my NH900, I think it can do almost anything the NH1 can, except for the timestanp function and the clock It is slightly bulkier (very little though) and has a somewhat more limited remote but it has the bigger (but not always easy to read) display on the player and has the AA add-on (so battery life is extendeable) and no proptietary elements (like the NH1's USB-connection, USB-cable, special current connector which requires the charging stand, special Sony Li-Ion battery,...) 'cause of these reasons, I personally prefer the NH900 over the NH1, which is why I chose the NH900, but I have never really used the NH1 (only handled it in the shop), so to really compare their useability aspects is kinda hard for me hope this still helps a bit greetings, Volta

well, I used the headphone out, bu I can set its level and put it to somewhat rediculously high (well it's almost always at that level as my partially deaf dad uses it for his tv-hearing aid) went minijack->minijack -line in, manual reclevel (25/30), mic sense low (does this matter with line in?), trackmark @60min the recording was very clear and levels were perfectly on first dot with peaks till halfway to second dot.. greetings, Volta

haha, for something I made up on the toilet, it sure lasts long

Soundpros even sell them mounted in croakie themselves, so why would it not work? also try this thread for ideas greetings, Volta

I have been wondering really long if I should answer to this. Not because it would be so difficult for me as I'm so 'cool' but oh so dim but 'cause this really is to adolescent for words. Man, you even destroy your own arguments, so why should I bother. (you say you don't use stereo cause it's often unbalanced and not 'as-it-is' but you still use equalizers... they enhance only a couple of frequencies so that would really destroy the soundpicture as is, not?) I will try to keep my answer simple and at a decent level... but that redundancy was put in there by the ppl who made the music...if my favorite bands would make a mono record, I would respect their idea and listen to it in mono, not go about and try to make stereo from that mono track... sounds logical, not? then why would you want to do it in the opposite direction? ever listened to things like Arvo Pärt or Satie? They not only use stereo as an "instrument" (it really ads something to the music) but they also use silence as an instrument...according to your theory this should yield very small files, as when you "edit out all redundancies" by making it mono, why stop at that, silence is just silence, so why keep all of that in? If you leave just a little gap, so you know there was some silence there, no INFO actually is lost? that would be true, if both your ears would be placed right on top of each other let's say in the middle of your forehead or something (perhaps they are, in which case, sorry )... But with normal ppl they are situated at both sides of a real physical separator: your head. becouse of that, even a pure 'mono' sound coming from somewhere will yield two different sounds IN your ears. This has to do with a lot of factors like the angle of the soundsource to the line of your ears; interaction between soundwaves and physical objects (like that head) and many more... and that would imly a free open space, once you start looking at room accoustics, the picture really gets complicated. Even though it is this complicated, ppl can reproduce sounds in such a way that you (by listening trough headphones with only two speaker-elements, not stereo surround stuff) can get a clear directional picture of the sounds. This recording technique is called 'binaural recording'. You should listen to it sometimes, but don't 'mono' it first and then complain you couldn't hear it so you change everything to make it sound as it was? boy that must be the most haughty remark I've heard in a long time sorry, but now I've got to laugh... I never said you should do tests in the first place. You just popped up in this thread with the 'one and only, the ultimate test that would prove once and for all that MP3 sucked'... well, for all I care you should never do a test again, but don't post about them either. If you post about them, I have the right to question your method and to suggest other (in my view better) methods...that is what a free forum is all about. For the "wav 100% natural audio power"-part I want to point out again that as bug80 also explained... we hear nature in stereo, even if it sings in mono...so any natural sound would be in stereo... besides, wav (or PCM) can sound like crap too if the recording, the source material is crap, not even going mono will change much ...PCM is only bits and bytes: say digital photography... of course a low res pic can't be as sharp as some very high res one, but with the high res one you could also take rubbish pics if you don't get the lighting right. I know my maths, but I just don't get it... wouldn't you say that there is a much bigger difference between 294 and 146 than between 146 and 128? By halving the stereo to mono, you compressed all the info in the music to half the bits&bytes, 'cause as I said, stereo is 2 channels with (slightly) different info, while mono, played through a stereo speker set or headphones is 2 identical channels. So according to your calculationsreverting to mono cost you a lot more in quality than using Hi-SP in stead of SP. My guess, the Sony-dumb@sses actually realized that (almost) noone uses mono to listen to music...I personally think mono is very useful...for speech, memo's and stuff, but then I use a dictation machine (they can still do mono) he day I think saving space is worth it to really cripple my listening experience, I think I hope they have found better lossy codecs, 'cause I really won't try mono just to save space, kills to much musical-info IMHO...until then, Hi-SP suits me just fine for listening on the move and such if I would ever use mono, it definitely wouldn't be through headphones. If you listen to it through speakers, (like on a lot of rockshows), the room accoustics and the position of your ears and all at least work to give the impression the sound is natural and alive. If you listen to mono through headphones, why bother using both ears? You get all the info exactly identical at both sides, so you could just as well plug one ear shut and only use the other to listen. ?? so stop listening in real life, 'cause you never hear exactly the same through both ears. And believe me, a bird-concert early in the morning, when you rise from your tent on a hike in the woods comes very close to audio-perfection ...even if I still hear it in stereo...darn, I wish I was deaf at one side, those lucky bast@rds hear audio perfection all the time (this last remark was sarcasm and definitely not intended to hurt any partially deaf person!) ah, with perfection you mean the dull, very dead 'not one interferin factor present' I hear e v e r y t h i n g that is in there exactly as it is there... well, let me tell you one thing, that is not audio perfection, also 'cause I'm afraid you can never control your ears to signal everything perfectly to your brain...the best thing is to print out all the digital 1's & 0's or some graphs and read your music, much closer to perfection. But the whl audio experience involves human listening to stuff... this can and should never be 'perfect' as that would mean dead... I find it very hard to respect ppl that won't understand the idea that what they are shouting is just an opinion. Arguments can work consructive to gain a better knowledge of certain issues... shouting only proves one's incompetence to formulate real arguments auch, sorry if I insulted you by rationally reasoning against you method and ideas, but this is no ego show... I simply didn't believe in your method period. So maybe I write it down a little different than someone else, sorry I'm not so tech savvy...that doesn't make me cool, that makes me jealous of all those other ppl here that are trashing your methods/ideas by using the correct terms. I never called myself cool and never would...but if you mean with it that I don't get carried away and start SHOUTING in capitals all the time, than I thank you very much for the compliment to be honest, I would have tried to explain it to you as clear as I ever could (and there probably would have been some mistakes in it) but Dex has beaten me to it, and believe me, I can never out-tech him! (and strangely enough I respect his arguments, as he never shouts them) What I think is very important here concerning stereo is the listening aspect through headphnes, as that's what this thread was about: -with mono, both ears recieve exactly the same info -with stereo they recieve a (slightly) differing signal, so that in our brain that difference is translated into spatial info... so stereo produces some extra info, not from the bits & bytes present, bu exactly from the difference in b&b's between both ears. in nature and everywhere in real life, your ears pic up differing signals, that's part of our survival technique, as we cn guess from what direction danger is coming... so our ears are quite used to that stereo thingy...and I for one wouldn't want to miss it, certainly not when a band I respect has put effort into producing that stereo picture...who am I to say that it's redundant? greetings, Volta

just had some codfish with some unpeeled new potatoes and endives (admittedly, not at my PC ) ...and Kaineda77 actually believed none of the MDCF-members ever think of food as they are posting here

I found a disc with things that could be missed, so I went ahead and gave it a try... guess what, it worked with my NH900 that is some crazy excrement happening there in my little machine... but still, don't think I will be using it often BTW, Killroy, I went through hell to try this I wanted to record some MTV just for the purpose of this test, but shakira was on. So I waited till her song was done and pressed rec and walked away to do something useful while waiting... but I hadn't seen it was shakira night or something ! So I recorded 5...FIVE shakira songs in a row and what's worse (a lot worse!), I even listened to them a couple of times (well partly) while performing the steps described above so you owe me big for still going through with this test greetings, Volta (and if you will excuse me, I will now go and wash out my ears) PS: Sorry all you shakira fans out there... don't want to diss you, but shakira and me, will always be just as comfortable as cacti and balloons... just not my cup of tea!

it works for anything recorded on a disc in Hi-MD format (what you have done is the actual method described in the faq's to upload realtime digitally if the SS-faster than realtime-upload has failed for some reason), but not for anything on a disc in non-Himd (like LP2/LP4/SP discs that can be played in older pre-Hi-MD machines, what this thread actually was about) greetings, Volta

indeed and... ---- I just tried it myself, switched it on, turned it to MTV and pressed rec, checked levels... worked just fine... too bad I didn't check what was on... now I've actually got shakira on MD blech! (not to offend any shakira fans out there, but it really is not my cup of tea )

please read the rules for posting in the software faq's... and give us (a lot) more details about your system specs and MP3-specifications (especially bitrate) ...'cause this really is too little info to help you in any way greetings, Volta

you could try GP powerbank...

charging cradle: nope remote: non-LCD lipstick type remote I believe my idea: import from Japan cheap: don't import from Japan but live with the crippled accessories and search around on the net (not only on MDCF) greetings, Volta

hm, try this