greenmachine

If the camcorder's automatic level control works the same way as minidisc's AGC works, it needs to exceed a certain level to work. It depends on many factors such as the loudness of the signal, the microphones' sensitivity and the battery boxes' attenuation if it'll exceed that point. If it does, you'll get virtually the same compressed sound as before, but with less/no clipping. If there's no possibility to defeat that ALC, you have to work below it's threshold to get a dynamically uncompressed recording. If you're satisfied with the way the ALC works and all you need is an undistorted recording just use the battery boxes' attenuator in loud environments and don't worry. Yes, there is, at least theoretically - the higher voltage from the battery box improves the microphones's performance/specifications. If you will notice it practically and it's worth carrying aditional gear around is a different question.

But not too reliable since most of them are dying after a few years even if stored properly.

http://forums.minidisc.org/index.php?showtopic=7989

The medium itself is the main difference. I think you should also take a closer look at the Creative Nomad Jukebox 3.

To answer Baub's questions: Yes, if you're recording directly to the digital input, the recorder is not supposed to change the signal in any way. Sony's statement on cd players can be easily misunderstood. They propably mean that if you use a cd player as a source, it has to have an optical digital output. Of course, other devices with optical output than cd players can be used as well. Since you already seem to have all the necessary equipment except for the storing device, you could also consider DAT, Compact-Flash or Harddisk-based recorders, where each has their own advantages and disadvantages. Click here to read on: http://www.taperssection.com/index.php?topic=29057.0

Yes, it's a simple condenser in-line. Every 'battery box' uses one for each channel to avoid d.c. voltage entering the recorder's input. By choosing the value of this condenser, you set the rolloff frequency. By setting the value high enough, you'll set the rolloff frequency below 20 Hz, which means no rolloff at all (just for subsonics you are not suppoded to hear anyway. To build a higher order filter is a much more complex task. 1st order = 6dB/Oct 2nd order = 12dB/oct 3rd order =18dB/oct 4th order=24db/oct ...and so on... It would be only useful if you only have a microphone input available (preamplifier gain cannot be reduced - when recording with camcorders, etc.). When using minidisc recorders, you should instead switch to the line-input if you're getting overload through the mic-in in loud environments. "Attenuation of the microphone output degrades the signal to noise ratio and should only be used, when the preamplifier gain can not be reduced." (Siegfried Linkwitz) Avoid to alter the signal before it reaches the recorder (bass rolloff...) whenever possible (if you can get a clean, undistorted signal without rolloff), you can always edit it afterwards if necessary.

That's a highly subjective question. For me, the quality degradation from LP2 to LP4 is much more significant than from SP to LP2. That said, i would use LP4 only if i had no other choices, if i'd really need the extended recording time (speech recording). For music it's unenjoyable. For recording, always use the best quality setting you can afford, you can still downsize it afterwards if you have to. Other than that, you can use the search function, which gave me the following quick result: http://forums.minidisc.org/index.php?showt...&hl=lp4+quality

Yes, but.. -there is no 'plug-in power' from the line input (supply voltage for electret microphones), so you'll need either a mic with built-in power supply (internal battery) or/and use an external power supply a.k.a. 'battery box' if you are using electret microphones (i think more than 90% of the people here use them) and want to record very loud sounds (amplified live concerts...) directly to line-in -for everything else but very loud sounds you'll need an external preamplifier, preferrably with a supply voltage for the mics. If the preamp has lots of headroom and/or offers true variable gain control or you never need to record very loud sounds, you won't need an additional 'battery box'.

Or he did - despite his promises not to alter the signal - some weird kind of equalizing, who knows?

A common first order bass rolloff filter at approx. 100 Hz (6dB/oct. -- 50 Hz will be 6dB quieter, 25 Hz will be 12dB quieter -- 6dB quieter equals half the perceived loudness) doesn't do much damage and can be to a great part restored. In fact, it's even hard to detect sometimes with average equipment. (yellow line=frequency response) It looks differently with a higher order filter, where it works in fact more like a bass 'cut' and is next to impossible to restore. That said, i think it's to a great part the PA system and/or the recording position we should blame here, in fact there is relatively low bass present with peaks at 40-45Hz, but at the same time there's a huge 'hole' in the higher bass region between approx. 60 and 250Hz which is most likely not to blame on a bass rolloff filter, otherwise the low bass wouldn't be that pronounced. If people can't hear that sub-bass, it's propably due to their impotent playback equipment (loudspeakers, headphones...)

I think you're confusing CBR and VBR here. AFAIK, VBR is more likely to cause troubles with incapable software/hardware. You could try to decode the MP3's beforehand to linear pcm (*.wav) and feed sonicstage with that. Or better, if you have the uncompressed source (CD, etc.) available, feed it directly with it, try to avoid transcoding from one lossy format to another whenever possible.

Unfortunately a perfectly efficient all-round codec does not exist, most of them are not even close. You have been comparing two entirely different, noncompatible codecs (Atrac3 and Atrac3+). If you would have compared the same codec with the same internal settings at different bitrates i'd have accepted your statement.

I have to disagree: For lossy codecs it does matter how you select between useful and unuseful information, so theoretically an unefficient codec can sound worse at twice the bitrate than a more efficient one. Ogg Vorbis, HE AAC and MP3Pro seem to be serious competitors at such a low bitrate. I don't think WMA Std performs significantly better than mp3 at 128 kbit/s, if at all: http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat128/results.html

Atrac3 LP2(132) vs Atrac3Plus HiLP(64) discussion: http://forums.minidisc.org/index.php?showtopic=7348

I don't get this 18/30 unity gain setting: If i connect my md-recorder (mz-r 909) to my cd-player (pioneer pd-s 504) - which should have a standard 1V peak to peak output voltage - the analogue way, I have to set the recorder to max. 15/30, anything above would lead to clipping. Did they change the gain for newer MD recorders? Does this cd-player have a higher, non-standard output voltage? Somebody please enlighten me.

Short question - short answer: ---- No

If i would be travelling with two times the speed of light relative to the earth in my spaceship, would time on earth appear to go backwards from my perspective?

Didn't have such a good laugh for a long time, thanks DJ.

You can record either through line-in or mic-in. You would need an external mixer to do it simultaneously. ---- Turn up the TV's volume to the max. and adjust levels with the recorder. By the way, your avatar scares me.

Mp3 @ 128 kbps can be quite acceptable and surpass Atrac at that bitrate in many cases if set properly IMO. It can be a real pity that the uneducated user has so many choices to mis-set it and / or choose encoders which differ more or less significantly qualitywise. For example, many users seem to think choosing 'real stereo' would be 'better' than (m/s) joint stereo (see BladeEnc). They propably knew what they were doing when they decited not to give the user any choice except to choose the bitrate with Atrac. I see no point in setting the lowpass that low for mp3 though, it'd be too obvious IMO.

Don't be shy, i'd count the computer as a modern instrument. Propably you need to be even more creative for this kind of music creation than others who play from a sheet of music. What i meant to ask was whether people create and/or reproduce music.

You might want to check out this group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/njb3tapers/ And this FAQ: http://www.taperssection.com/index.php?boa...;threadid=16338 And this site in general: http://www.nomadness.net I'm using it and my main concern is the lack of a quality built-in mic preamp / A/D converter, so you have to carry around additional devices for recording, which makes it pretty uncomfortable and 'unstealthy'.

The loud passage from 3.30 to 4.20 seems to be seriously clipped (at least the right channel). If you 're looking for high quality mp3 encoding, you can use LAME with the widely accepted --(alt-)preset standard commandline.

If there were no such maniacs, who would develop, tune and compare all these fabulous codecs for the end-consumer?

I've been interested what kind of information the codecs find dispensable and throw away, so i've messed around with an audio editor and came to following results: trash mp3 trash 132 trash 64+ Propably useless but interesting... As expected, Atrac3+ @ 64kbps sounded 'best' in this reversed case, maybe $ony tested it this way