phox Posted December 5, 2004 Report Share Posted December 5, 2004 I know this isn't the first time you've herd this and i'm sure it wont be the last, but i just have to vent. WHY does sony feel the need to completely and udderly strangle the Minidisc technology. We all know that minidiscs can become a serious competetor with the iPod if not blow it out of the water What does Sony hope to achieve by putting all these restrictions on the technology? (atrac, SS, restrictions on file movement, etc., etc.) Do they think they'll stop piratism or something? anyone with one hundreth of an once of logic would know that if someone wanted to move music, they would burn it to a disc, why the HELL would they fumble with minidiscs?? If the directors of whatever department is in charge of minidisc development took 5 minutes to look at the technology and make some simple changes, minidiscs would dominate and become a serious force in the portable media world. It could defiently set a new standard and would rival the iPod in sales. I just find it entirly frusterating in how Sony is handeling the technology. It completely bogels the mind to try to understand thier reasoning behind all of this. I'm sry for the post because i know you've herd it all before, but i just wanted to put it in one place and had to vent. If u got beef with how sony is treating the technology and imagine a better world with a few small changes, please, feel free to post, i know i feel better thanks for letting me cool off ~phox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xeroxide Posted December 5, 2004 Report Share Posted December 5, 2004 it is not the first time sony has done something this stupid. Do you remember that protection "key 2 audio" or something like that? a protection that cost sony millions of dollars to develop and was "cracked" by a pen worth $0.99 read this for a laugh http://mixonline.com/news/audio_copyproof_..._cds_cracked_2/ sad thing is... it's true! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b.e.wilson Posted December 5, 2004 Report Share Posted December 5, 2004 WHY does sony feel the need to completely and udderly strangle the Minidisc technology. We all know that minidiscs can become a serious competetor with the iPod if not blow it out of the water ~phox"Udderly strangle"? I'm having a bit of a time picturing that. Not that I disagree with the sentiment, mind you, I'm just trying to figure the relationship of the neck with the udder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted December 5, 2004 Report Share Posted December 5, 2004 Moving this to the appropriate forum.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_bass5 Posted December 6, 2004 Report Share Posted December 6, 2004 I cant help feeling people are moaning because Sony and others are trying to stop us doing something we are not supposed to do. We might as well just walk into HMV and take what ever we want. there is always a way round the copy protection but this doesnt make it ok. its still ilegal As for MD overtaking ipod. if you look at the cost and size of a 20gb ipod against a MD with 20gb of storage i think the ipod costs a less and is much more portable.. I dont like copy protection but companies might as well just give every thing away for free if they didnt use it. Just my monday morning moan. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Posted December 6, 2004 Report Share Posted December 6, 2004 I cant help feeling people are moaning because Sony and others are trying to stop us doing something we are not supposed to do. We might as well just walk into HMV and take what ever we want. there is always a way round the copy protection but this doesnt make it ok. its still ilegal Well, that argument only holds up if you assume that everyone who wants the copy protection lifted is going to use it illegally. I use mine to record my own performances and rehearsals. Is sony protecting me from pirating my own intellectual property? Sure, I will concede that alot of people do it. But not everyone. And if there are 10 products with out restrictive copy protection and 1 with, in the end, there will probably only be 9. I think we should be prepared to see MD's go the way of the BetaMax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_bass5 Posted December 6, 2004 Report Share Posted December 6, 2004 Rowen, i use mine the same. my gigs and rehearsals . how is sony stoping you from copying your own songs? once its on your pc you can convert it to .wav and copy or burn as many times as you want. If you need to copy to another pc then you just copy the tracks to the md as data. granted you need other software but i think we need to realise why MD has been created and that if musicians are going to use it this way ie mic or line input then it is not upto pro standard anyway so we cant really expect to do what you can with DAT.. what im saying is copy protection has to be there for the many (yes many and im one of them) who copy tracks rather than buy them If you own the material in the first place surley it wouldnt be in mp3 format. But this is just my view and i know there are exceptions. Dave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vova Posted December 6, 2004 Report Share Posted December 6, 2004 Sony assumes that people own the music they listen to, on CD. If this were the case, then the whole atrac/mp3 argument does not apply and an MD actually makes much more sense than an ipod. However judging by the relative ipod/md sales Sony is a bit naive in its assumptions. :grin: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_bass5 Posted December 6, 2004 Report Share Posted December 6, 2004 Agreed that you should own the music you wish to copy What do you mean by md makes more sense.? An ipod with 20gb is more compact than md recorder with 20x1gb discs.and i have found track access to be quicker, certainly if you have to change discs. Dave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shermy Posted December 6, 2004 Report Share Posted December 6, 2004 Forgive me...I'm fairly new. Can you do live recording with an iPod? I looked at the specs and don't remember seeing or reading about any types of line-in or mic-in jacks. If they do, you'll be seeing a barely used Sony NH900 on E-bay very soon! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vova Posted December 6, 2004 Report Share Posted December 6, 2004 Agreed that you should own the music you wish to copy What do you mean by md makes more sense.? An ipod with 20gb is more compact than md recorder with 20x1gb discs.and i have found track access to be quicker, certainly if you have to change discs. Dave.with an ipod you are actually carrying only 600 usable megs of music because your battery runs out. The other 20 gigs is essentially ballast. The other consideration is convenience - with an MD you get one-click cd-md recording - no fuss, no clogged HD, nothing to learn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Posted December 6, 2004 Report Share Posted December 6, 2004 Rowen, i use mine the same. my gigs and rehearsals . how is sony stoping you from copying your own songs?I guess I'm just miffed that I've got just one shot at digital transfer. After that it analog/realtime. I think that's kind of extreme for a mic recording. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_bass5 Posted December 6, 2004 Report Share Posted December 6, 2004 Rowan, if your recording via the mic the the damage is alread done, after all the mic is analog. if you use the hi-md render program that marcnet has created you can turn your .omg file into .wav files, clean them up and then do what ever you want with them. you will end up with a better recording than just transfering them via SS2 as the mic will have created hiss and distortion already. again i do see your point though. Dave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xeroxide Posted December 7, 2004 Report Share Posted December 7, 2004 Rowen, i use mine the same. my gigs and rehearsals . how is sony stoping you from copying your own songs? once its on your pc you can convert it to .wav and copy or burn as many times as you want. I've had a problem with the transfer... a session recorded by a mic did not copy to the computer but for some reason still put protection on so I had to do a real-time transfer (not good if thats 12 sessions at 1 hr each) what im saying is copy protection has to be there for the many (yes many and im one of them) who copy tracks rather than buy them If you own the material in the first place surley it wouldnt be in mp3 format. But this is just my view and i know there are exceptions. Dave.Problem being, the targeted people which sony places the protection for... do not really go for the mic do they? why in the world would they decide to put a 1 time limitation on analogue recordings... do they think us performing artists are going to sell our art on MD's? hang on a sec... hmmm... that's not a bad idea :grin: harder to copy than cds... lol, apart from that, I can't find any other reason to "protect" mic recordings from the recorder... it removes a great deal of power from the recorder... a power I want to have. Also, when the files are locked, you can not split the tracks using the T-Mark feature, this also annoys me but not as much since I can edit the pc files (if they transfer sucessfully) Note: after SS2.2, I have not had an unsucessful transfer and hope I never will :grin: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted December 7, 2004 Report Share Posted December 7, 2004 iPods cannot record any more than 8kbps, I believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
me Posted December 7, 2004 Report Share Posted December 7, 2004 with an ipod you are actually carrying only 600 usable megs of music because your battery runs out. The other 20 gigs is essentially ballast. The other consideration is convenience - with an MD you get one-click cd-md recording - no fuss, no clogged HD, nothing to learnThis is repeated time and time again and it is completely false. You have a selection of 20GB worth of music. This means you can select 8 hours out of a week's music and play it. Even if the battery life was ~200 hours, there are only 24 hours in a day and you need to sleep through some of those. I had an E900 with 100 hours of battery life in LP4. I have 50 discs. 4 hours a disc, 200 hours. I can only listen to half of them. Whoops, ballast again. Except this time the ballast is enough to keep Queen Mary 2 at her waterline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_bass5 Posted December 7, 2004 Report Share Posted December 7, 2004 I think if Sony didnt protect analog recordings as well then whats to stop us making one from a cd and copying many times. With the one pc transfer once you have done this you can then convert to .wav and make more copies anyway. people will alway find ways to get what they want out of things and Sony has a right to try to stop them. Why not get a DAT recorder if quality is important ? Analog recordings can be just as good as digital to a lot of people. I think all things have limitations and you have to find ways of working with or around them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xeroxide Posted December 7, 2004 Report Share Posted December 7, 2004 whoa? that's even worse than (or equal to) telephone recordings (more like mobile phone recordings with bad reception!!!!) The IRiver would have been my choice as a hdd player, at least it can record at different bit-rates Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obsideo Posted December 14, 2004 Report Share Posted December 14, 2004 Why not get a DAT recorder if quality is important ? Analog recordings can be just as good as digital to a lot of people. I think all things have limitations and you have to find ways of working with or around them.Analog, if very high quality can't be beat IMO, but that's neither here nor there - DAT IS digital, as is MD. MD player recorders are much more portable that DAT and sound every bit as good. That's about it. *edit* I think we're speaking in term of portability here so MD has it in spades. Besides with an audio recording in DAT you've got to record it back in realtime anyhow, which makes (the newest versions) Hi-MD that much more attractive since you HAVE a digital faster-than-realtime transfer option.... but don't get me wrong. If I was setting up a home studio and had cash, I'd be recording on reel after reel of 2in. tape - That's a ways off for my pocketbook though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_bass5 Posted December 14, 2004 Report Share Posted December 14, 2004 I was refering to the fact that DAT is not compressed like MD so if you want to record via mic or line in DAT will give better results. Dave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted December 14, 2004 Report Share Posted December 14, 2004 dave, you can record lossless PCM with a Hi-MD unit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_bass5 Posted December 14, 2004 Report Share Posted December 14, 2004 Yes but not 2hours of it without copy restrictions like MD has. I know there is a resriction on doing digital to digital but you can upload it to as many pc's as you want. Dave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted December 14, 2004 Report Share Posted December 14, 2004 Ultra portability and high possibility that Hi-MD will have higher densities > DAT, imho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_bass5 Posted December 14, 2004 Report Share Posted December 14, 2004 I agree with Kurisu about the portability of MD over DAT . I have both and although my DAT recorder is small (fits into jacket pocket) MD is much more versitile (now). Dave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael_Walker Posted December 19, 2004 Report Share Posted December 19, 2004 i can live with the copy-protection, my beef is that SONY are such twits at writing software. I have already lost some "priceless" recordings due to the Sonicstage UPLOAD GLITCH... and now my sonicstage doesnt work AT ALL and sony seems to be in no hurry whatsoever to assist me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.