Sony Hi-md Vs. Apple Ipod

[daynine]

Someone please help me decide!

Upon receiving my tax refund this year, I would really like to get a minidisc player (namely, the Sony MZ-NHF800) or the Apple iPod. I've done tons of research and they're about the same price and have the same features, provided you buy the right accessories.

Maybe you can help me if I tell you what I want to do with it...

I have a weekly internet radio show and I want to be able to take the recorder around with me and get spontaneous interviews or a soundbyte from the occasional concert. I also want to be able to record station IDs from people with it. I want to be able to edit the sound file on my PC. I want to be able to record the occasional radio show on FM that I might miss because I'm at work. I'm also a student and would like to record lectures every once in a while.

From what I understand, I can do that with the minidisc player and a mic. Am I right when I say the mic is very expensive, though? With the iPod, I can do that stuff with a mic adapter and a mic but is the sound quality worse? I don't think I can do the FM thing with the iPod either. However, the iPod can play mp3's and the Hi-MD can't. And the iPod has so many more accessories you can get for it.

I guess what I'm asking for is just for someone to tell me why either Hi-MD or the iPod is the best so I don't feel buyer's remorse. If anyone has experience with both or would like to put their 2 cents in, that would be awesome. THANKS!!!

[aeriyn]

If you're not going to record live shows (i.e. music) and recording voice is going to be the least of the unit's use, the iPod makes more sense.

If recording is your primary use of the device, Hi-MD is the only way to go. The iTalk recording add-on is a voice recorder, not suited for recording music. But it'll work for voice, lectures, etc.

For regular listening, the only MD unit that even approaches the iPod's sound quality are Sharp's Auvi 1-bit units (which are not Hi-MD), and some of the older high-power Aiwa MD recorders (the 10 and 15mW ones).

The feature set of the iPod is much greater than that of the NHF800 (as a portable audio player). The iPod does everything the NHF800 does, and does it better--except recording. That's the only advantage the NHF800 has over the iPod other than battery life (and maybe price, but that's not really the point of this reply).

It comes down to which one you want most. The iPod is an impressive device with very clean, detailed sound reproduction and a beefy 30mW headphone output that allows you to use phones with lower efficiency (and a lot of the best ones aren't the most efficient). Also, the iPod's line-out is the closest to a "true" line-out out of all other DAPs; paired with a good portable amp (MINT, Xin SuperMacro, Porta Corda MkII, Emmeline SR-71, etc) and a set of headphones or IEMs that really shines amped (i.e. Etymotic ER-4S, Westone UM-2) the iPod's sound quality is almost impossible to beat. The NHF800 doesn't have the output power to handle power-hungry headphones and it doesn't provide nearly as good a line level signal to a portable amp.

But if you're going to need CD-quality recording, Hi-MD is the only game in town. And with careful equipment choices, it can sound quite good, but still an order of magnitude below the iPod (or Rio Karma, or even iRiver iHP series, even though I don't personally care for their colored sound).

Bottom line is, decide which player fills your needs the best, then make the purchase. If you're not satisfied with it, you can always return it and get something that fits your needs better.

Edit: Good mics aren't terribly expensive. You can get a decent pair of binaurals from Reactive Sounds for around $100 US.

[zerodB]

The ipod is a great device, as our resident ipod fangirl aeriyn has aptly pointed out. A no-brainer to use when compared to MD, and lots of accessories availabile owing to it's popularity.

But I have to inform you that the only thing the ipod can't do when listening to music, is gapless playback. For example, a some commercial CDs are recorded without any pauses or silence between certain tracks. A lot of concept albums are done this way too (Pink Floyd's 'Dark Side of the Moon' an oft-quoted example). So if you record a live show, or put a live recording on your ipod, it will put a small gap between tracks , even thought they

were intended to go from one to another without a pause.

If you just want to listen to a bunch of random songs, and do the occasional voice interview/lecture, then go for the ipod + accessories.

Although the minidisc doesn't quite have the output power of the pod, I would recomended it you since you want to be able to capture soundbytes, record FM radio, lectures, concerts, etc. You won't be dissapointed with the recording features of the MD, and since you are dabling around with radio, I think the MD is what you need.

Another alternative to consider might be another hard-disk unit, with recording capabilites. I know there are some avail.

All in all, just continue your research, and I'm sure you'll discover which one suits your needs. If you can, see if you can borrow either or both an md or a pod from a friend you know who has one of them, and try them out for yourself.

Good luck.

[aeriyn]

Yeah, the iPod is terrible with gaps. I notice it every time on my Mini, but since only the Rio Karma does gapless, and it's, well, huge and ugly, I can deal with it even though I listen exclusively in album mode.

If you don't listen to classical music, though, it is not a deal breaker.

[Christopher]

I would definitely go with the Zen Micro over the iPod; depending on your size needs of course a regular iPod may be better - but don't discount the alternatives out there. The Micro has an FM radio natively, as well. If you're looking to do spontaneous recordings as you mentioned, then second generation Hi-MD is the way to go.

[Fast Eddie]

Forget the ipod. If you want a HDD based machine get something else, like the zen or iriver.

Although I'm more than happy with my HI-MD. The best bit being that I can still upgrade the hardware when I want and still play the discs. That's removable storage for you!

[aeriyn]

The Zen Micro is uglier than a Rio Karma. Creative can make one hell of a flash based player, but they can't seem to make decent HDD players. The FM radio on the Micro sucks, too. If you want a good radio, get one of Xin Feng's modded Sony pocket radios. I have the '59 one, and it sounds wonderful, although I rarely use it except when jogging. http://www.fixup.net

iRiver is... No-Mid-Fi! All bass and treble, baby! Midrange? What's that? We don't need no stinkin' midrange!

For hard drive players, if you ABSOLUTELY must avoid iPods so your Slashdot crowd friends don't accuse you of being a trendwhore or something, get a Rio Carbon. I almost got one over the Mini, except for the hissing issue and the fact that the firmware was buggy (Rio fixed both problems now, though).

The iPod does not suck. The only thing that sucks is the stock buds. An iPod can beat even expensive home CD players if you use it properly. For example...

Apple Lossless > 20GB iPod > Sik Din line-out > Xin SuperMacro > Etymotic ER-4S/Westone UM-2/Future Sonics EM3

Right there is a portable setup that can kill even a megabucks audiophile home rig, and the cost remains under $1000 US.

[me]

I'd pick the NHF800 if the main purpose is recording. An iPod is a music playback device with a mic adapter as an afterthought. HiMD is designed with recording in mind.

Although, maybe an iRiver H340 or H320 might do the job as well. It's worse than an iPod in regards to being user friendly but it's better as a recording device although not perfect.

There is no best hard drive player. An iPod certainly isn't perfect. But whatever, I'll buy one so Aeriyn don't call me an anti trend whore for buying something else so my slashdot friends don't call me a trendwhore.

[aeriyn]

But whatever, I'll buy one so Aeriyn don't call me an anti trend whore for buying something else so my slashdot friends don't call me a trendwhore.

←

LOL

[dclarke32]

what up people

i have read this forum many times. i mostly scoured through when i was looking at buying a minidisc player. after the meteoric rise of the ipod, one of my friends decided he might want one. he asked for my opinion, since he knew i had a minidisc player, so i gave it to him, as well as suggested several sites to look at before he made his decision(he recently bought an ipod -- i told him it was an uninformed impulse buy, but what can you do). going through that process i wondered why i bought a hi-md unit instead of an i-pod.

that question led me to wonder why everyone here(specifically the moderators like kurisu and aeryn, and people with the most experience), haven't gone to i-pod yet. kind of like ps2 versus xbox. all things being equal, i think people make decisions based on one or two specific factors or beliefs that are just deal-breakers. so what were your reasons for not abandoning sony's format for the one that is supposed to be much more user friendly, stylish, poplular and audio-wise, flat-out better?

for me it came down to recording. i record net radio programs to listen to at work, and an ipod really is intended more(in my opinion), to be a play-back mega giant, with less emphasis on overall recording. i believe in the disc-based format(though not always in sony), so i didn't have a problem with that, my friend does(hence the ipod). the minidisc can function all my needs, with an emphasis on the ones that are most important, whereas i don't feel the ipod could(maybe i am the uninformed one, who knows?). what about you guys? i am talking to people with one unit not, both a minidisc player AND and ipod. if you had to have just one.

[Guest tony wong]

I personally do think there should be no comparison between Hi-MD and iPod :

1. Hi-MD is primarily built for music, data storage is just a bonus

where iPod is not

iPod is built primarily both for data storage and music

(in which u will find it's hard to manage if u really have 20G or even 40G of music in a iPod)

2. media used is totally different

iPod use non-removable media, and the storage media is fragile

3. iPod don't have a self-developed codec for music storage, where Hi-MD have lots of it

[aeriyn]

I personally do think there should be no comparison between Hi-MD and iPod

←

I agree. Hi-MD = portable recorder. iPod = portable player. not even the same class of device. So no more trying to compare apples and oranges, kthnx.