sony_man Posted February 27, 2005 Report Share Posted February 27, 2005 im curious, im about to buy a new music reproductive playing apparatus , and i was wondering if MP3's bow down to the sound of minidisc or is it vice versa? which sounds better, which has better quality? i just wanted to know because with my eggos (d66), my moms 15$ CD player pumps out more bass than my MP3 player: the damn ipod which should burn in hell. ive also learned in the minidisc T forums that files that arent MP3's arent crappy and have better sound ANNNND bass. so i thought about that and went to itunes to play music on my eggos. i toyed with the equalizer forever and never got the same sound as my moms CD player. im a bass head, so would a new Hi- Md or the second gen Hi-md be better for me rather than a new MP3 player? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael1980 Posted February 27, 2005 Report Share Posted February 27, 2005 LP4 is pretty bad sounding, unless you get a Type-S unit, but even then, IMO it is poor.LP2 is worse than LAME mp3.Anything above that (Hi-SP, Type-R SP, PCM) is very difficult to distinguish from the original.iPod's neutral sound is nothing to do with different codecs, just with the iPod itself. And yes, MD players pump out much more bass than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananatree Posted February 27, 2005 Report Share Posted February 27, 2005 If you want MD, wait till the Auvi HiMD player is released. That will give you more bass than you bargained for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Tires Posted February 27, 2005 Report Share Posted February 27, 2005 Why wait. Why not buy a cheap unit from eBay of the FS subforum to get used to MD, especially if you plan on ever using it for field recording (don't say you'll never do it, now that I've started I love it). Buy a Hi-MD only if you feel like MD is worth it.By the way, higher end MD units tend to have more customizable EQ settings than the low end ones. I'd suggest looking into a used or old stock Sony MZ-N10. I've seen them go for under $100 on eBay. I also loved my MZ-N510 (no mic input though) a lot. It was an awesome unit, and I've seen them go for about $40 before. The second gen Hi-MD units will be awesome though for avid MP3 fans, as they will natively play back MP3s without conversion. SP/Hi-SP/LP2/Hi-LP/etc are best when encoded from the original source, but there's a quality loss when you transcode a file.Just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sony_man Posted February 28, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 k so let me try to get this right. Hi-sp is better than Lp4/3. Hi-sp is the form the song is encoded for Hi-Mds? but if i want the good bassy sound from a minidisc player i should stay away from the second gen MD's because of their now Mp3 playback? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael1980 Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 Judging by your 1st post, if you want bass you should stay away from the iPod and that will be enough lol.Seriously, bass does not depend on the codec. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sony_man Posted February 28, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 (edited) so i can purchase an MP3 player and have just as good a sound? i mean my moms 15 dollar CD player is better than my ipod for gods sakes!edit: and i also wont be dissapointed if i get an MP3 player, say an Iriver H10, it will sound just as good or better than Md? Edited February 28, 2005 by sony_man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael1980 Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 Well depends on the mp3 player I have never even seen an Iriver H10, so can't comment there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sony_man Posted February 28, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 i see but then how about Irivers altogether? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin42 Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 In my experience, Iriver units sound AWESOME.you don't seem to have a lot of recording needs; as much as this may get me flames, HiMD/MD in general really isn't for you. It's more of a very flexible format that you need to record with to really reach it's true potential. Not to mention we don't know yet how native MP3 playback will be done -- if it still needs SonicStage it's going to be a pain compared to some other MP3 players drag-and-drop abilities.That said, MD units sound VERY VERY nice, especially at their highest quality. LP2 sounds better than MP3 (at 128kbps) to my ears... but that's personal preference.There are many good sounding MP3 players out there that will be better *players* (only) than MD units. I'd look at IRiver and Creative Labs. I don't get all the hype over iPods, mine sounds like crap compared to anything from those 2 brands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sony_man Posted February 28, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 justin have you had experience with the H10 in particular? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 all HiMDs have custom and preset EQs so you can get all the BASS you want Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Tires Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 Justin42 has a point though. MD/Hi-MD isn't for everyone. A good flash player or HD DAP might be better for Sony_Man. I can'r personally comment on the sound of a Creative or iriver unit though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NRen2k5 Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 (edited) so i can purchase an MP3 player and have just as good a sound? i mean my moms 15 dollar CD player is better than my ipod for gods sakes!edit: and i also wont be dissapointed if i get an MP3 player, say an Iriver H10, it will sound just as good or better than Md?←I'm guessing that your hearing is terrible and you're actually mistaking extreme clipping for "heavy bass". There's no way in Hell that a $15 CD player puts out good *anything*, bass included. Edited February 28, 2005 by NRen2k5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arb226 Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 Minidisc is perfect for me because I don't need to record and I just wanna play. I have had everything from a solid state player, and Ipod (which sucks in every way and never worked properly), a Creative Zen (sound was much better than ipod and cheaper), my treo 600, zodiac, etc. Minidisc is a format that is much more robust and has always been much more reliable. I have transcoded alot of 128kbps/192kbps MP3's to LP2 and they sound REALLY good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
streaml1ne Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 LP2 is worse than LAME mp3.←With what settings on Lame? I've tested this specifically with 128k MP3 -q 0 with lame 3.96.1 and there's no way it sounds better than LP2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NtN Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 Sony_man you've probably ended up getting the attention of quite a lot of audiophiles - although i'm no no no way near an expert on any of the topics i just know these things for a fact:1. Type of Codec doesn't mean more or less bass. (someone already mentioned).2. LP2 - 132k/sec ATRAC3 DOES IN NO WAY SOUND 'bad'! It sounds great in fact - yes this is just opinionated... but there is no way that you can say it is bad - no absolutely no way. 132k atrac3 sounds very good - and IN MINE AND MANY OTHERS opinion it sounds significantly crisper and fuller than mp3 at 128 (mp3 always sounded a tiny bit tinny to me - but not to the point that i would say mp3 was a rubbish codec).3. Depends on not only the actual player but other factors. - Equalizer and Earphones mainly. The ones supplied with my NH900 were pretty poor, making everything sound muddy but i have to say the bass was very 'large'. The new headphones that i got to replace them MDR-EX71SLB - were so much clearer and the bass was noticeably weaker. AS long as you got a good set of earphones, good source material (encoded from) - then your bass should sound fine. Fine tune it with your EQ as well.I'm not really sure why i'm replying to this.. i guess i just get fed up with people bashing the lower bitrate codecs, putting people off MD just because they're audiophiles and really wish there was some way they could have everything in PCM without the drawbacks of size and battery life. UgHNOt all of us are like you.. yes and not all of us are like me. I can understand how someone would dislike Hi-LP (64k/sec ATRAC3plus) - but say that LP2 sounds bad is just beyond belief. It's all in your head!!!! LIstening tests will friggin prove this! BAAAAAA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael1980 Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 (edited) With what settings on Lame? I've tested this specifically with 128k MP3 -q 0 with lame 3.96.1 and there's no way it sounds better than LP2.←I was going by the 128 multiformat listening test on HA. http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=21904I never tested it myself though, results could be possibly be affected by Type-S DSP, who knows...Plus on the presentation page, they don't mention what version of what encoder they are using (whether it is SS or some other program). Apparently SS2.3 has got some improvements according to a few tests on this board comparing hardware vs software encoders. Edited February 28, 2005 by Michael1980 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
streaml1ne Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 I was going by the 128 multiformat listening test on HA. http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=21904I never tested it myself though, results could be possibly be affected by Type-S DSP, who knows...Plus on the presentation page, they don't mention what version of what encoder they are using (whether it is SS or some other program). Apparently SS2.3 has got some improvements according to a few tests on this board comparing hardware vs software encoders.←Take a look at the bitrate distribution table near the bottom of this page which is linked off that HA forum entry... VBR encodes were used on almost every codec. When I see a CBR comparison of these codecs I'd be more inclined to take note of the results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin42 Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 (edited) I have no experience with any of the latest Iriver units, unfortunately my experience comes from having a few of their earlier CD-based MP3 players (SlimX, etc, can't remember the specific models right now). I think they're probably the best sounding MP3 playback I've heard from a portable.Best MP3 player I've heard is the Sony MXD-D400 CD/MD deck. It plays MP3 CDs and sounds AWESOME. But it's not portable so that doesn't help much. Best portable is the Creative Nomad Jukebox (the original; I never got around to picking up any of the later models.. but based on listening here and there to newer, it sounds like they've only gotten better). I have an old Nomad II (flash portable) and it's quite good overall.The IRivers have a very clean, crisp sound to me. I think their newer models have only improved overall quality. (at least on paper)I also think the complaints about lower bitrate MD are exaggerated. In my entirely unofficial listening tests, (i.e., "real life" and not using reference headphones in a controlled environment), LP2 compares VERY well to 128kbps MP3. I actually don't even mind HiLP given the right situation (Car, noisy, somewhere that sound quality isn't going to be entirely noticable). It sounds MUCH better than a 64kbps MP3, or most other 64kbps codecs. Much less swishy/swooshy artifacts.I do think SP is noticably better than HiSP, I hear artifacts on HiSP occasionally and I almost never do with good ol' traditional Type-R ATRAC4 from my D400. That's not to say HiSP is horrible, I just wish HiMD included "old" SP. Edited February 28, 2005 by Justin42 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sony_man Posted March 1, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 so i guess ill just have to increase the bit rate. i dont think its that i have terrible hearing, i mean i pick out things most people cant, and i want the bass to just bang my damn brains into itself. i guess the H!0 is more in favor now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted March 1, 2005 Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 i'd like to see a comparison between MP3, OGG, SP, HiSP, and WMA all at bit rates between 250-320kbps and see what the results say Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sony_man Posted March 1, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 yes lets have a straight out final answer on which is he best. i must know. MP3 whatever because im really really looking forward to purchasing this Iriver unit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted March 1, 2005 Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 well i say that because that way theres no excuses, use the best of what you have, the highest avilable bit rate and see what happens! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A440 Posted March 1, 2005 Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 It has already been mentioned above, but headphones make a huge difference. If you want big bass that's not just bloated sounding, in a pair of fold-up headphones under $50, get some Koss Portapros or, even better to my ears, Sennheiser PCX 100s. I agree that MD is not for you, Sony Man, especially if you already have an MP3 collection. To put those on any current MD player would mean transcoding them to ATRAC, lowering their quality further. When you want is an MP3 player with flexible enough equalization to crank up the bass. And make the bitrate at least 192. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bug80 Posted March 1, 2005 Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 NOt all of us are like you.. yes and not all of us are like me. I can understand how someone would dislike Hi-LP (64k/sec ATRAC3plus) - but say that LP2 sounds bad is just beyond belief. It's all in your head!!!! LIstening tests will friggin prove this! BAAAAAA←I've always thought that LP2 was good enough for me untill I got myself a better pair of headphones. Man are those artifacts annoying It's a shame LP2 is the maximum bitrate for downloads to NetMD (I don't own HiMD). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted March 1, 2005 Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 you could always record in SP via real time line in cabel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bug80 Posted March 1, 2005 Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 you could always record in SP via real time line in cabel←True, but it´s more time consuming compared to downloading through USB. Being able to download true SP to MD via USB would be very nice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael1980 Posted March 1, 2005 Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 True, but it´s more time consuming compared to downloading through USB. Being able to download true SP to MD via USB would be very nice ←Well, my comp takes the same time to record to lp2 and does a bookshelf to record to sp. Around 15 minutes for a CD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted March 2, 2005 Report Share Posted March 2, 2005 Well, my comp takes the same time to record to lp2 and does a bookshelf to record to sp. Around 15 minutes for a CD.←well unless your CDs are only 15min long, then it defintley is shorter to do the lp2 route Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeriyn Posted March 2, 2005 Report Share Posted March 2, 2005 some MD bookshelves have 4x realtime dubbing from MD to CD.sony_man, if you are a basshead, the ipod is not for you. The ipod's analog output stage is not an opamp output; it's directly off the wolfson DAC and it has output coupling capacitors to prevent DC offset from destroying the headphones, since direct output from the Wolfson DAC chip puts off half its supply voltage in DC--2.5V I believe. Output caps form a high-pass filter which rolls off the bass with low-impedance phones.Anyhow, iRiver players are known to be somewhat bassy, but if I were you I'd scoop up a Rio Karma. Compuplus was selling them for $175 a little while ago. Personally I think the Rio Karma is the best sounding DAP period... if they were a little less ugly and oddly shaped, I'd be using one of them instead of my iPod Mini. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sony_man Posted March 2, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2005 (edited) haha yeah karma's are a bit unappealing physically. and a bit chunky/ bulky looking.hey aeryin, there are newer minis out now! the colours seemed funkyfied a bit. not a lot but a little brighter. it makes it look as if i was colour blind and now i realize what the real tone and hue's they had. Edited March 2, 2005 by sony_man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael1980 Posted March 2, 2005 Report Share Posted March 2, 2005 well unless your CDs are only 15min long, then it defintley is shorter to do the lp2 route←I have seen 5x true SP dubbing, maybe there are even higher. 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.