jakewoodblues Posted July 13, 2005 Report Share Posted July 13, 2005 I'm brand new to Hi-MD & I love it! Just a little confused & hope somebody can help me.Hi-LP=how many kps? I'm using sonic stage 3.1 & it only shows the kps, not the mode name. Can somebody deceipher this for me? Thanks,Jakewoodbluesthe newbie! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishiyoshi Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 Welcome to the format!Hi-LP comes in two bit rates: 64kbps and 48kbps. If you are concern with sound quality, I would suggest that you adopt Hi-SP at 256kbps.For further information: click here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 generally speaking Sony seperates the Hi-LP 64kbps and 48kbps by not placing the hi-lp in front of the secondso you would have:PCMHi-SPHi-LP48kbps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakewoodblues Posted July 14, 2005 Author Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 Thanks alot! I appreciate your help.Jakewoodblues Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bri Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 Can I hop on the band-wagon here and ask:If ATRAC3/132kbps gets your 16 hrs. 30 min. from a Hi-MD disc, is there much loss in quality from ATRAC3plus/256kbps down to that?Also, I never realised just how much time mp3s take off a Hi-MD disc...4 hrs. 30 min.!!!What the hell? Does that mean if you have a higher than 128Kbps mp3 you'll have even less time? Most of mine are 192VBR or higher. Given the idea that copies transcoded into ATRAC are better sounding, with it be worth converting?Sorry for all the questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 i never understood what they mean by 4h 30min but its gotta be complete bull (unless the bit rate is around 320kbps or something).regarding Atrac3 132kbps (LP2) vs Atrac3+ 256kbps (Hi-SP), LP2 is generally fine for most people as they will have a hard time telling it apart from the original (especially for a portable unit). However if you do compare them HiSP sounds better and is *almost* the same as PCM IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDGB2 Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 (edited) There are compromises. Better quality or higher capacity.For a quiet or 'serious' listening environment the difference between LP2 & Hi-SP is quite evident.I regard Hi-LP to be on par with raw (compressed) mp3. Not so good for a serious listen, but more than adequate for jogging, work, office etc.Also - 1 'standard' minidisc in Hi-LP = over 10 hours on a disc.Lot cheaper than fixed capacity mp3 players, and when it's full - just stick another disc in! Maybe one day the iPloppers will see the light... Edited July 14, 2005 by MDGB2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andicillo Posted July 14, 2005 Report Share Posted July 14, 2005 There are compromises. Better quality or higher capacity.For a quiet or 'serious' listening environment the difference between LP2 & Hi-SP is quite evident.I regard Hi-LP to be on par with raw (compressed) mp3. Not so good for a serious listen, but more than adequate for jogging, work, office etc.Also - 1 'standard' minidisc in Hi-LP = over 10 hours on a disc.Lot cheaper than fixed capacity mp3 players, and when it's full - just stick another disc in! Maybe one day the iPloppers will see the light...←You can try the Hi-Md calculator to get the most of Hi-Md recordinghttp://ravn.net/md/hi-mdcal.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bri Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 Thanks for the help guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 For the record these are the bitrates:PCM: 1411kbpsMP3: 96~320kbps (supported in sonicstage)Atrac (fake SP): 292kbps (note, in SonicStage it your audio gets transcoded to 132kbps LP2, before it is transfered as SP with the added bits)Atrac3 LP2: 132kbpsAtrac3 LP4: 66kbpsAtrac3+ Hi-SP: 256kbpsAtrac3+ Hi-LP: 64kbpsAtrac3+ Hi-LP: 48kbps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbetsho Posted July 15, 2005 Report Share Posted July 15, 2005 I find Hi-LP a perfect compromize of sound quality and quantity and battery consuming. For me, Hi-LP isn't bad at all, and I can fit 34 hours to one disc, excellent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted July 16, 2005 Report Share Posted July 16, 2005 I find Hi-LP a perfect compromize of sound quality and quantity and battery consuming. For me, Hi-LP isn't bad at all, and I can fit 34 hours to one disc, excellent.←agreed however only in the portable world, i wouldn't plug it into my Hi-FI deck at home here and play that out of my speakers on a quiet day.My only problem (if you can even call it that) with HiLP is that on some source audio it sounds GREAT and on others is sound like DIRT, where is the compromise, the middle ground, the in-between? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbetsho Posted July 16, 2005 Report Share Posted July 16, 2005 agreed however only in the portable world, i wouldn't plug it into my Hi-FI deck at home here and play that out of my speakers on a quiet day.My only problem (if you can even call it that) with HiLP is that on some source audio it sounds GREAT and on others is sound like DIRT, where is the compromise, the middle ground, the in-between?←I haven't had such problems, I plug it to stereos quite often and it sounds just fine, although I don't have such spoiled ears that can't appreciate not-so-hi-fi-sounds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDGB2 Posted July 16, 2005 Report Share Posted July 16, 2005 In therory it *Should* sound similar to an FM radio broadcast, but I'm not too convinced my self.I'm sure it sounds lovely through a Mini or Micro system, but hurts yer ears through proper hi-fi! Wonder what a proper Hi-MD deck would sound like on hi-fi....*dreaming Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bri Posted July 16, 2005 Report Share Posted July 16, 2005 Does anyone have views on Hi-LP on a portable...BUT with good audiophile headphones - i.e. Shures, etc.Might sound like a bit of a mis-match but I'm not stupidly picky if the tradeoff is worthwhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted July 16, 2005 Report Share Posted July 16, 2005 i think it all depends on how sensitive your ears are to finding artifacts in the compression. No matter the headphones I could pick out artifacts in HiLP, LP4, 48kbps, the others I have trouble doing so for the most part and HiSP I've never been able to find artifacts (sometimes I think there is but when I check the CD source the noise in question is part of the original). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hironiemus Posted July 17, 2005 Report Share Posted July 17, 2005 I am listening to my md mainly while riding my bike using koss porta pro headphones. I am satisfied with the sound quality of Hi-LP in 98% of the songs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted July 17, 2005 Report Share Posted July 17, 2005 I am listening to my md mainly while riding my bike using koss porta pro headphones. I am satisfied with the sound quality of Hi-LP in 98% of the songs←well there you go, don't even worry about it then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
genghisbunny Posted August 26, 2005 Report Share Posted August 26, 2005 (edited) Does anyone have views on Hi-LP on a portable...BUT with good audiophile headphones - i.e. Shures, etc.Might sound like a bit of a mis-match but I'm not stupidly picky if the tradeoff is worthwhile.←Money spent on good headphones is NEVER wasted. I've got (fairly cheap but nice) MDR-V200s which are a million times better than any buds I've tried. Anything beats the buds that come with an iPod or a minidisc, so just throw those away (<RANT> proof that ipods are fashion rather than music items -> people still use those s**tty white headphones to look cool even though 20 bucks would make their 400 dollar thing sound dozens of times better!</RANT>)At the end of the day, it's always going to sound more accurate through better headphones, but accurate can also mean you hear the faults more clearly.I'm using Hi-SP with my headphones and on the car stereo and find it quite good (although had to set up different EQ for the two different set-ups for sound quality). If you're really worried about sound quality on Hi-LP, try it out. Borrow some decent 'phones from a friend, or BETTER YET go into a store which has them on display and audition them with some favourite tracks of different styles on your MD in different quality levels (bit rates). Any decent hi-fi store should have demo units of over-the-head type headphones to try. Obviously, you can't try out "shove in your ear-hole" ones for sanitary reasons, but I doubt you are thinking of them when you say "good headphones" anyway.This will also help you choose between several hundred-dollar headphones with similar stats.Good luck! Edited August 26, 2005 by genghisbunny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparky191 Posted August 26, 2005 Report Share Posted August 26, 2005 (edited) I think that better earphones will show up the artifacts low quality of HiLP more than cheaper ones. I've been experimenting with better earbuds, sennheiser MX500's and Panasonics HJE50W, and it has made lower than 192 bitrate stuff sound so poor that I can't listen to them anymore. But the better than 192 is sounding great! Edited August 26, 2005 by Sparky191 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted August 26, 2005 Report Share Posted August 26, 2005 I think that better earphones will show up the artifacts low quality of HiLP more than cheaper ones. I've been experimenting with better earbuds, sennheiser MX500's and Panasonics HJE50W, and it has made lower than 192 bitrate stuff sound so poor that I can't listen to them anymore. But the better than 192 is sounding great!←exactly my thought, the more clarity you get from the headphones the higher the chance you can pick out some defects in the sound quality Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
optimistic-pessimist Posted August 26, 2005 Report Share Posted August 26, 2005 For the record these are the bitrates:PCM: 1411kbpsMP3: 96~320kbps (supported in sonicstage)Atrac (fake SP): 292kbps (note, in SonicStage it your audio gets transcoded to 132kbps LP2, before it is transfered as SP with the added bits)Atrac3 LP2: 132kbpsAtrac3 LP4: 66kbpsAtrac3+ Hi-SP: 256kbpsAtrac3+ Hi-LP: 64kbpsAtrac3+ Hi-LP: 48kbps←I know you all are generally talking about putting your music collections on MD and HiMD... but I've been wondering...As far as live concert recording... how does Hi-SP compare to the best quality I could get on my "old" MZ-R910... (regular SP I guess)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenmachine Posted August 26, 2005 Report Share Posted August 26, 2005 It's comparable. I consider HI-SP not to work much different from SP except for the use of joint stereo, thus slightly increased effiency and lower bitrate. I can't really abx both, whether recorded live or not. It's a good alternative to recording in pcm if you need the extended time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
optimistic-pessimist Posted August 26, 2005 Report Share Posted August 26, 2005 (edited) Hmm... Hi-SP a good alternative to PCM you say...I'm hoping that PCM will offer a noticeable difference in quality for my live recordings. That's the whole reason I bought a Hi-MD unit.I'm taking 5 discs into Ozzfest with me this weekend so I can record in PCM mode. Inconvenience aside... I want the best quality I can get. Edited August 26, 2005 by optimistic-pessimist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted August 26, 2005 Report Share Posted August 26, 2005 There is a difference between PCM and HiSP when taking it from a digital bit perfect PCM source (i.e. CD) However with a live show I'm not sure you will be able to tell the difference between a PCM/HiSP recording (could just be my ears but thats what I've found in practise anyways)But hey, if you do opt for HiSP you get almost 8hours on one HiMD disc instead of only 96? min of PCM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
optimistic-pessimist Posted August 26, 2005 Report Share Posted August 26, 2005 There are many, many people that will attest to how much better live recordings sound when made on DAT over MD. I know there are other factors involved, but surely the ATRAC compression has something to do with it. I like the size of MD recorders (as far as sneaking it into shows is concerned) so having PCM mode in a machine the size of an MD recorder is great... at least that's my opinion so far.Actually this weekend I'm going to sneak in my MZ-R910 as well as my MZ-RH10 and do a side by side comparison. Unfortunately I don't have two complete recording rigs, so it won't be a TRUE side by side... but I'll record a song or two with each recorder (while the same band is playing) to hopefully get a good idea of the differences and similarities between the two (at least, in my usual recording environment.) 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.