Nuvudah Posted September 21, 2005 Report Share Posted September 21, 2005 (edited) Have anybody tried this...When recording the HI MD from an analog source would it be better to record initally at the higher bit rate (256k Hi sp) before transferring to a lower bit say (132k or 105k) rate to save disc space or would the recording at (64k Hi-Lp) be improved /upgraded by transferring @ 132k rate ? Thus the end result would be the same ? would the lower recording have artifacts and exactly what are artifacts ?If I may ask unrelated question Do the energy from the NH-10wm sony rechargable battery has to be drained LOW before recharging to the point even to take out the still "fair" rechargable battery when using AC power once again so that it may fully discharge first ?Please transfer to HI MD forum Edited September 21, 2005 by Nuvudah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KJ_Palmer Posted September 21, 2005 Report Share Posted September 21, 2005 You should record only once at the highest bitrate you require, otherwise you will introduce further artifacts in your final version due to recompression. You may not be able to detect the artifacts of course, but they will be there, so why take the risk..You should drain NiMH batteries as much as possible before recharging them, to avoid the "memory" affect assocated with these batteries.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuvudah Posted September 21, 2005 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2005 You should record only once at the highest bitrate you require, otherwise you will introduce further artifacts in your final version due to recompression. You may not be able to detect the artifacts of course, but they will be there, so why take the risk..You should drain NiMH batteries as much as possible before recharging them, to avoid the "memory" affect assocated with these batteries..thank you very much KJ would it make a difference If the source is from MD's LP4@ (66k) which is already close to HD-MD's Hi-LP(64k) and HI-Sp would be a waste of disc space? And if I transferred/ recorded up to 132K /265k will that enhanced the recording ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenmachine Posted September 21, 2005 Report Share Posted September 21, 2005 You can't improve sound quality by transcoding from a lower to a higher bitrate, in fact you'll loose some. If you re-rip from a lossless source directly to a higher bitrate, the quality can be significantly improved though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KJ_Palmer Posted September 21, 2005 Report Share Posted September 21, 2005 Even transferring from one 'lossy' compression codec (eg. ATRAC) to another (eg. MP3) at the same bitrate brings in extra artifacts. This is known as transcoding and should be avoided where possible.My advice would be to hang on to the lossless or high bitrate source (eg. wav files or original CD or Hi-SP), archive that somewhere and use it for coding down to the portable format/bitrate of your choice... It all depends how feasible/convenient it is for you though, of course... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A440 Posted September 21, 2005 Report Share Posted September 21, 2005 Even transferring from one 'lossy' compression codec (eg. ATRAC) to another (eg. MP3) at the same bitrate brings in extra artifacts. Imagine you are photographing a photo. Each time you do that you are introducing graininess--the lower the resolution, the more grain there is. So whether you are photographing a low-res photo or a high-res photo, you want to get as clear an image as possible to start with. So you should photograph it at high-res, or, in audio, a high bitrate. The better resolution (higher bitrate) you have to begin with, the clearer the image/sound when you compress it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexx Posted September 23, 2005 Report Share Posted September 23, 2005 Have anybody tried this...When recording the HI MD from an analog source would it be better to record initally at the higher bit rate (256k Hi sp) before transferring to a lower bit say (132k or 105k) rate to save disc space or would the recording at (64k Hi-Lp) be improved /upgraded by transferring @ 132k rate ? Thus the end result would be the same ? would the lower recording have artifacts and exactly what are artifacts ?If I may ask unrelated question Do the energy from the NH-10wm sony rechargable battery has to be drained LOW before recharging to the point even to take out the still "fair" rechargable battery when using AC power once again so that it may fully discharge first ?Please transfer to HI MD forumMiMH cells do not suffer memory You should record only once at the highest bitrate you require, otherwise you will introduce further artifacts in your final version due to recompression. You may not be able to detect the artifacts of course, but they will be there, so why take the risk..You should drain NiMH batteries as much as possible before recharging them, to avoid the "memory" affect assocated with these batteries..I don't think so: it would be like making a "perfect" copy of a bad piece of music Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenmachine Posted September 23, 2005 Report Share Posted September 23, 2005 MiMH cells do not suffer memory They're somewhat less prone to memory than nickel-cadmium but still suffer from it, so it's not a bad idea to drain them at least from time to time. 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.