lukpac Posted January 19, 2006 Report Share Posted January 19, 2006 I'm looking to upgrade from my R700. A few questions:1) It looks like the NH900 is at least partially metal. Are the RH910 and RH10 all plastic (it looks like it from pictures)?2) Are the display and remote pretty much the only differences between the RH910 and RH10?3) Are there compelling reasons to go for the RH910 over the NH900? The display looks a bit nicer on the RH910, and it also does MP3 (which I don't care about), but beyond that...? My main concern is probably audio (recording) quality - were there really any changes between the two?Also...has anyone done a comparison between ATRAC/292kbps and ATRAC3plus/256kbps? I've noticed on my R700 that while I normally don't notice compression at SP, I *do* if I invert one of the channels and sum to mono (normally anything in the center would drop out - with compression you don't hear the main center signal but you still hear the artifacts).Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bland10000 Posted January 19, 2006 Report Share Posted January 19, 2006 I can give you a partial answer to #1 regarding the rh10. The front of the unit is metal; the backside of the unit is plastic. There is a plastic plate on the front of the unit so you can see the screen but the plastic piece sits atop a metal shell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dex Otaku Posted January 20, 2006 Report Share Posted January 20, 2006 1) It looks like the NH900 is at least partially metal. Are the RH910 and RH10 all plastic (it looks like it from pictures)?Both the RH10 and RH910 have a metal front that has transparent plastic over almost all of it. Look in the reviews forum for people's opinions [including] on the build quality.2) Are the display and remote pretty much the only differences between the RH910 and RH10?Yes. Sort of. Depending on what region you buy the unit from, you'll get different remotes with most of Sony's units. Generally speaking, the most generic-possible remote is sold with units in North America, and the better remotes with displays are sold with Japanese models. Look carefully at the details of what you're getting from where.3) Are there compelling reasons to go for the RH910 over the NH900? The display looks a bit nicer on the RH910, and it also does MP3 (which I don't care about), but beyond that...? My main concern is probably audio (recording) quality - were there really any changes between the two?The main differences:* the RH10 and RH910 support MP3 playback without transcoding* both also have a function that will list files on your HiMD [i have never had a use for this, myself]* The display on the RH10, obviously* The NH900 can record in MD/LP modes; you can make truly backward-compatible MDs with it by recording in realtime to SP, LP2, and LP4 modes; note that none of these modes are uploadable via USB from any existing portableAlso...has anyone done a comparison between ATRAC/292kbps and ATRAC3plus/256kbps? I've noticed on my R700 that while I normally don't notice compression at SP, I *do* if I invert one of the channels and sum to mono (normally anything in the center would drop out - with compression you don't hear the main center signal but you still hear the artifacts).The "difference" as it can be referred to -always- contains the bulk of audible artifacting from any lossy stereo compression algorithm. This applies equally to MP3, AAC, ATRAC in all its incarnations, AC3, and literally every other lossy format you can think of. As to the differences between SP and HiSP, many have shown a preference for SP, primarily because it's a more mature codec. Both have their pros and cons, but in all honesty, the vast majority of people [who also find that 128kbps MP3 is transparent to their ears] would never be able to detect the difference between them except in the most glaringly obvious of cases [such as the infamous castinets sample used to show how poorly a codec responds to hard transients]. I have used both SP and HiSP for recording and find that hardware-encoded HiSP's quality is usually more than sufficient for my requirements. The difference between the two is very minor.The biggest difference in my books is that self-made HiSP recordings can be uploaded from any HiMD portable, whereas SP mode recordings cannot be uploaded [via USB] using any existing consumer equipment, portable or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukpac Posted January 20, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2006 Both the RH10 and RH910 have a metal front that has transparent plastic over almost all of it. Look in the reviews forum for people's opinions [including] on the build quality.Thanks, great.* The NH900 can record in MD/LP modes; you can make truly backward-compatible MDs with it by recording in realtime to SP, LP2, and LP4 modes; note that none of these modes are uploadable via USB from any existing portableAs to the differences between SP and HiSP, many have shown a preference for SP, primarily because it's a more mature codec. Both have their pros and cons, but in all honesty, the vast majority of people [who also find that 128kbps MP3 is transparent to their ears] would never be able to detect the difference between them except in the most glaringly obvious of cases [such as the infamous castinets sample used to show how poorly a codec responds to hard transients]. I have used both SP and HiSP for recording and find that hardware-encoded HiSP's quality is usually more than sufficient for my requirements. The difference between the two is very minor.The biggest difference in my books is that self-made HiSP recordings can be uploaded from any HiMD portable, whereas SP mode recordings cannot be uploaded [via USB] using any existing consumer equipment, portable or not.Hmm. Perhaps the 900 is a better bet for me then, just for the extra option. Of course, I'd prefer to do everything uncompressed anyway, but the 1 GB discs are a tad much these days.On the other hand, I could just re-use the same few discs if I'm getting a lossless copy. Hmm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alrose312 Posted January 20, 2006 Report Share Posted January 20, 2006 I'm looking to upgrade from my R700. A few questions:1) It looks like the NH900 is at least partially metal. Are the RH910 and RH10 all plastic (it looks like it from pictures)?2) Are the display and remote pretty much the only differences between the RH910 and RH10?3) Are there compelling reasons to go for the RH910 over the NH900? The display looks a bit nicer on the RH910, and it also does MP3 (which I don't care about), but beyond that...? My main concern is probably audio (recording) quality - were there really any changes between the two?Also...has anyone done a comparison between ATRAC/292kbps and ATRAC3plus/256kbps? I've noticed on my R700 that while I normally don't notice compression at SP, I *do* if I invert one of the channels and sum to mono (normally anything in the center would drop out - with compression you don't hear the main center signal but you still hear the artifacts).Thanks.NH900 is better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukpac Posted January 20, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2006 NH900 is betterDetails? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alrose312 Posted January 20, 2006 Report Share Posted January 20, 2006 Details?it just is...trust me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dex Otaku Posted January 20, 2006 Report Share Posted January 20, 2006 Personally, what this would come down to for me is whether I needed backward-compatible realtime recording or not. If I needed SP mode on location [and didn't care about not being able to upload], then I'd go with the NH900.If I didn't, I'd probably go with the RH910.That said, I'm very happy having both an NH700 and RH10. 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.