lurk Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Hi, New to this forum and very new to MiniDisc as well... a very basic question I think, but I couldn't find any information in the forum (maybe the question is just TOO basic )The RH10 can "directly playback MP3". So, can I just plug it in via USB and copy MP3 files to the disc? I tried it, it didn't work. Do I really need to install Sonic Stage to do that? Or do I just need to know where to put the files and how to name directories+files? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Hi, The RH10 can "directly playback MP3". So, can I just plug it in via USB and copy MP3 files to the disc? I tried it, it didn't work. Do I really need to install Sonic Stage to do that? Or do I just need to know where to put the files and how to name directories+files? Hi - welcome to the forums. You will have to go through Sonic Stage to put MP3's on your RH10. But it's not at all a bad piece of software as you'll see if you download version 3.4 from the downloads section. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenmachine Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 You need to use SonicStage so that Sony can encrypt your files and make further upload impossile. If you copy the files in data mode, you can copy/duplicate to your heart's content but not play them on the unit. Where's the logic you ask? I honestly have no idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sony_Fan Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Hi, New to this forum and very new to MiniDisc as well... a very basic question I think, but I couldn't find any information in the forum (maybe the question is just TOO basic )The RH10 can "directly playback MP3". So, can I just plug it in via USB and copy MP3 files to the disc? I tried it, it didn't work. Do I really need to install Sonic Stage to do that? Or do I just need to know where to put the files and how to name directories+files?I have the same unit, and MP3 playback sound quality is awful. I suggest you convert the MP3s to ATRAC3+ 256kbps. It will sound better. I don't know why Sony makes MP3s sound worse. If you want good sound quality from direct MP3 playback, you should consider an MP3 player instead of Hi-MD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raintheory Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 I have the same unit, and MP3 playback sound quality is awful. I suggest you convert the MP3s to ATRAC3+ 256kbps. It will sound better. I don't know why Sony makes MP3s sound worse. If you want good sound quality from direct MP3 playback, you should consider an MP3 player instead of Hi-MD.My guess is that they would make it sound worse because mp3 is not their format.Either that or they are just using the ATRAC engine to decode Mp3 as well (which probably wouldn't sound as good as a dedicated Mp3 one), and don't have a separate Mp3 decoder in the unit at all... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobgoblin Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 My guess is that they would make it sound worse because mp3 is not their format.Either that or they are just using the ATRAC engine to decode Mp3 as well (which probably wouldn't sound as good as a dedicated Mp3 one), and don't have a separate Mp3 decoder in the unit at all... no can do with using the ATRAC engine to decode mp3's. thats basicly like trying to run a petrol engine on diesel...if i should guess, its something to do with the "encryption", and most likely unintended. somehow it screws up the datastream of the mp3 so that the codec firmware/hardware of the player gets some strange data.basicly i cant see any corp doing something like that intentionaly, as the risk of backlash would be to great... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tekdroid Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 basicly i cant see any corp doing something like that intentionaly, as the risk of backlash would be to great...We are talking about Sony here, the rootkit CD people?Just checking This is mild action from this corporation, and goes unnoticed by many. Most will just decide "atrac is so much better" and not think about it again. Which is their intent. The last thing they want is frequency response plots on dedicated sites exposing their shenanigans (which is just my opinion of what this is: Sony shenanigans). Hard to 'corrupt' data this way unless it was an intentional 'feature', IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobgoblin Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 We are talking about Sony here, the rootkit CD people?Just checking This is mild action from this corporation, and goes unnoticed by many. Most will just decide "atrac is so much better" and not think about it again. Which is their intent. The last thing they want is frequency response plots on dedicated sites exposing their shenanigans (which is just my opinion of what this is: Sony shenanigans). Hard to 'corrupt' data this way unless it was an intentional 'feature', IMO.that rootkit bit was in a third party tool that sony had "bought" wihtout checking all its capabilitys. or atleast it looks that way given how they reacted to the discovery...oh, its simpler then one think. it all depends on how the encryption algorithm works given the input data. it amy well be that some silly bug creates a odd-ball result if the "right" amount of data is inserted.most likely it was originaly designed to work with atrac data. data that do not produce results in that value range or something similar. but then they apply it to the mp3 data (thereby not requiring a new decryption chip), maybe without properly checking the output beyond finding that it can play the music.99% of the time, stuff like this isnt intentional. its side-effects of other actions. actions that have not been properly screened. sony may be amoral about anthing but the allmighty bottom line, but its not intentionaly evil (atleast i hope not). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tekdroid Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 99% of the time, stuff like this isnt intentional. its side-effects of other actions. actions that have not been properly screened. sony may be amoral about anthing but the allmighty bottom line, but its not intentionaly evil (atleast i hope not).I won't argue with you here, but we are talking about the same corporation that only took off the 1-upload limit for user-made line-in/mic recordings in SonicStage 3.2, right? And that still requires your MD to not be write-protected to transfer tracks from unit to PC? And that can, under certain reproducible circumstances, delete tracks off MD without so much as a warning?I see so many things they've done as more serious than this (even if it is a bug). IMO, they are worthy of contempt and a good dose of cynicism, regardless of whether this in fact is a bug or not. I don't think the backlash for this would be any greater than some other stuff they've done (and continue to do).I guess all I'm trying to get across is that they're not the nicest guys in the playground Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pata2001 Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 I have the same unit, and MP3 playback sound quality is awful. I suggest you convert the MP3s to ATRAC3+ 256kbps. It will sound better. I don't know why Sony makes MP3s sound worse.I beg to differ. Transcoding will always reduce quality. You won't get improvements by simply transcoding to Atrac3+ 256kbps. In fact, you might be wasting space if the MP3 is froma lower bitrate. I don't believe Sony "intentionally" make MP3 sound worse. Atrac has been refined a lot with Type-S decoder and such, while MP3 is pretty much brand new for HiMD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwakrz Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 I beg to differ. Transcoding will always reduce quality. You won't get improvements by simply transcoding to Atrac3+ 256kbps. In fact, you might be wasting space if the MP3 is froma lower bitrate. I don't believe Sony "intentionally" make MP3 sound worse. Atrac has been refined a lot with Type-S decoder and such, while MP3 is pretty much brand new for HiMD.But the fact still stands the an MP3 file sounds terrible comparied to the same transcoded MP3 to Atrac file when played back on a Hi-MD 2nd gen unit.I agree that playback of a transcoded MP3 file on a PC would show signs of a generation loss but the playback of MP3 files is so poor on the 2nd gen HiMD units that it actually makes it sound loads better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lurk Posted February 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Thanks for your answers!That's definitely not what I understand by "direct playback of MP3s", but well... I finally got it working now. Haven't tested the sound quality yet, but if I have to use Sonic Stage anyway I might as well convert the files to Attrac3+ directly.The reason I would like to get my files on the MD without any special software is that I'm mainly running linux. And I couldn't get the player to be recognized by my old Win98... until I installed the Personal Audio Driver, that is. This forum is cool, and now I'm happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accountkiller Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 (edited) People such as myself with >10GB of .mp3 downloads don't have the will or the time to convert everything to atrac3, especially considering WinAMP and WMP do not currently support this format (no, I will not listen through SS). IMHO, with the right 'phones (I have the Sony EX81's) and EQ set-up (a smilely minus some treble) on the RH10 (thanks for replying to my post about it btw, fellas ), I have acheived better sound quality with >128kb/s .mp3s than any iPod or iRiver can reproduce.HOWEVER, in the rare circumstances where I have acquired a music file in 64kb/s .wma, for example, SS does the liberty of converting this format to <256kb/s atrac3 upon transfer... which just sounds amazing especially considering the low-quality of the original .wma file.I shall continue ranting tommorow.All the best. Edited February 2, 2006 by klasse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raintheory Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Windows Media Player can play OMA files just fine. At least it does on my computer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dex Otaku Posted February 3, 2006 Report Share Posted February 3, 2006 http://forums.minidisc.org/index.php?showtopic=10621Scroll down to "MP3 Playback Test"It's beyond me how any device decoding a bitstream of any type could end up with a "filtered" profile that so perfectly matches something done intentionally. That said, it can be compensated for fairly well with the EQ if you know the curve and how to use an EQ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobgoblin Posted February 3, 2006 Report Share Posted February 3, 2006 think your last b is missing a / there... 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.