Optical recording vs PC

[whitecloud1]

Two strange questions:

I have 2 minidisks: MZ-NH1 (newer) and MZ-N1 (older). Both are excellent!

I have found that recording CDs to Minidisk by optical cable in the older "SP" mode (292) gave me a very warm, yet excellent and detailed sound quality which seems healthier for one's ears than the full-bodied PCM or WAV formats. I know that one CD took up most of an 80 min older MD.

Using the new Hi-SP minidisk and recording optically in Atrac3plus 256, the sound is not as warm as the old SP even though tracks are smaller in file size.

I've also tried Atrac3+ at the new 352 kbps option and transferred to MD using Sonic Stage 3.4. When I do this, the sound quality still doesn't seem as warm and appealing as my old SP recordings.

My 2 questions are:

1

If my CD player is better in sound quality than the CD-ROM on my PC, could it give a better sound (when recording optically direct to the minidisk) than when simply importing, even at at "high" (slower), to Sonic Stage and transferring via USB from PC to MD?

2

Which codec, (excluding PCM/WAV), gives the warmest quality minidisk transfers using Sonic stage, and is the nearest to the above-mentioned SP/optical transfer at 292 kbps of the older MD format?

Mathematically, 256 is 36kbps less than 292 and 352 is 96kbps more, yet even the Atrac3+ at 352 doesn't seem as good as the old SP. Does anyone else feel the same way or is it my immagination?

JB

[KrazyIvan]

Just use whatever sounds best to you and forget about all the technicalities behind it. Enjoy your music!

[ozpeter]

Digital transfer from a CD player via optical or digital transfer from your PC via USB should have no "sound" as such - if correctly implemented the digits from the CD are being transferred as is. What the MD recorder then does to them in terms of data compression and resampling is another matter of course.

[Artstar]

Just use whatever sounds best to you and forget about all the technicalities behind it. Enjoy your music!

The best response of all.

[Sparky191]

Better is subjective. You might prefer the sound of one method someone else the other method. Digitially they should in theory be the same, bit for bit. However most electronic signals are effected by the electronics they pass through. So for example the same MD will sound differently on different MD players.

[sebastianbf]

I've got the same question a time ago. I did several test recording CDs via optical and then transfering the same music from the PC. I used pretty good headphones and I couldn't tell the difference between both. Also, carefull with the placebo effect.

[ATELETRONICS]

i can easily tell the difference between what you mean. the answer seems to me that you have no choice but to use atrac 352 and import it as wave and then transfer. i really miss old sp! it is awesome!

[pauljones52]

IMO atrac3plus 256 sounds much better than SP, but I do agree that SP has a warmer feel to it. a good comparison would be 256 = CD sound (technically good but lacking warmth) SP = Vinyl sound (suffers from some small crackling/artifacting but warmer sounding)

Edited February 9, 2006 by Matt J

[Sparky191]

What earphones are you using to decide all this?

[ATELETRONICS]

i use my hi-fi at home.

[whitecloud1]

Thank you very much to all who replied. There is much food for thought here.

I still have the option of formatting the disks in old MD and then using SP via optical link. (I still have my old MZ-N1 player and so the disks could be played on both machines). I guess SP is not possible for newer Sony Hard Disk players (not minidisk players) but I'm not sure about this. I assume they can import and playback in lossless and other codecs not available to minidisk players?

The electronic equipment should make some difference e.g. the minidisk player, the earphones used, and also the CD player which reads the digital data and thus the quality of the optical output. I've noticed this on 2 different CD players: an ARCAM and a Technics player, both using optical output to SP on MD.

------------------------------------------------------

I noticed that if I import using the Lossless option, the resulting Atrac3 plus (352) files when transferred to MD were of a warmer quality than those imported directly as Atrac3 plus (352) files. So I tried importing as WAV files and exporting in Atrac3 plus 352.

There is a noticible improvement but I needed to increase the bass using the "Heavy" EQ option. I still feel that the SP is nearer to the Analogue (ADD CD) as the voice is less detatched from the overall blend.

You ask which phones I use. I have 4.

The phones supplied with the old MZ-N1 (MDR-E808) are better than those supplied with the newer MZ-NH1 (MDR-838) I need to turn up the volume on the newer one, (as one has to do with different HI-Fi speakers) so I assume they need more power to drive them.

I also have an inexpensive Sennheiser set (MX 550) with an adjustable volume slide. There is a brighter treble on this without losing the bass. However, as a result the overall output sound is less warm and pleasing.

Finally, I have a set which came with a Panasonic portable CD player. (no number given).

These have great bass sensitivity and don't give too much treble.

These are my preferred set. Incidentally the remote supplied with the NZ-NH1 is too short as I can't read the remote due to it being too close to my long-sighted eyes, even with reading glasses - so I need a longer phones to compensate for this. This leads to a very long combined length of remote and phones.

Finally, as in Vinyl or Tape, if the original CD was first recorded in analogue (ADD), the initial sound will be almost as warm as vinyl.

Compare Linda Ronstadt's "Round Midnight" 2 albums. No. 1 is ADD and No. 2 is DDD. The difference is clear. So I guess the best way to preserve ADD is to use SP?

All thoughts welcome.

JB.

Edited February 11, 2006 by whitecloud1