why fewer and fewer options?

[Huffer7]

Can anybody guess at this? I don't understand how Sony thinks.

Look at the number of options they removed in the 2nd gen hi-md units. Some of the options I loved personally, but I could see how they might not be essential for others, like speed control (extremely useful for learning to play instruments: you can slow a recording down to pick apart what's happening) and keeping the light on on the remote at all times.

But who would complain about extra sound options like VPT virtual surround? And why remove the line out? And the ability to record in old md modes (who would complain about that?) Surely the fans of md appreciate these options. Why remove the useful recording indicator light? And, the most puzzling of all is the removal of the date-time stamp.

But they got it right with the larger display. But now the new RH1 unit scheduled for June removes that! And look at the downgrade in the remotes! Is that they just think md fans will buy whatever they release? Do they just not care? Is it just skewed thinking?

If Sony understood who their customers were and we all put together 'the ultimate' hi-md player, would they make it for us?

[pata2001]

If Sony understood who their customers were and we all put together 'the ultimate' hi-md player, would they make it for us?

Since when Sony "understood" their customers? Sony's current goal is pure profit. So much that they are releasing an iPod adapter for their Car CD decks, but no support at all for Sony own brand portables. Sony is focusing on profit so much, that they forgot that if they had improved their existing product lines and listen to customers, they might actually make more profit! Simple big corporate stupidity. Seems to be no different under Sir Howard (even worse with the lack of availability of the NW-Axxx series and connect fiasco). The time Sony wake up is probably when everything is too late.

[dex Otaku]

. . . like speed control

I honestly can't speak to this one. As a recordist who is not a musician, I have used units that had this function and never understood why it would be practical, but musician friends pointed out exactly the purpose you describe, so I can see why it would be useful. It seems a strange thing to toss out, yes.

Lack of timestamping [ALL units should have it] is even more baffling to me.

But who would complain about extra sound options like VPT virtual surround?

Well .. in all honesty, I have never met anyone who thought VPT surround was useful in any way, or for that matter that it even did what it's supposed to do even remotely well. I've tried a friend's netMD with it and it just sounds like crap to me. I see this as one of those functions that uses extra power and takes up space in the firmware that could be better used for something that is actually even remotely useful, which VPT isn't by even the longest shot.

And why remove the line out?

The word here is superfluous.

Point 1: these portables are not actually designed to be used with amplification; they're made for listening with headphones of some kind.

Point 2: HiMD has the ability to transfer [upload] via USB to a computer.

Point 3: units with digital amps [hd or not] are only a couple of dBV short of 1Vp-p on the headphone output, which is well within the range of line level for consumer devices.

Point 4: actually adding a separate line out means:<blockquote>* probably having another [dedicated] output preamp

* adding a dedicated jack to the PCB [which means yet another point of probable mechanical failure]

* for "true" line-level, requiring a power supply of higher voltage than a single 1.2V NiMH or 1.5V alkaline can provide, i.e. requiring more batteries or requiring lithium batteries; in either case, the point being that true line-out requires more power

* requiring a larger PCB or devoting more of the PCB's real-estate to just this purpose</blockquote>

. . .the ability to record in old md modes. . .

On one hand, for those who have invested in MD over the years, this is an important function.

On the other hand, 1st-gen offered this functionality, and Sony did basically state that it was a transition period concerning backward-compatibility. The idea behind having a new format is that people should switch. Period. People don't, or at least shouldn't, buy into new technologies primarily because of backward-compatibility. They should buy in because the new kind completely supercedes the old.

This does suck rocks for those with decks, car players, bookshelf units, &c. - but then, they already have those units, and those units likely can themselves record [with the exception of car decks].

In the end, I won't really argue either way on this one. I don't need to be able to record in SP or LP2, myself, so I really don't care.

The omission seems kind of silly though, considering how little effort it takes to include it, and how many people are unhappy about it.

Why remove the useful recording indicator light?

It takes power?

I'm actually glad that no unit I've ever used had a specific recording light on it. That's the kind of thing that's among the first "features" I turn off on any equipment [along with "beep" sounds].

And, the most puzzling of all is the removal of the date-time stamp.

I mentioned this above already, but really, it should be pointed out that a slim minority of units made between the creation of MD and now have supported this feature, and the units that usually did so were of the industrial or otherwise professional variety.

Basically, this isn't something that was removed. It's something that simply hasn't been implemented in most of the models released by Sony [or anyone else for that matter].

Possible rational for not including this: <blockquote>* time/datestamp requires a clock which uses constant power [Given that all current units come with quick mode and disc memory turned on by default, that's pretty poor logic]

* perhaps Sony are just trying to save 0.0005 cent on that part

* the vast majority of users will never use it, or even for that matter realise it's there [how many times have you ever picked up someone else's digital camera and noticed that they had never set the built-in clock? From personal experience - I have set the clock on nearly every digicam I've ever laid hands on, including those used by professional photographers, because users usually don't care or don't want to invest the energy in learning how to set it, and don't even realise that they can use that EXIF timestamp to catalogue things]

* probably the most likely reason IMO - this has long been considered one of the functions that separates "pro" units from everything else [with HiMD, only the NH1 currently supports date/timestamping]</blockquote>

But they got it right with the larger display. But now the new RH1 unit scheduled for June removes that!

Got it right? Yes and no. I have an RH10 and in all honesty, the large display is great for when I'm using it as a player, not as a recorder. Many of us here have been pushing for Sony to market HiMD as a recording format, not as a solution for portable listening. Their design changes seem to reflect this, IMO.

The most important elements of the display for recording have nothing whatsoever to do with titles, albums, artists, or most other metadata usually included in track tags. What is important are the record level meters, recording mode [bitrate], group and track number, and a few basic record settings. Being able to see those things at a glance is essential, while seeing nice big track titles is completely unnecessary since recordings being made in the now don't have titles [yet].

Record meters don't have to be particularly large, either. The RH10's meters alone are probably only marginally larger than the RH1's if the mockup photo reflects what the real thing will be like at all, and really, the RH10's meters are slightly larger [heightwise] than necessary.

If you ask me, actually, it would be far more useful to have a longer meter with more segments.

End point being: the large display isn't actually all that useful for recording.

And look at the downgrade in the remotes! Is that they just think md fans will buy whatever they release? Do they just not care? Is it just skewed thinking?

This is only the situation outside of Japan, from what I know. The main reason for this that I can see is that Sony probably want to bring the price on units down as far as possible to get people to actually BUY them. Making display remotes optional [since you can still buy them separately] is one way to do so.

The proof is in the pudding - MD recorders were around $900CAD here 5 years ago; now one can find them for under $200CAD. Plastic bodies, cheaper remotes, &c. all make that possible. The more they sell, they wider the format spreads, the more likely it is that HiMD at least will stick around longer.

In the end, the real answer to this question is that they're trying hard to appeal to the North American market, where Cost Is King. Basically - North Americans are cheap. Most people would rather pay less money for crap products they don't need than pay more for something that's useful, functional, and of high quality.

On the other hand - back to the rationale of marketing the units as recorders - remotes with displays have side-effects when making microphone recordings; the EMR coming from the remote cable gets picked up by your mic cables, and makes its way into your recordings. What this means is that recording with a remote that has a display is next to useless since the display is a constant noise source. [And yes, this is simplifying a bit, since in situations with constantly loud sources the noise is easily masked; for people like myself who usually record quieter sources, display remotes are useless, though.] This is part of why I kind of laugh when people continuously ask for recording remotes; sure, if what you actually want is bzzzzzBLEEPbzzzzzBLEEPbzzzzzzzBLEEPBLEEPbzzzzz over all your recordings...

Point being: many if not most people making recordings will inevitably leave their display remotes behind, because they corrupt their recordings. The cheap lipstick remote still does the job, though.

Display remotes also tend to broadcast their noise to amplifiers if you jack in through them, too. Which means actually listening to bzzzzzBLEEPbzzzzzBLEEPbzzzzzzzBLEEPBLEEPbzzzzz coming through your speakers.

If Sony understood who their customers were and we all put together 'the ultimate' hi-md player, would they make it for us?

Well - thing is, from their perspective, that's exactly what they're doing, or at least - trying to do.

I look at the RH1 mockup photos and what I immediately see is a resemblance to the R37 and R57 bodies, which are still widely used and revered as among the best portable recording models. That in itself suggests to me that someone at Sony has been listening to us to some extent.

[The Low Volta]

I must say I couldn't agree more with dex! But still I'd just like to add... if the RH1 really turns out to be what the first rumours promise it to be featurewise and if they perhaps have reintroduced the imestamp feature (which doesn't seem probable from the early descriptions and Sony's way of doing stuff) it comes pretty close to my 'ultimate HiMD recorder' (which is what I expect HiMD to be... it just isn't competitive as a player anymore)

for a 'player' I will gradually start looking for other options

[1kyle]

Loads of companies IMO have over bloated "features" that most people rarely use in practice.

Just look at the current crop of "Mobile Phones" which have really caught the "Feature-itus" bug in a big way. Do people really want to watch a movie or seriously surf the internet on those tiny screens, and just making a phone call which was the primary purpose of the device seems to be just an "after thought".

Similarly for MD players being used as a play back device using those tiny bud phones is a full blown Equaliser necessary.

Same with computer software. Even something simple like NERO which is great for burning CD's and DVD's has become such a piece of "Bloatware" (Release 7) which requires you to install Microsoft .NET etc that I'm sticking with Release 6.0 for as long as possible.

Extra features are often added purely as a "Selling Point" to be pushed by ignorant salespeople in front of possibly some even more ignorant customers.

Basically a decent screen or failing that a nice remote together with high quality recording and playback is what I expect from these type of devices. I really couldn't care too much about computer connectivity although SS 3.4 seems to be OK in that regard.

A SIMPLE High Quality device that does what it's designed to do AS SIMPLY AS POSSIBLE is all I (and I expect a lot of others if they are really honest with themselves) want from the product.

The screen of the RH10 is a beauty that would be nice on the RH1 but there might be issues with this screen that we don't know about yet such as it's longevity or power consumption and I can imagine that in discreet recording situations a bright screen like the RH10 might cause unwelcome or unwanted attention.

We'll have to wait and see what the device is really like.

Don't forget this is primarily a RECORDING medium so whilst a large screen is perfect for playback, it's not required for recording.

As others have intimated recording level meters would be a useful FUNCTION (and I mean a Function not a FEATURE) to have on a recording device.

Cheers

-K

Edited March 18, 2006 by 1kyle

[dex Otaku]

. . . Similarly for MD players being used as a play back device using those tiny bud phones is a full blown Equaliser necessary.

Personally, I find that because of the type of earphones usually used with portables, an EQ is a requirement.

I kind of wish they'd just go all the way and make a variable-Q 3 or 4-band paragraphic EQ + variable freq high+low shelves available. The range available with the built-in 6-band graphic EQ frankly isn't enough [especially to tune the bottom end, which it doesn't even do at all in its current incarnation] to compensate for the "quality" of the included 'phones. The extra power such DSP would take and the interface would likely be a problem [access to the current EQ is bad enough with too many button presses].

The presets they currently give are useless crap; at the least they could make 5 custom settings available for those of us who listen with more than 1 pair of 'phones. Also, making the entire range subtractive only [i never go above the zero line, all that does is add distortion] would be nice.

I'd trade a bit of battery life for adequate EQ any day.

[rayzray]

if Sony would just start making just "White" units; and white this and white that; they would couble their sales in a jiffy; tiffy that though, and iffy that; i woulf bend. and yes; better EQ would be nice; RIce wouldn't mind.

Edited March 18, 2006 by rayzray

[1kyle]

Personally, I find that because of the type of earphones usually used with portables, an EQ is a requirement.

I think this tends to prove the point. It's NO POINT adding a "Feature" if it doesn't do satisfactorily what it purports to do in the first place especially when reality sets in after the initial Sales Hype when a device is first launched.

As your post suggests a full blown customisable decently designed equaliser is another issue entirely but on these type of devices we are not going to get that so it makes sense perhaps to remove the rather feable version SONY have on some of their devices deflecting user criticism and adverse publicity.

I think I'd rather have a piece of kit that does 100% well the few basic functions that I need rather than a machine that comes equipped with nice sounding features but lets the user down in practice.

Of course this also boils down to choice but that's my take on it.

Cheers

-K

[dex Otaku]

Excellent way of putting it, 1kyle.

I, myself, still prefer having the limited correction that the current EQ provides, as without it the sound of earbuds [which I usually use because they're convenient in terms of size, weight, nd easy+fast removal and re-insertion] is categorically unbearable.

[tekdroid]

I'm actually glad that no unit I've ever used had a specific recording light on it. That's the kind of thing that's among the first "features" I turn off on any equipment [along with "beep" sounds].

Pretty much the only thing I disagree on. I love the MZ-NH1's recording light and miss it when using my other unit. It's a very good indicator things are working at a glance (and a good "glance-at-it" indicator of louder level activity), and a great way of seeing disc access on the computer (Windows Explorer tells you a file is copied but the MD is still writing, for example). Given MD's slowness, it's also a good way of seeing disc activity on lengthy writes when the Explorer copying status dialogue is hidden by other windows or whatever as you're working.

Current draw of the thing is negligible. It's much more of a hassle to stare at a small LCD (or whatever) to see disc activity than view a quick visual indicator like a light.

So my respects to the light!

[Hungerdunger]

Some of the options I loved personally, but I could see how they might not be essential for others, like speed control (extremely useful for learning to play instruments: you can slow a recording down to pick apart what's happening

I use that feature to speed up spoken-word recordings, so that a one hour recording can be listened to easily in 45 minutes, or even, if they're not talking too quickly and you're prepared to lose the occasional word, in half an hour.

[rayzray]

i LOVE speed control just to speed up ALL the songs ;; and it puts "Life" in the songs; gives a blah day an energetic feeling; like "Let's get some work done"; or; a nap with zingo music.

[garcou]

I must say I couldn't agree more with dex! But still I'd just like to add... if the RH1 really turns out to be what the first rumours promise it to be featurewise and if they perhaps have reintroduced the imestamp feature (which doesn't seem probable from the early descriptions and Sony's way of doing stuff) it comes pretty close to my 'ultimate HiMD recorder' (which is what I expect HiMD to be... it just isn't competitive as a player anymore)

for a 'player' I will gradually start looking for other options

As portable player MD is only one option, but as "portable + home hifi + car audio " player, it has no competitor

Edited March 18, 2006 by garcou

[The Low Volta]

but as "portable + home hifi + car audio " player, it has no competitor

euh sorry, but first (Net)MD is IMHO obsolete... too little storage space and no option for lossless (PCM) recording so I won't consider this an alternative for anything anymore...

and secondly: perhaps portable player is only one option, but honestly it is the only option Sony chose for HiMD!!

HiMD only offers portables, a few overpriced mini/midi-hifi's and absolutely no car-decks as far as I know. So maybe if they had launched HiMD seriously in all those markets, it could have worked...but they didn't/won't and even if they would I guess it would be much too late now

besides, "no competitor" is a bit strong IMHO... I do all that stuff you describe now and for most things a HiMD really isn't necessary:

- portable player: HiMD for now (but I'm looking for a decent replacement and there is a lot of choice)

- home hifi: well, a good home hifi of course and a great invention that carries lossless audio called 'CD'

- car audio: a car deck with aux-in combined with the portable player (so now it's still a HiMD, but it could easily be replaced)

...but...

- portable recorder: HiMD and I really see no alternative within the same price range + audio quality

hope my argument is clear(er) now... but of course this is only my opinion and you may differ.

[1kyle]

As The Low Volta says there are possibly other better alternatives if you just want a play back only device.

For Future recording eventually I know I'll switch over to a solid state format but only when solid state media becomes as cheap as MD's and above all are REMOVABLE.

After recording I like to keep the discs as archive and there's no reason why I shouldn't play these on decent equipment WITHOUT LUGGING A COMPUTER AROUND.

Hard disk devices will not IMO make it as the preferred portable recording medium for reasons I've posted earlier in this thread.

Burning CD's for archiving recordings is not really an option either. There's discussion all over the web about longevity of these devices (CD-R's and CD-RW's. I'm not talking about commercial CD's here).

Also for home listening I prefer the smaller form factor of MD's (would be even better with solid state cards).

600 - 1000 CD's can take up an inordinate amount of space. 100 - 150 Hi-MD's or even 800 standard MD's can be stored very nicely.

Currently for most non top end gear which costs 1000 USD and above there really ISN'T any alternative to the MD for portable recording.

A device which concentrates on this rather than playback will survive for a good few years yet and will effectively be a New Generation.

As to the "Low recording time" of 1Gb discs (90 Min in PCM mode) I can't really see that as a problem. Most groups don't play 90 mins without a break or a puse to tune up instruments so you've got ample time to pop in another disc.

Back in DAT days (much more expensive as well) we typically used 60 Min tapes and the batteries wouldn't last much longer than that either.

For those using "Cassettes" a 90 min tape also was probably as much as you used although if you were forced to use these for recordings then a 60 min tape was probably better.

If MD is marketed as a RECORDING device it will as I've said survive for a good while yet. Forget about MP3 and other spurious playback formats. If people want MP3 then you can code this AFTER the recording session for people to use on their Ipods etc.

[dex Otaku]

Burning CD's for archiving recordings is not really an option either. There's discussion all over the web about longevity of these devices (CD-R's and CD-RW's. I'm not talking about commercial CD's here).

CD-RW, being a phase-change optical format, has longevity similar to DVD-RAM. Both are more costly than dye-based WORM formats, though.

[Top Cat]

Point 1: these portables are not actually designed to be used with amplification; they're made for listening with headphones of some kind.

I use (quite often) my Hi-MD recorder in the middle of recording chains. OTOH I'm already almost fed up by my recorder used as a portable player - I just have very few opportunities to use it as such.

So actually I'd like line-out more than hp-out

PS

Concerning power. I suspect the line out does not need more energy than hp-out because it does not have to drive any mechanical elements but goes directly to electronic amplifier.

Note the impedance for a typical line-in is like 10 kOhms vs. 20-100 Ohms for headphones. No way for a line-in to draw any substantial energy from line-out...

[dex Otaku]

Concerning power. I suspect the line out does not need more energy than hp-out because it does not have to drive any mechanical elements but goes directly to electronic amplifier.

Note the impedance for a typical line-in is like 10 kOhms vs. 20-100 Ohms for headphones. No way for a line-in to draw any substantial energy from line-out...

A line output uses almost no "power" itself [i.e. mW are low because the load is so high-impedance] but the voltage required for full line-out is higher than the headphone output [which, being low-impedance, relies on wattage over that load, not specifically just voltage across it], higher in fact than the single 1.2 or 1.5V supply allows for. The headphone output of the current series' digital amp barely puts out 1Vp-p .. It would require higher power consumption for it to reach "true" line level by amplifying/stepping up the battery voltage by one means or another to put out at least a full 1Vp-p; to reach the same levels as a normal CD player it would have to be about 4Vp-p or higher. So - while the line output itself doesn't use power in the sense of its high impedance load consuming current, reaching true line level would use more power just to get there [voltage-wise]. Did that make any sense?

By no means am I actually an electronics engineer, so I could be out to lunch on this, but it makes sense to me that the limited power supply restricts how high even a high-impedance line output can actually get, amplitude-wise, since it depends on voltage [PSU to output amplifier] being high enough.

Li-battery units [3.some volts/cell] would easily be capable of this, as would 2xAA cell units. One might note that the "true" line outputs disappeared from MD units back when they started using single AA or NiMH cells.

[tekdroid]

CD-RW, being a phase-change optical format, has longevity similar to DVD-RAM. Both are more costly than dye-based WORM formats, though.

Not even close. DVD-RAM uses radically different materials and construction (not to mention write strategy) to CD-RW. CD-RW isn't even in the same ballpark as DVD-RAM.

[Top Cat]

I see what you mean, but for e.g. the mic phantom power somehow manages to be around 2.3 V while the battery is 1.2 V. However, mics might use less energy compared to line-in, I don't know...

[dex Otaku]

Not even close. DVD-RAM uses radically different materials and construction (not to mention write strategy) to CD-RW. CD-RW isn't even in the same ballpark as DVD-RAM.

The answers on this seem to vary rather wildly from source to source. Having now done more reading on it, I'll agree with you [yay! I concede!].

Part of the problem with really answering this question is that the technology hasn't been around long enough to truly determine longevity, though. In 50 years, we'll both be able to find definitive answers maybe.

[1kyle]

The answers on this seem to vary rather wildly from source to source. Having now done more reading on it, I'll agree with you [yay! I concede!].

Part of the problem with really answering this question is that the technology hasn't been around long enough to truly determine longevity, though. In 50 years, we'll both be able to find definitive answers maybe.

DVD-RAM is certainly (currently) the media with the best longevity prospects. The discs in caddies are even better since this adds another level of protection in their handling. (DVD-RAM comes in either "Caddies like a large casette or plain discs like "normal" DVD's).

Read write cycles are more than 200,000 compared with "bog standard DVD-RW or DVD+RW.

You can do enough tests on devices to "simulate" longevity reasonably accurately. You don't always have to be around for that long to test the physics.

The base nuclear fusion physics of the Sun for example is well understood. We know that the the sun will end its life in around 4 billion years from now as its Hydrogen core becomes exahusted and we even know how it will end (Red Giant etc). We don't actually have to be there in 4 billion years to prove it (even if it were possible).

Actually in practice CD-RW seems to have the biggest "compatability" problems. Often a CD-RW burned on one computer won't read properly on another, and it's likely to die the death relatively quickly since the storage area (around 600MB) is too small these days and for decent Read Write mode where you can use a CD-RW like a very large floppy disk (instead of using a CD-RW as a standard CD) you have to use "Packet writing" software like Nero inCd which is a real pain as anybody whose used "packet writing software" on a computer knows onlyt too well.

[dex Otaku]

I'm aware of DVD-RAM. I used it for my primary rotating/incremental backup medium [with caddy, even]. It's slow, but it's reliable as heck.

[1kyle]

Actually the newer DVD-RAM devices will work at 3X and I think some will work at 5X. I quite like the double sided ones at 9.4GB as well.

Incidentally the very excellent Panasonic UJ845 (marketed as Matshita I think) will work in most laptops. It supports both DVD-RAM and Dual Layer DVD's as well as all the other CD / DVD formats. Excellent drive if you want DVD-RAM in a laptop. This drive will also write conventional DVD media at 8X (If you can find the media).

It's REALLY EASY actually changing a DVD / CD drive in most laptops even the most ham fisted of you can do it. I had a lot of trouble with a really crappy Pioneer drive in a Sony VAIO. I changed it for the Panasonic (Matshita) and now I can also enjoy watching DVD's recorded on a DVD-RAM panasonic DVD recorder on my laptop.

WinDVD works with DVD-RAM as well as standard DVD's. PowerDVD doesn't just in case you want to try this too.

I archive to DVD-RAM as well. Don't trust anything else.

Cheers

-K

Edited March 21, 2006 by 1kyle

[dex Otaku]

Actually the newer DVD-RAM devices will work at 3X and I think some will work at 5X.

Perhaps, but both of my drives [an older SL Panasonic/Matsushita and a cheapo DL BenQ that was an emergency replacement at the right price of $49 but doesn't take the caddy] write at 2x. The security is worth the wait though.

It's REALLY EASY actually changing a DVD / CD drive in most laptops even the most ham fisted of you can do it. I had a lot of trouble with a really crappy Pioneer drive in a Sony VAIO. I changed it for the Panasonic (Matshita) and now I can also enjoy watching DVD's recorded on a DVD-RAM panasonic DVD recorder on my laptop.

That you found a drive that specifically fits your VAIO is actually surprising to me. I've never actually seen a notebook drive that fit any computer except the specific model or line it was made for. I take it the replacement you found was made for the VAIO line?

As someone who has serviced notebooks for a number of years [on and off for at least 10, and I still do if only irregularly now .. units from Sony, Toshiba, HP, Compaq, Acer, Dell, Gateway, IBM, and basically anything sold in Canada except Apple..] I'd disagree with this on principle. Notebooks are invariably of proprietary design and there is absolutely no consistent standard [that I've seen, at least] for internal optical drives outside that of the OEM who made the notebook, and those standards tend to vary between models and/or model lines [the bastards!].

If the OEM has a drive available, or someone makes a replacement that fits the case and connections of the one you've got, go ahead and install it. Otherwise I wouldn't recommend just buying a drive and expecting it to fit.

Aside from that, external drives are much easier to deal with [in terms of standards compliance, at least].

WinDVD works with DVD-RAM as well as standard DVD's. PowerDVD doesn't just in case you want to try this too.

I've used PowerDVD with DVD-RAM. Whether it works depends more on what the disc was written with and how standards-compliant it is, by my experience at least. [DVD-cams, for instance, tend to suck for this, regardless of what advertising tells you. But then, DVD-cams tend to suck in general. Anything that writes a first-generation copy that isn't frame-based is useless crap for editing.]

We're way off topic, here. Heh. Maybe we should go jabber in the off-topic forum?

[rayzray]

DVD-RAM is certainly (currently) the media with the best longevity prospects. The discs in caddies are even better since this adds another level of protection in their handling. (DVD-RAM comes in either "Caddies like a large casette or plain discs like "normal" DVD's).

Read write cycles are more than 200,000 compared with "bog standard DVD-RW or DVD+RW.

You can do enough tests on devices to "simulate" longevity reasonably accurately. You don't always have to be around for that long to test the physics.

The base nuclear fusion physics of the Sun for example is well understood. We know that the the sun will end its life in around 4 billion years from now as its Hydrogen core becomes exahusted and we even know how it will end (Red Giant etc). We don't actually have to be there in 4 billion years to prove it (even if it were possible).

Actually in practice CD-RW seems to have the biggest "compatability" problems. Often a CD-RW burned on one computer won't read properly on another, and it's likely to die the death relatively quickly since the storage area (around 600MB) is too small these days and for decent Read Write mode where you can use a CD-RW like a very large floppy disk (instead of using a CD-RW as a standard CD) you have to use "Packet writing" software like Nero inCd which is a real pain as anybody whose used "packet writing software" on a computer knows onlyt too well.

I recentcy bought 3 Panasonic DVD Recorders and 3 Panasonic Players; all for the purpose of using the SAME DVD-RAM's in one houe and recording in one room and watching in other rooms.

i have begun recording music in the DVD-R's but mustly capture movies and things on DVD-RAMS to watch..

now i capture ANYTHING on DVD'RAMS at the xp (1 hour) speed; and find it amazing that i can make permanent DVD'R from those RAMS.

i want to but one more Panasonic DVD-RAM Recorder to take out on "Field recording A/V projects.

is that OK? or is there something better in the same priceline that i could use.

i want to use my Sima SFX-9 Video Efrects Mixer with it and some Portable DVD players as monitors..

will this fly?

Edited March 21, 2006 by rayzray

[dex Otaku]

i want to but one more Panasonic DVD-RAM Recorder to take out on "Field recording A/V projects.

is that OK? or is there something better in the same priceline that i could use.

If having something you can edit later is your desire, then DO NOT use ANY equipment whose first generation of encoding uses DVD-compatible MPEG-2 video [which is not frame-based encoding]. The quality is CRAP [read: Hi8 and SVHS analogue video cameras look WAY better] once you've edited and re-rendered your work.

if your pupose is to have something where the first generation of encoding is as far as you go, it's fine. Otherwise, MiniDV and other frame-based digital video formats [DV25, DVC, DV50, MJPEG even] are vastly superior.

[1kyle]

Slightly off topic I agree however these days most "Slim" format DVD drives will fit into most notebooks. Theres a common connector at the end as well.

This works for pretty well ALL brands of laptops.

http://www.bixnet.com/lapexcddriv.html

Don't worry about the various makes of drive etc.

Just look at some of the pictures to show how it's done. I can guarantee ANYBODY can do it provided they know how to use a screwdriver.

These sort of jobs are much easier than you think.

Don't confuse the "Slimline" DVD hardware with standard enclosures. The slimline one's are made for laptops specifically (although if you supply a decent housing for them there's no reason why you can't use them in a desktop computer either).

An excellent advantage of DVD-RAM for video recording is that you can actually WATCH one part of the disk while RECORD to another AT THE SAME TIME.

This can't be done with DVD- or DVD + formats.

Cheers

-K

Edited March 21, 2006 by 1kyle

[rayzray]

If having something you can edit later is your desire, then DO NOT use ANY equipment whose first generation of encoding uses DVD-compatible MPEG-2 video [which is not frame-based encoding]. The quality is CRAP [read: Hi8 and SVHS analogue video cameras look WAY better] once you've edited and re-rendered your work.

if your pupose is to have something where the first generation of encoding is as far as you go, it's fine. Otherwise, MiniDV and other frame-based digital video formats [DV25, DVC, DV50, MJPEG even] are vastly superior.

don't know if i should take this somewhere's else; it's OT , but no one complained yet; but it should be of interest to others.

i take my sources from three methods.

1. i DV things in my camcorder. them to the PC#2 which has the main DVD burner.

2; i sample video off original DVD's and use them as backgounds; so i have to put them on a DVD'R of DVD-RAM.

3. i can lift video/ from TV onto DVD-RAM which works well into the PC#2's main DVD burner.

i can do all this (THROUGH) my Sima SFX-9 Vedeo Effects Mixer.. and add "Real Time" effcts.

so, there not much re-burning to do; it's all done at the first burning.

so, you are telling us that it is GOOD to save/archive music and video on the DVD-RAMS all the time and forget about the DVDr. RW; and CDr RW etc? interesting matter;

i must shove that up my famitly's rear cause they have their ways of saving their stuff; whic i don't agree with.

is there a way to start all this on another thread? like bring it all there; maybe i can copy and paste and save yous and the mods some trouble.