Hi-MD as a Playback Device

[himd_anxiety]

The impetus of this thread was some advice someone gave in another thread that opposed using Hi-MD as a playback device. "Its benefits are all on the side of recording," the poster said. I posted this to ask whether you agree and, second, to disagree myself.

Advising someone to get a cheap flash player instead of a Hi-MD player/recorder or player seems to overlook its inexpensive media relative to flash storage space. Second, ATRAC file compression provides copious extra space. Third, the flash player is likely to have inferior sound and fewer sound options. Fourth, its functionality as a storage device will be minimized due to space constraints, which are less a concern when you have a 1 Gigabyte disk at just $7. Finally, the flash player will likely provide far less search functions and lack the convenient jog dial.

I think that even if I owned just a small CD collection, I'd buy the 600D from Sears, where it is on sale for just $68, and put all my CDs on it. You'd never have to change disks since you'd only need one. It would be like a 1 gig flash player. I cannot see why someone would say all Hi-MD's strengths are on the recording side.

I do know that that is what gives it its edge over hard-drive players and its decisive edge over other flash media, but I think it's still a very good playback device. I have my NW-HD5, but was listening to my MZ-NHF800 today and still found the sound superior.

I'm sure many of you here use Hi-MD as a primary playback device. I did for a year, then switched to my NW-HD5 just because I wanted to carry close to all my music. If I were just around the house or wanted to play a device through a stereo, I'd choose my Hi-MD recorder, though.

Edited May 22, 2006 by himd_anxiety

[A440]

The impetus of this thread was some advice someone gave in another thread that opposed using Hi-MD as a playback device. "Its benefits are all on the side of recording,"

Well, that might have been me. All of your points are well taken--especially the economy of 1GB discs versus flash memory. It's one of the big reasons I stick to Hi-MD. Although I'm a recording zealot, I got a NH600D myself and use it quite often as a portable player. At current steep discounts, it's a great bargain. But at its original list price, it was overpriced.

There are advantages and disadvantages on both sides. For someone who has their music collection as CDs, I would lean toward Hi-MD for a few reasons: sound quality (even in Hi-SP) and, just as important, Simple Burner, which is much more sensible than ripping the CD onto the hard drive, storing the files there, and transferring them to an mp3 player. It's the one piece of software Sony got right.

If the collection is not CDs but mp3s, it's a different story. I have an Iriver 795, and I compared some mp3s (dragged and dropped in Iriver's Music Manager) and mp3s converted to Hi-SP. The extra round of compression did bad things to the mp3s, particularly an Ennio Morricone soundtrack that had some percussion in it--the artifacts made the ATRAC version unlistenable. There's also the matter of size: the Iriver is like a fat triangular pack of gum, and they make even smaller ones.

All of us here are used to the quirks of MD, but if you think about it, the menus are not exactly as intuitive as they could be. (The Iriver is just as bad in different ways.) You can pick up an Ipod Nano and figure it out immediately. For a newbie who's just looking for a portable player for the mp3s in her computer, MD is big, clunky and weird. I'm entirely fond of it, but for someone deciding on a new player now, MD would seem outre. As a recorder, however....

[Sparky191]

Personally I reckon a iPod Shuffle sounds better. Its much smaller and the controls are more logical. I can also fill it faster and use it as a memory stick. It also charges from USB and doesn't need a cable. Its also much more robust and a lot cheaper. So I'm less likely to damage it, and even if I do or lose it, its cheap to replace.

On HiMD The whole group button thing annoys me as does tiny amount of info the screen displays especially on the cheaper models which are directly comparible to the Flash players. The button placement is illogical, pause/play should be on one button. I don't have a LCD remote, and perhaps that would change my mind on the useablility. As would a digital amp on the SQ front. But that would add to the expense of the unit.

I still like HiMD however I suspect would need a better unit to switch to using it as my main player. The RH1 might be that unit, but its too expensive for me.

[Tunster]

The iPod Shuffle is the most useless invention made by mankind (the Apple Corp kind that is). Any standard flash/hdd player with a screen has it. For one, I do not rate the iPod SQ. For two, flash/hdd based players with lose everything if it breaks. I don't care if a MD disc brakes (very unlikely) or the player was to pack in (the data can still be accessed with another player). For three, I love being different and having a RH1 (compared to everyone having some kind of standard MP3 Player) will look brilliant in comparison ).

If you love the quirkies of MD, go for it. Don't see why you cannot use HiMD as a playback format. For my main purposes (when I get the RH1), I'll recording my radio shows in LP2 on a NetMD deck and then uploading to PCM for archive. With regards to playback, I'll use the 1GB discs to store Hi-SP quality (from CD) albums.

[johnsmells]

um ok, im not one of those people who moans at people on threads, but a minidisc player is

too expensive compared to a shuffle?

I buy a Ipod shuffle from woolies for seventy quid odd.

I run out space on my shuffle, thats ok i'll just listen to the radio instea... thats ok i'll just potter down to dixons and buy some more memor.... oh dear, um thats not how it works.

as for sound quality, minidisc players are just better. as the old saying goes, you cant shine a shit, high bitrates = it sounds nicer. whats wrong? bored of your one and a bit albums you can squeeze on your ipod?

after the initial, and i agree slightly steep outlay for a silver RH1 off ebay or a blue or gold RH10 (this is just me being awkward and wanting stuff in pretty colours, and why don't they just offer stuff in pretty colours everywhere? but this is a discussion for another time). it costs but one five pound note to purchase a shiney new 1GB disc from the slimey salesmen in my local sony shop.

plus if a young gent passes you in the street looking to make a small sum to support his "sherbert" habit, he will be infinately more likely to trouble you "for a light" if you are sporting muggers choice earphones.

its just my opinion on the matter

tunster posted mid writing, and seemed to cover everything else i should have said, including one important point.....

chatting to the local apple fanboys (there are a lot, i go to an art uni) i am constantly berated for being stuck in 1997 for having a minidisc player. they are so smug until one day they drop their £330 "best thing ever invented ever, you are rubbish if you haven't got one"

£300 ipod + £30 on a see through gimp suit for it to protect its shiney metal ass (futurama reference on the internet? how origional)

oh dear it fell on the floor, is it allright? no, no its not, its insides have broken into a million peices like they were made of pottery.

ahhh, never mind, you can borrow my old sharp player, its the size of a shoe.

Edited May 22, 2006 by johnsmells

[Sparky191]

Get a grip and compare like with like. Can you not just stay on topic for once, instead of the tired auld rabid fanboz MD sound bits. HD players have nothing to do with the topic. So I'll ignore those points they are not relevent.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The comparison was made between using a cheap HiMD with a SINGLE disk and a flash based player. If you lose the flash based player you have all your music on your PC suitably backed up. The same as you do with your SonicStage library. What do you do when you out and only have one disc with you, and want to add more music? Pop into a music store and buy an album? No you can't. So you head back home and get a new disc or go to a PC and switch the content on your disk. Mind you we were talking about having a HiMD and only one disk so swapping disks isn't an option. As for a radio, most MD don't have those either (and no current model). Most flash players do.

As for muggers choice earphones, that can only assume you use the stock buds. If you are doing that then forget talking about SQ. SQ doesn't exist with stock buds with almost any player regardless of format or bitrate. Speaking of bitrates = SQ well it depends on the headphones you are using doesn't it. Again if you are using stock buds you're not going to notice much of a difference past 192kps. So thats a complete blind alley aswell. Most flash players can play a wide range of bitrates to equal those on MD. Again there no point in listening to PCM with stock earbuds on a noisey commute.

The Shuffle is well regarded by many audiophiles as having great SQ for a portable. Its simply not the same as the rest of the iPods. That you don't make the distinction means you are not aware of that. Of course you need decent phones to hear it. The Shuffle doesn't need a screen, its designed for random music listening. If you want a player with a screen and different navigation there are many units that do have those features, with as good SQ.

Edited May 22, 2006 by Sparky191

[johnsmells]

sorry mate, i didn't mean to get you knickers in a twist.

whats with the whole one disc thing? discs are cheap as chips and fairly small, ok if you are carrying round twenty discs with you then, i agree its going to be a bit of an arse, but two or three is no big deal.

i understand the whole thing of having a flash player, i do, but maybe you could have picked a better one to argue your point with.

ok, look, apple is fine and dandy. they market their products increadably well (who else could sell the idea of not having a screen as a feature?), and have decent music player software, and they have managed to make them for many objects of desire, they have a complete solution and for that they sell them by the truck load.

if i was agruing your side, then i probably would have picked something from cowon or iriver, i don't own a flash player from either, but they offer buckets of options and apparently ace sound quality (i have a iriver IMP900 Cd player and the sound quality on that is ace of spades), and seemingly constant firmware updates.

i don't think that it is that unreasonable to discuss topics other than sound quality, as even though that may be your primary requirement, its nice to have other capabilities, even if you don't want them now you may do in the future.

maybe thats the crux of my problem with you picking the shuffle, it is so limited in what it can do, ipods seem to be the most limited music players, no radio, no recording, you have to use special software rather than drag and drop. other people have the impetus to expand its capabilties, a great example of this is the ipod linux project. Apple have makes very restricting products, the worst offender is the shuffle, i mean no screen? this isn't 1997.

Look we can argue this till we are blue in our faces, but i think that people don't choose minidiscs purely on their capabilities (although they are amaizing at quite a lot of things, sound quality included) its the chance to try things differently, to go out of their way to choose something that sets them apart from white earphoned masses, for me personally it is quite a big part of it.

Edited May 22, 2006 by johnsmells

[Terence Kelly]

Get a grip and compare like with like. Can you not just stay on topic for once, instead of the tired auld rabid fanboz MD sound bits. HD players have nothing to do with the topic. So I'll ignore those points they are not relevent.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The comparison was made between using a cheap HiMD with a SINGLE disk and a flash based player. ....

I think the topic was using Hi MD as a player. Certainly it's very practical for that. I bought my two oldest daughters HD3s for players, and one did die after a short drop to a carpeted floor. The sound quality on the HD3 in High SP was decidedly inferior to what I was used to on minidisc. My youngest daughter (11) was wishing she had her own music player, and after some consideration I bought her the 600D. It was cheap, it's more durable than HD player, and uses a standard battery. It is bigger than a flash player, but she's prone to lose things, so bigger was better. She really likes it so far. I think flash players shine for people doing vigorous exercise. Size and weight are important in that situation and superb SQ is not. It's great we have many choices, and Hi-MD is an excellent choice for playback.

TK

[RobA]

I record nothing, I use Hi-MD soley as a playback device. It is the ultimate playback solution in my opinion. Cheap affordable media, long battery life, ATRAC compression to store more music per gig at while keeping high sound quality, and it is just much more affordable than HDD or Flash players. I started out with a 600D and got it for 80 bucks on amazon. Worked great for playback. A stupid friend of mine broke the jog dial, so I echanged it with sony and got an rh10 for only 30 bucks. The rh10 imo, is the ultimate playback unit. The OLED display is awesome plus everything else that HiMD offers. I ended up buying another 600D as a backup/workhorse unit on ebay for $45 bucks and use it as well. I really like removable media, one of the main reasons I use HiMD.

HiMD is awesome for playback, take it from someone that does no recording at all. But unfortunately it looks like sony is switching gears and is now targeting the business recording market instead of being a playback competitor of other mp3 players, damn shame.

[malheuresement]

I use my NH1 primarily as a playback device.

In addition to its flexibility and excellent SQ, can I extoll HiMDs virtues of being able to manipulate tracks and albums on-the-go.

Moving single tracks from one group to another, moving entire albums, reordering tracks, deleting tracks and albums......all of these things are possible with HiMD machines. And its just what I need.

As someone who does all of his listening through his portable device and not on a PC, I like to be able to remove the duff tracks from albums, freeing up space for other tracks the next time to transfer music over from my laptop.

I am so glad I moved back to HiMD.

mal.

[Sparky191]

From the first post.

....if I owned just a small CD collection, I'd buy the 600D from Sears, where it is on sale for just $68, and put all my CDs on it. You'd never have to change disks since you'd only need one. It would be like a 1 gig flash player. ....

My knickers aren't in a twist, I'm laughing my ass off.

I love the logic, a HD player is too big, a Flash player is too small. You don't want all your music on one disk you want it on loads of discs. But then you want a bigger 2GB+ disks so you have less disks. iPods are bad because they don't have a radio, even though you can buy a radio remote for them, and there isn't a radio MD model anymore. iPod is bad because its not drag and drop, even though MD isn't either. You critise iPods for not beign able to record, then praise the MD download only units. Some people reckon flash players don't have good SQ, but then others reckon they do, as long as they aren't an apple one. You don't want to talk about SQ unless its about how MD has better SQ, even with 64kps files and stock iDuds.

You'll note that a lot what was wrong with MD units has been addressed on the latest units. That not been achieved by being blind to MD faults, as the MD fan boyz are. But by pointing faults out and Sony finally getting their finger out and actually doing some work on the format.

Forget about the Shuffle, you don't get it.

http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/attachment....53&d=1110489572

http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showpost.ph...6&postcount=586

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y100/Elep...headphones1.jpg

I like my MD & HiMD unit but I'm not blind to their faults.

Edited May 22, 2006 by Sparky191

[jonny mac]

I use HiMD almost entirely for playback and as I've said before it's excellent for this. I won't go into the reasons for that (yet again) but I think that anyone who dismisses MD as useful only for recording is missing something. i have yet to find anything that can top MD simply for sound quality, never mind it's other many advantages.

[johnsmells]

oh dear young man

*edited by atrain*

if all the cool kids were jumping off a bridge would you do it?

i can see that once you were commited with minidisc, you gazed into her bright blue display, you found her quirks charming. but now over time they have grown more and more irksum, you drift apart, slowly you realise there is no love left in the marriage, you start seeing other people bitter at the thought of the time you spent together. this is going to be a messy divorce.......

Edited May 23, 2006 by atrain

[atrain]

no handbags! respect choice please guys.

[Sparky191]

I'd respect more the choice of someone with some experience of the devices they are lambasting.

[iTor]

What can I say? Being a playback only HiMD user, I couldn't be happier with it.

For the holiest shake, life battery is insane! It is quite fast at downloading and converting songs to the player (note that I come from using a 510), and bought a cheap elk35 on eBay and could not have done a better inversion.

I love this player, and I probably won't convince anybody with these reasons, but have had quite a lot of music players and would not go back to mp3 flash players. I never owned an Ipod, if anyone wants to know, but I don't think I need to.