Jump to content

Hi-SP vs Hi-LP

Rate this topic


mil

Recommended Posts

I just bought my first HiMD player a few days ago. So far i have recorded a couple of disks. all the recording i have done so far is in Hi-SP mode. this means that i can fit about 8 hrs of music on one disk. In the manual it says if i switch to Hi-LP mode i can record 34 hrs of music. can anyone tell me if there is much difference in quality between Hi-LP mode and Hi-SP mode.

thanks in advance!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

evidently, if the same disc can hold four times as much music, this means the file size is four times as small or in other words: lots more info is cut out... this has an effect on sound quality (SQ)

whether or not this quality loss hinders you in the enjoyment of the music is up to you. Just download the same piece of music in HiSP and HiLP and listen if you can hear the difference... if not, congrats, you have just won quadruple storage space. I for one can hear too much differences with the original source and even with HiSP... I use either HiSP (on my NH900) or MP3 (Lame VBR V4-new on my RH1).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you record will also make a difference is what bitrate sounds acceptable. A single aCapella voice is fairly easy to encode, a full orchestra much more difficult. The first would sound good at a low bitrate, the latter would be able to take advantage of a higher bitrate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi-SP for most people sounds the same as PCM. Hi-LP most people can hear a difference if you listen carefully. Also if the source sounds like crap there is no point in using a high bitrate, garbage in garbage out. I for one use 356 and Hi-SP. For crappy sources I use the lower bitrates. I carry around a few more discs but thats no problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the intended use of the recording makes a big difference in what quality you want to use to encode. If I am recording something that will be played through the crappy sound system in my truck I don't worry too much about quality being top notch but it does have to be an acceptable level. I don't record in 48 kbps or anything ridiculous like that. I will use Hi-LP though because the sound system it's being played through is no better than FM quality anyway. But if I want to listen to something through my best headphones I want much better quality.

I'm apparently different on source material too. If I download an mp3 from the web I don't want to make it worse by encoding it at a lower level like Hi-LP. It will sound very bad if I do that IMO because it is getting double compression. If I'm transfering someting from a CD I will go ahead and use Hi-LP because it can stand to lose a little quality if the intended use is through a crappy sound system like the one in my truck. But it will definitely be noticeable if I play it in my car which has an excellent sound system.

I think these questions are just something a person will learn to deal with in time. There are no perfect answers for every situation. Just remember that it's best to try to get the best quality you can get for your situation. You don't want to find that you recorded a bunch of music on a 1 gig disc only to hear really terrible sound from it on a long ride home from out of town when you really wanted to hear those tunes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

It's pretty simple. Hi-LP is equivalent to FM Stereo quality.

That's a far-fetched claim by Sony marketeers.

IMO FM is much higher quality (at least in ideal reception conditions).

And often FM is indistinguishable from CD except for background hiss. BTW some reputable radiostations refuse to air anything lower than PCM 44/16 - that must be for a reason...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a far-fetched claim by Sony marketeers.

IMO FM is much higher quality (at least in ideal reception conditions).

And often FM is indistinguishable from CD except for background hiss. BTW some reputable radiostations refuse to air anything lower than PCM 44/16 - that must be for a reason...

FM quality is "equalized" from the radio station. That means that bass, treble and mids are adjusted to enhance sound quality. But a flat FM signal would be equivalent to Hi-LP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FM quality is "equalized" from the radio station. That means that bass, treble and mids are adjusted to enhance sound quality. But a flat FM signal would be equivalent to Hi-LP.

No, no way. Lots of FM stations sound bad because of compression (of dynamics, to make the station louder, not digital compression as with MP3 or ATRAC), bad reception, etc. However, a clear signal from a good-sounding (i. e., minimally processed) station is light years ahead of Hi-LP. I do a lot of recording off FM with very good tuners (Yamaha T-85 and Sony ST-S730ES) and 24-bit A-D cards (Echo Indigo IO and Edirol UA-1EX) and I can tell you that the compressed files are NOT as good as the original WAV files. FM doesn't sound better because of equalization, it is because of the lack of digital compression and its subsequent losses and artifacts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FM quality is "equalized" from the radio station. That means that bass, treble and mids are adjusted to enhance sound quality. But a flat FM signal would be equivalent to Hi-LP.

A clear FM signal with no analog noise, excellent channel separation, and no processing would have more in common with 32kHz PCM than Hi-LP. Remember, the main downfall of Hi-LP is he barrage of awful digital artifacts (ringing, pre-echo, noise) that it introduces into the audio. Those, IMO, are FAR more annoying than the analog shortcomings of FM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...