newbie question

[tiggerlou]

Greetings!

I am a musician and composer with very little expertise in tech matters, but I'm learning fast. I've had an MZ-R-30 for many years, and I've been very happy with it. I'm thinking of upgrading to the MZ-M200 / RH1, to transfer my many minidisc recordings onto my hard drive, also for live recording.

Here's my question, and it's a real newbie question, but I have to ask: What does "better sound" really mean, when you talk about the difference between other formats and minidisc?

Everybody raves about it, and I can't argue with their enthusiasm, but I'd like to know what exactly you're talking about. Does it mean that when I record a live performance or rehearsal, that the sound will be more faithful to the original? Warmer? Cleaner? Golly, I don't even know what I mean by the words I just used --that's how much of a newbie I am with recording.

In the past I've gone to a studio for any recording that I care about. But if I can remove that expense, I'll do much more of it. I know, I know, I have a LOT to learn about recording in general. One step at a time --which brings me back to my original question.

So, can someone give me a quick rundown on what that means? "Better Sound 101", please?

BTW, I'm really enjoying reading this forum --SO much great information here, guys!

thanks much,

Tiggerlou

[tiggerlou]

Oh, I forgot to ask.

If I convert sound files from ATRAC to some other format, like mp3 or wav, do I then lose the quality I would have had in the ATRAC version? In other words, if I record something on my new (still hypothetical) MZ-M200, then burn it onto CD, or whatever other format so a non-minidisc person can listen to it --do I lose that better sound?

Or did I still do better recording it on the minidisc to begin with, compared with recording it onto some other kind of recorder?

That's actually something that might make or break any decision to purchase the MD recorder. If I'm the only one who will hear the better sound, all on my lonesome listening to my record collection, then it's really not worth it to me. It has to be viable as a professional tool.

So, if I convert a recording to another format, would the better quality of minidisc recording be passed on to non-minidisc listeners?

thanks!

[raintheory]

To somewhat answer your second question:

The RH1/M200 is a Hi-MD recorder. All Hi-MD recorders can record in uncompressed PCM... i.e. 16bit 44.1kHz (same quality as CD), as well as a few Atrac3/Atrac3+ formats (which are the lossy ones).

Edited December 15, 2007 by raintheory

[tiggerlou]

Yes, I've seen that in a lot of posts, but --forgive me but I did say I'm a real newbie to recording --what does that mean in actual sound? What does that mean to a musician?

I've got a lot of years under my belt as a really low-tech performer. Most it has been a capella. I just walk out onto a bare floor, look 'em in the eyes, and deliver the tunes --and that's as low tech as you can get.

I DO know the sound of a room, however, probably better than a lot of folks who perform with all the tech bells and whistles. I can walk into a room and say, "Okay, this place is reeeeally live. So Medieval music would sound really sweet in here, but I'd have to be careful with the lyrics because they'd get muddy with all the natural reverb --and cut that Charlie Parker tune from the program. That will turn into complete mush in this room."

So I've got a good ear. But little to no tech experience.

So, once again --what do you mean when you say "good sound" or "as good as CD" in recording? Does it sound closer to what an audience member hears? Does less of the signal get cut off / bled dry / dulled down / or otherwise mucked up by the technology involved?

What does better sound MEAN to a musician?

[A440]

You should definitely get the RH1 to upload your old stuff, and to record your new stuff in PCM. When you upload your old stuff, convert it to .wav to put it on CDs. .wav is the same as PCM and the same as the files on commercial CDs.

Playback on the RH1 sounds excellent. That's the "warm" sound people are talking about. But that's the output of the unit, not the recording of the input, so it's really beside the point for what you want to do. You don't want warm, friendly, charming, elegant, literary, sexy or any other kind of altered sound when you record: You want accuracy. And the RH1 will capture the sound coming into it very accurately--better than your R30. That's what you want.

Here's why. Digital recording uses a certain amount of ones and zeros, measured in bits or bytes, to capture sound. The more bits/bytes, the better the sound is reproduced.

When the CD was invented, audio geniuses ascertained that about 1411 kbps (kilobits per second) was high fidelity for human ears. We can hear up to about 20,000 Hz, and CD's sample the sound at 44.1 times per second, twice as often. Since then people who look at numbers, and golden-eared audiophiles, have decided that even CDs aren't hi-fi enough and they sample at even higher rates. Fine for them.

Your R30 recorded in the SP format at 292 kbps: compressed sound, but pretty high quality. mp3 is also compressed at various bitrates. Compression throws out a certain amount of information in order to make the files smaller, which is why they are called lossy. The art of the programmer is to throw out information that matters less to the human ear. Different formats--mp3, ATRAC (the compression on minidiscs)--make different choices.

Most people probably can't detect the difference between mp3 at 192 kbps (or SP at 292) and CD-quality sound; a lucky or unlucky few can. But the MZ-M200 records in PCM, CD-quality sound. That's an upgrade from your old SP.

What does it mean? More depth. More detail. Better transients (compressed sound can be hell on cymbals, piano notes, voices). Ever listened to a download of acoustic music from iTunes? Your musician's ears probably hear that something's a little flat. But people are listening to those downloads on itty-bitty white earbuds while they're at the gym, so 128 kbps is good enough for them.

Dulled down is a good way to say it. A visual analog would be graininess, or the kind of pixelation you see on computer graphics. It's a digital approximation of the sound. How fine is the grain? That's what bitrates mean. More bits, more details of every sort.

But at a certain point--certainly well before the difference between SP and PCM--bitrate is far less important than recording technique: good mics, good placement, good room acoustics, and all the things you know about acoustic spaces. Cheap mic to PCM is no better, and probably worse, than a decent mic to SP. Studio engineers know all kinds of techniques to make things sound better.

PCM or .wav copied to CD will have zero quality loss. But PCM won't improve a bad recording: you'll get a more accurate version of the badness. Bring your RH1 to the studio with you, send the same input to the studio recorder and your RH1, and see if you can hear the difference....

There are other small portable recorders now that record at CD quality or better: the Edirol R09 and the Samson Zoom H2.

Minidisc recording is not "better" than other recording, except on one front. Different recorders will have different preamps behind their mic inputs, and minidiscs happen to have excellent little preamps built in, better than the other two. People who have compared them say that outboard mics into mic-in sound better on minidisc.

But if you're going into line-in, or through a mixer or a console, you'll get the same recording if you use the same bitrate on any digital recorder. They're all collecting those zeroes and ones with digital precision and CD-quality sampling rates.

Still, since you have all those old SP recordings, the RH1 is ideal for you.

Edited December 15, 2007 by A440

[tiggerlou]

Thank you so much! I really appreciate your taking the time to answer this.

It does sound like the MZ-M200 is the way to go. I'm glad. The main reason I've been Googling so much these days about minidisc, is that I don't want to invest in it just for emotional reasons --glorifying the underdog. This is a serious enough purchase that it deserves rational, clear thinking about genuine quality.

But now that I know it makes sense --hey, I can let myself get *excited* about it, too

I have another question: with Sony dropping the minidisc format, what happens with repairs, warrantees, etc? Where do I go if I have problems with my recorder? Do I go to independent repair people? How do I find reputable shops? Or would Sony still do repairs? Actually, I'm not sure I'd want to trust Sony with that --because of what happened when I called them recently.

This story probably won't surprise anyone. When I first looked up the Sony website to get specs on the recorder, I found nothing, nada, zippedy doo dah. I was shocked (didn't know yet that they are discontinuing ATRAC), so I called the tech support line for portable audio. Seemed like a good place to go for answers --

--you'd think.

The guy said, "Huh? What are you talking about, again? ...uhhh.... MICRO-discs? I have no idea. Lemme ask somebody else here" Absolutely nobody at that tech support line, and I spoke with bunches of people at Sony, none of them had ever HEARD of minidisc. I eventually spoke with someone at Sony in Canada, and they said, "Sure you bet! We love 'em here"

Pretty sobering.............

thanks again

Tiggerlou

[Strungup]

He does learn fast doesn't he.

Sony , the Omnicient , ...........ummmm , I forgot what was I supposed to Know ?????

[mmp64]

This story probably won't surprise anyone. When I first looked up the Sony website to get specs on the recorder, I found nothing, nada, zippedy doo dah. I was shocked (didn't know yet that they are discontinuing ATRAC), so I called the tech support line for portable audio. Seemed like a good place to go for answers --

--you'd think.

The guy said, "Huh? What are you talking about, again? ...uhhh.... MICRO-discs? I have no idea. Lemme ask somebody else here" Absolutely nobody at that tech support line, and I spoke with bunches of people at Sony, none of them had ever HEARD of minidisc. I eventually spoke with someone at Sony in Canada, and they said, "Sure you bet! We love 'em here"

Pretty sobering.............

thanks again

Tiggerlou

Even a few years ago, before MD was essentially dead, Sony support was pathetic. They are just too big.

[A440]

You should treat the M200 gently. It is the last of the line.

I've never understood why people want to knock around their electronics like sports gear. Accidents are one thing, but it's silly to abuse equipment. Minidisc does have moving parts, and there's a lot of technology tucked into that tiny case. It stands to reason that shocks could set something awry.

When you get it, test everything out soon. Playback, mic-in recording, line-in recording, optical if you have something with an optical output, uploading. Just so that in the very unlikely event there are problems out of the box, you can return it under warranty and get another one before they disappear. Who knows what Sony would replace it with after they're gone? Probably a flash recorder. Maybe the PCM-D50 will have price-dropped by then.

http://www.jr.com/JRProductPage.process?Pr...feed.SON+PCMD50

I don't recommend MD to newbies any more--only to people who are familiar with it and have a library of discs. The quirks and learning curve aren't worth it when you can just do drag-and-drop with an Edirol. But you have that backlog of R30 recordings, so it makes sense for you to get the M200. Even if all you ever did with it was upload, you'd save so much time it would be worth it. And you'll be doing new recordings too.

[Strungup]

Alas ,.... the end IS nigh , if even the loyal cease to recommend or preach the way of the source , Blasphemy you croutons , In the name of S-car-GO what R you thinking .

All the Vinagrette and Olive oil in the Salad bowl cant save us now ,......

The D50 is a nice machine though , I got the chance to see one the other day wit mine own oculars , (Siiiiiigghhhhhhh.....) I want one .

[Sparky191]

I've decided to stop recommending MD to newcomers too, the PCM-D50 is a good alternative, as first reviews are quite positive about its mic pre-amp.

Is it not a lot more expensive than a RH1/M200 though. Or even a used HiMD unit. I still think HiMD is useful for cheap recording if you can buy the unit at a resonable cost.