Which portable himd player sounds the best?

[gbrunsdon]

hi there - I already have an RH10 and an RH1 - but realise I'm totally addicted to these babies.... so looking for a reason to buy another.

So wondered - is there one that sounds better than the two I already have?

- or is there one with other features / capability - that I could persuade myself that I really need?

Any opinions / advice appreciated... please don't say I don't need another one....

[Kardon]

Well sound quality wise, not much will beat your RH1, but I could recommend you look into a MZ-EH1, as they are the smallest Hi-MD compatible players, however they have very little features, and are very hard to find...

[Strungup]

I have recently gotten very attached to the MZ-NH1 , .......5mw output L/R to the phones , Various customizable EQ's , Hd amp etc .

I like the design as well , I think the RH1 should be in the case of the NH1 , but with the regular USB jack like the RH1 has

[culp4684]

Since you already have the two Hi-MD recorders, why not get a player only unit? The sound quality would be pretty much the same and they are less expensive. You could get either the MZ-EH50 or 70 at Pricejapan.com among a few other sources...

Edited September 2, 2008 by culp4684

[Strungup]

Now that I have the NH1 , I have a Blue EH-930 I would be willing to sell . Charging stand ,Batt pack , Remote and Power Supply all included

[sinus]

Since you already have the two Hi-MD recorders, why not get a player only unit? The sound quality would be pretty much the same and they are less expensive. You could get either the MZ-EH50 or 70 at Pricejapan.com among a few other sources...

No, the EH50 and EH70 will be a downgrade soundwise, because of the missing HD digital amp.

For a player-only unit with HD digital amp go for ... (in descending order)

1st generation:

MZ-EH1 (lovin it! warning: RARE)

MZ-NH3D (downloader)

2nd generation (supressed mp3 playback):

MZ-EH930 (RH10's player-only brother with better sound) [Highly recommended to go for guitarfixer's one]

MZ-DH10P (warning: high battery consumption and thick)

rgrds

Now that I have the NH1 , I have a Blue EH-930 I would be willing to sell . Charging stand ,Batt pack , Remote and Power Supply all included

How much? Am also interested!

Edited September 2, 2008 by sinus

[sinus]

EH50 & 70 do have HD amps. Some plastic for the body and Ni-MH instead of Li-Ion doesn't make them unconsiderable SQ-wise ...

Oh! If that's true I'm very sorry!!! (Whole world crumbles down) ;-)

So you can say: every Hi-MD player has the hd amp. But why did they leave it out of the RH10?

[Avrin]

2nd generation (supressed mp3 playback):

MZ-EH930

IIRC, the MZ-EH930, despite being a 2nd generation unit, doesn't play MP3 at all.

Edited September 2, 2008 by Avrin

[sinus]

IIRC, the MZ-EH930, despite being a 2nd generation unit, doesn't play MP3 at all.

Oh my ...

You're right!

What a shame!

How embarrassing!

sry!

[Avrin]

As for the sound, of all the units I have, the best sounding one is definitely the NH3D (a Japanese-only unit). Despite having a HD-digital amp, it doesn't have the boring clearness, characteristic to most HD-digital amp units. It does sound clear, but not boring in any way. The RH1s do have this boring clearness, and the sound is further marred by the units being European ones with hardware level limitations. Although a Japanese RH1 would probably sound similar, or even better than the NH3D.

But I also love the soft sound of the non-HD, but still digital amp of my RH910 (this one sounds absolutely similar to the RH10 I once had), and the warm sound of the NH600s with their great TOSHIBA TA2131FLG analogue headhone amps, even despite their European hardware level limitations.

And don't ask me about the sound of the E10 - it is just a toy with its fancy SANYO DSP, which plays sounds that were never there before. Nice for LP4 though.

Edited September 2, 2008 by Avrin

[sinus]

The RH1s do have this boring clearness, and the sound is further marred by the units being European ones with hardware level limitations.

Isn't it a software limitation removable via firmware hack?

You also said, you love the NH3D's sound ... which other Hi-MD first-generation top-of-the-line models did you hear? (EH1? NH1?)

rgrds

[Avrin]

Isn't it a software limitation removable via firmware hack?

The limitation contains both a software and a hardware part. The software part is easily removable via service mode. The hardware part (extra resistors) requires some resoldering to remove it (by shortening the resistors). And then again noone would guarantee that a resoldered European unit will be equivalent to its Japanese counterpart, since Japanese models frequently contain additional and/or higher quality hardware than models manufactured for the outside world, and service manuals usually contain schematics for all models, except Japanese. Although a resoldered European unit will be equivalent to its North American counterpart (as can be seen from most service manuals).

You also said, you love the NH3D's sound ... which other Hi-MD first-generation top-of-the-line models did you hear? (EH1? NH1?)

None actually.

Edited September 2, 2008 by Avrin

[sinus]

The limitation contains both a software and a hardware part. The software part is easily removable via service mode. The hardware part (extra resistors) requires some resoldering to remove it (by shortening the resistors). And then again noone would guarantee that a resoldered European unit will be equivalent to its Japanese counterpart, since Japanese models frequently contain additional and/or higher quality hardware than models manufactured for the outside world, and service manuals usually contain schematics for all models, except Japanese. Although a resoldered European unit will be equivalent to its North American counterpart (as can be seen from most service manuals).

interesting read,

did someone compare the EU, american and japanese rh1 versions here on this forum? or can someone verify this in any way?

[culp4684]

Oh! If that's true I'm very sorry!!! (Whole world crumbles down) ;-)

So you can say: every Hi-MD player has the hd amp. But why did they leave it out of the RH10?

They also left it out of some of the others in the line of second generation Hi-MD units (RH710, RH910). These had the digital amps to save power, but weren't HD. Also, the first generation NH600, NH700 and NH800 didn't have any kind of digital amp.

IIRC, the MZ-EH930, despite being a 2nd generation unit, doesn't play MP3 at all.

Sadly, Sony never made any player only units that were compatible to MP3. I believe the only recorders that did this were the RH1/MZM-200, RH10/M10 and DH10.

Edited September 2, 2008 by culp4684

[sfbp]

As for the sound, of all the units I have, the best sounding one is definitely the NH3D (a Japanese-only unit). Despite having a HD-digital amp, it doesn't have the boring clearness, characteristic to most HD-digital amp units. It does sound clear, but not boring in any way. The RH1s do have this boring clearness, and the sound is further marred by the units being European ones with hardware level limitations. Although a Japanese RH1 would probably sound similar, or even better than the NH3D.

But I also love the soft sound of the non-HD, but still digital amp of my RH910 (this one sounds absolutely similar to the RH10 I once had), and the warm sound of the NH600s with their great TOSHIBA TA2131FLG analogue headhone amps, even despite their European hardware level limitations.

And don't ask me about the sound of the E10 - it is just a toy with its fancy SANYO DSP, which plays sounds that were never there before. Nice for LP4 though.

Has anyone (other than myself) correlated ear problems with the HD-digital amps? I purchased the RH1 in the middle of 2007 and within a month got a severe attack of tinnitus, which I had never suffered before. I am not 100% sure but something different about the sound from this unit compared to all the others, bothers my ears. Dynamic normalization makes it sound less boring and I suspect that (turning on D-norm) is when my ears started to act up.

Your comment about the soft sound rings many bells. I finally got my R91, and what I noticed was that during silence my ears actually rested. Somehow with the RH1, this didn't happen.

It's ok now, as I keep my RH1 for recording and/or uploads, and use the NH600 when I want to listen to a HiMD disc.

[Strungup]

I noticed that when I listened to a Sharp with the 24 bit AD processor , I HATED it, it actually was painful after about an hour of listening .I cant remember the model but it had the Four prong headphones .

[trager]

Ok guys, I'd like to jump on here and ask a big question, if I may.

For a while, I've wanted to start a thread called something like “Why exactly is it that Minidisc sounds so good?” The main substance of my post would have been along the lines of the following: I've listened to several ipods/MP3 players/multi-codec jukeboxes etc. and they never sound anywhere near as good as either my late 90s MD portables or my NH-1 and RH-1. In fact many of them sound positively awful, as if I'm listening to music through a cheap PC soundcard. What exactly is it about portable minidisc recorders that makes them sound so good by comparison? Not being much of a techy, I've never really understood it, and I've worried that it's all psychological because I do love the character of Minidisc, as well as the fact that it doesn't require a computer. For a long time I figured it must be the ATRAC codec, but after listening to FLAC sound awful on a DAP, it has become clear to me that it is actually something to do with either the DAC, or the amplifier, or something else that a Hi-Fi (rather than computer) company like Sony knows how to manufacture well. So can somebody explain, for the benefit of us laypeople, which bit is really making the magic happen?

I've read this thread with fascination so far, and it makes me want to expand my question. If you can explain which part of the machine is the most important part for sound quality, can you also point the way to where someone can find out which recorders/players have which of those parts, and which of those parts are the best? That is, has anybody put together a list or chart anywhere that shows which MD and Hi-MD models have which DACs/amplifiers/etc.? I've done Google searches and found passing references to Burr Browns and things, but I can't find very much information that really helps me understand why these machines sound so good in general, why some are considered to sound better than others, or which sound the best.

I realise this may be a dumb question, or else it may be a very vague question, so I do apologise. But I've kept coming back to these machines for years, and I just can't quit. So I really want to know what types of components are most to blame for my Minidisc obsession, and if possible, I now also want to know exactly which of those components are in which machines, and which machines I should seek out if I want to travel the golden glistening listening road to Minidisc Heaven.

Thank you sooo much in advance.

[Strungup]

Not a dumb question ..........

It isnt the " One thing " that makes MD sound good ,......it is the Whole combination , of the design itself .

There isnt just one part you could take out , and put into another DAP to make it sound better , the Magic of Md , is that the Whole works together as a Whole , not as separate , The Mic pre is one of the best there is ( just function limited , it could have been taken farther , MUCH farther) , the Type of heads , and the drivers for them , the fact that the circuit is Analouge/Digital Mixture , you get the fatness of analouge and the benefits of digital RAM ,........ so many things that work in tandem inside the Md , that if you took out the one thing ,...... it would affect everything else .

That is why the MP3 players wont ever get it . because the just dont get it . , it is like that kid back in school , whom you tried to explain how to do a particular Algebra problem to at least 100 times , and they just couldn't get it , flunked Math and went on to Art school instead ( not a bad thing in itself ) The persons who designed the Md had a Goal , and a desire to create something really special and imaginative , That is the Magic ........ everything else today is designed for profit and competition .

The days of that kind of Magic are gone for now , technology is moving away from that , and that magic will happen somewhere else , that Magic happened with the Hubble telescope , That Magic has been replaced with Competition and Capitalism

MP3 wont get it ..... it didnt have the same goal to begin with , it was designed for the purpose of Sharing music over the internet (Research the birth of the net and history of mp3)

History of the Md

http://www.sony.net/Fun/SH/1-21/h4.html

Edited September 9, 2008 by Guitarfxr

[netmduser]

I cannot really explain why MD just sounds better. One idea I had was that because Atrac sounded bad in the initial release, they put a lot in the hardware design to max out the sound quality. Today even the cheapest downloader netmd models still sound fantastic. I recently did buy one of the newer sony flash mp3 players and they do sound great so it appears some mp3 player designs have caught up. It even has that distinctive beep when you stop and start it just like md.

[culp4684]

For a long time I figured it must be the ATRAC codec, but after listening to FLAC sound awful on a DAP, it has become clear to me that it is actually something to do with either the DAC, or the amplifier, or something else that a Hi-Fi (rather than computer) company like Sony knows how to manufacture well.

That's amazing because a lot of people claim FLAC is one of the best codecs when it comes to sound quality. What type of unit were you using?

[pata2001]

That's amazing because a lot of people claim FLAC is one of the best codecs when it comes to sound quality. What type of unit were you using?

FLAC is lossless. Atrac is lossy (MD/HiMD don't support Atrac lossless). If somebody thinks that lossy is better than lossless, than it's a hardware issue, not the codec. That's like saying Atrac being better than the original CD itself.

[trager]

That's amazing because a lot of people claim FLAC is one of the best codecs when it comes to sound quality. What type of unit were you using?

Sorry, I should probably clarify this. As pata2001 points out, FLAC is lossless, which means it retains all of the wave information, so its sound quality is not an issue. What I wanted to emphasise was that if the quality of the ATRAC codec was the only reason for MD's amazing sound, then listening to FLAC on a DAP should sound at least as good, or better if you have good ears. However, I listened to FLAC playing through an iPod that was running Rockbox firmware (I forget which ipod model) and it sounded somehow lifeless to my minidisc-accustomed ears. Rockbox is highly acclaimed as a firmware, and as we know, FLAC is lossless, so it became very clear to me that the amazing sound quality of minidisc is born outside the digital domain, and that ATRAC is just a good lossy codec that gives the circuitry as much as possible to work with. Either that or it's all just psychological, which I'm not willing to accept. So then I started wondering what it was exactly - amp, DAC, etc.

Not a dumb question ..........

...

Thank you, Guitarfxr, for your considered reply. That it's a combination of several well designed components designed to work well with each other makes a lot of sense. I wonder, which are the most influential components in playback from the point where the information is converted to analogue? (Is it right down to the quality of the wire used?) And, also, how could someone go about assembling a clear, comprehensive overview of which MD/Hi-MD units are better than which others for use either in recording or in playback, based on the different components that they contain? This always seemed to me to be something that the MD community would find very worthwhile, as we trawl eBay. I understand that the units manufactured in Japan have a better build quality. Do they record/sound better too?

I recently did buy one of the newer sony flash mp3 players and they do sound great so it appears some mp3 player designs have caught up.

Which model did you buy? How does the sound compare to minidisc? I briefly listened to a NW-A3000 a while ago but I can't really remember my impressions. I look at the A810 and A820 series with great interest, because for carrying music around and listening to it, a flash player would be infinitely more convenient than MD, and if sound quality is not really about codec, I keep going round in my head wondering whether a Sony network walkman playing Mp3s at 320k could sound as good as an RH-1 playing Hi-SP. I'm not really one for buying, trying and returning, and noone I know has a Sony Mp3 walkman, so I have no way of knowing. This is partly what fuels my interest in the exact components that make MD sound so awesome; I'm wondering whether the network walkmans have any of the same DACs, amp circuitry etc. Of course I doubt I could ever follow through on making the move to a flash player, because I love MD far too much, but it would be nice to know whether I'm making a choice based on real sound quality issues or just pig-headed fondness for the physical medium.

[jupitreas]

I think it would be difficult to find out which Hi-MD unit has the best sound quality since SQ is so subjective...

There are people out there who think vinyl sounds the best after all.

[Strungup]

I think it would be difficult to find out which Hi-MD unit has the best sound quality since SQ is so subjective...

There are people out there who think vinyl sounds the best after all.

Me is one of dem !!

[Avrin]

Me too!

[jupitreas]

Food for thought:

iPods and most other mp3 players are not in fact designed only with super SQ in mind. They have microprocessors that decode the compressed files, draw the menus and in latest models, even play movies, show visualizations etc. I am sure mp3 player constructors still put a lot of care into achieving high sound quality from a device like this; however, there is most likely some sort of compromise being made since battery life also needs to be considered.

MD players are in comparison extremely simple machines. The circuit is designed pretty much solely for producing sound.

[netmduser]

Which model did you buy? How does the sound compare to minidisc? I briefly listened to a NW-A3000 a while ago but I can't really remember my impressions. I look at the A810 and A820 series with great interest,

Sony A815 2GB flash. I also have several MDs and 600D HI-MD to compare to. I believe the reason why the flash player sounds good, is there is quite a bit of sound processing to make it sound better. Perhaps ATRAC inherently has this quality as well.

[tekdroid]

I think it can be summed up with:

Intelligent (and non-cheap) hardware design.

The price was never intended to be budget when they designed and priced these things.

The casings they did go budget on with various Hi-MD models to shave some costs off in an increasingly fickle and cheaper market, which was silly, and there's always the odd bad design flaws, but they designed the internals with high-quality parts and no doubt took great care in keeping the signal path generally free from digital and analogue distortions when designing the circuitry. These things are not easy to talk about in marketing litierature, especially when most of your customers are graced with your bundled cheap headphones, end up using them and wouldn't know any better.

Surprisingly (to me) was the care put into Sony's PSP, which also sounds great (and I would guess at least some other Sony flash players are designed with similar care, but which I haven't listened to). Sony know audio.

Units that are designed well, with sound the main focus, will always have a soft spot in the hearts of those who can appreciate their sound. Most devices selling now (I would guess) have their focus in other areas (ie. not sound), though I haven't listened to Sony's recent flash devices (call me when they make removable battery and flash models). This is pretty much true about the market in general. I love the fact that my Hi-MD units aren't video devices, aren't flashy things...I love that their focus is recording, editing, playback. I love the fact they have removable batteries. I love my simple LCD displays (though there are those with OLED).

I love how they do these (IMO, important) things REALLY well instead of just passably.

Just like you can get terrible-sounding CD players, you can get terrible-sounding FLAC and terrible-sounding laptops playing CDs and FLAC yet great-sounding ATRAC; beyond format superiority/ inferiority, a lot of it comes down to the hardware itself (and of course earphone/ headphone choice). Which is why some will always choose a separate soundcard in preference to on-board sound; same sort of thing. Beyond great source, it's the hardware, to a large extent.

I wish buying hardware that sounded great could be simplified. I think component choice plays a big part, but so does general circuit design. Regardless, info is always very thin on the ground. You just know when you hear it. IMO, Sony's Hi-MD are little gems in the market that most people gloss over when they see:

1) storage capacity at only 1GB

2) size of units (mini isn't mini anymore)

3) price (whether it be a low-priced MZ-NH600, or too high MZ-RH1)

4) think about their DRM nightmares with previous hardware

5) discs or removable anything and think they're primitive

6) have warped perception in any other area pertaining to MiniDisc / Hi-MD

Their loss, I say

Sure Sony have fumbled a bit with basic case design, and they can improve quality here in various ways, but over-all, what they are designed to do they do really well and the sound is generally consistently of a high standard compared to the bulk of the DAP competition, if you want to call it that.

[Sony_Fan]

Out of all Hi-MD units, the RH1 sounds the best. The bass is stronger, mids are sufficient and the highs are crisper. And thats really all that matters. This supposed HD digitial amp that it has is a joke though. My NetMD players puts out stronger bass and good midrange and highs.

Type-S > Digital Amp