Is the JA* range really THAT Good?

[md user]

Having recently gotten into Minidisc [], and looking through mindisc.org, I notice the good reviews in the early days for the Sony JA* range of decks.

Are they really THAT good, compared to the later (and now cheaper) Type R decks?

Yes, I guess this was a well-trodden question, but now, with hindsight, is it worth me spending A LOT more for a second-hand one?

For example, an early JA3ES may be within budget, but is it any better than a late type R JE* range for half-the-money?

Does anybody have some real experience comparing them?

JA's seem to still command higher prices - is this because of collectors acquiring ranges, or are they noticeably the best?

Thanks.

Keep enjoying MDs!

mdmad.

[sfbp]

My contention is: no. As long as you have optical out and a nice present-day amplifier/receiver with optical in to play back into.

Some decks are definitely better at reading marginal disks. The HHB portadat (sorry, portadisc) seems to take the prize on this. But maybe the JA are good too.

What I am reasonably sure is that the quality of the DAC (upheld by many posters) doesn't matter much (if at all) if you are doing opti-out.

[PhilippeC]

My contention is: no. As long as you have optical out and a nice present-day amplifier/receiver with optical in to play back into.

Some decks are definitely better at reading marginal disks. The HHB portadat seems to take the prize on this. But maybe the JA are good too.

What I am reasonably sure is that the quality of the DAC (upheld by many posters) doesn't matter so much if you are doing opti-out.

This is almost exactly what answer Pierre - I remind you that he own more than 100 decks (mdmad, have a look in classifieds section).

using optical out : middle and high-end decks are similar

using analog out : high-end only for the best sound

Réponse de Pierre En français

<< Voilà une excellente question et je vais essayer d'y répondre le plus objectivement possible. A l'époque où je travaillais les MD, mon installation Hi Fi était du très haut de gamme (étage de puissance classe A et pré-ampli ad hoc séparés). Les enceintes étaient également à la hauteur. Je dois admettre qu'à l'exception de quelques platines d'entrée de gamme, je n'ai jamais été déçu par les performances des diverses platines testées. Mes préférences vont effectivement vers les Sony JA, mais ce sont des critères plus subjectifs qui me conduisent à ce choix (design, poids,

conception générale, ...). Mon expérience est la suivante:

- si on travaille totalement en numérique, les platines de milieu,de haut et de très haut de gamme se valent, quelque soit le constructeur(le très haut de gamme étant le JA de Sony)

- si on utilise une conversion analogique/digital, mieux vaut s'orienter vers le haut (et le très haut pour Sony) de gamme et ce, quelque soit le

constructeur. >>

[md user]

My contention is: no. ...........

What I am reasonably sure is that the quality of the DAC (upheld by many posters) doesn't matter much (if at all) if you are doing opti-out.

This is almost exactly what answer Pierre - I remind you that he own more than 100 decks (mdmad, have a look in classifieds section).

using optical out : middle and high-end decks are similar

using analog out : high-end only for the best sound

................ tal, mieux vaut s'orienter vers le haut (et le très haut pour Sony) de gamme et ce, quelque soit le

constructeur. >>

Thanks sfbp and Philippe,

I am getting the idea - the value of the highest end is in the analogue input. If I stick to digital connections, I will get good quality recordings. Presumably the ATRAC version is then far more important.

I suppose these JA's will only matter for LP and FM recordings - but then the quality requirments are not so tight (where scratches and interference are more of a problem), to reach my expectations.

Thanks again, this will save me unnecessary expense, particularly as my budget is not high at the moment

[sfbp]

I suppose these JA's will only matter for LP and FM recordings - but then the quality requirments are not so tight (where scratches and interference are more of a problem), to reach my expectations.

The point with LP and FM is that I will typically want to post-process them. Satellite and internet broadcasts can be saved direct to MD and/or HD and/or CD, but the legacy media often (but not always) need clean-up.

This means outputting to WAV after recording (which needs to have been done at SP rate). There's not much point in recording at LP2 (which works beautifully if you can simply listen to the recorded sound, as the Sony software and hardware makes sure that LP2 moves around without any sort of modification, provided you have the MZ-RH1) if you need to work on the WAV files. Of course you can do it the old way (via optical out) but this takes a lot longer - what I did until I "tamed" the RH1 properly.

For LP I will get rid of the background disk noise, and surgically remove up to 3ms of clicks/scratches/pops. For FM I will get rid of any hiss, possibly including any 19Khz signal if the deck didn't already filter it (not sure if some decks, eg QS designation, in fact do so), again by subtracting out the background using FFT. For Cassettes, removal of the tape head hiss (bias?) is quite amazing, as usually this is the only defect on even the worst recordings (heheh some commercial tapes you can then hear the LP click/pop noises because they had been made from LP's). With a better tape deck this may be minimal (ie unnecessary), but it probably depends on the source of the recording.

One more thing, the "basic" (whatever that means, I am sure Avrin will correct me) A->D in most Sony decks (I cannot speak about other makes unfortunately) is, I think, better than in most portables (the RH1 might be the exception, it seems for whatever reason to give the best results with live recordings, better than first gen HiMD). And the real difference in the decks may be the way that the sound bits are reallocated by the DSP chip (ie the recording algorithm). The biggest difference between low- and high-end decks (with the same level of ATRAC eg Type-R) may be the quality of components, which give you a few dB SNR better. But IMHO that isn't going to affect most people, especially starting from legacy sources.

[PhilippeC]

I don't have a digital amplifier (except for my home theater) but an analog one (Cyrus IIIi). It was a quiet good one during his time (end 80's) in his price range. I stop to record my LPs as I can find 320kbps MP3 or lossless files on the web. No way to record FM for me, here in Vietnam we dont' have this opportunity and your choice : even ADSL is not fast enough to listen to radio with a good quality. So my energy is focus on CD and lossless / MP3 recording (with DFX Audio Enhancer in real time, SP mode). Till I have my MDS-B5 deck, I don't listen my MDs with RH900 and RH1 considering they are breakable as I said in another post. I use both Sony RH900, RH1 and N510 alternativly for recording as there all are Atrac 4.5 with type R.

[md user]

The point with LP and FM is that I will typically want to post-process them.

[1]...For Cassettes, removal of the tape head hiss (bias?) is quite amazing, as usually this is the only defect on even the worst recordings (heheh some commercial tapes you can then hear the LP click/pop noises because they had been made from LP's).

[2] ...A->D in most Sony decks (I cannot speak about other makes unfortunately) is, I think, better than in most portables

1-> Wow! I am really encouraged that I may be able to get my C90s that good! I'm looking forward to brushing them up!

2-> This is interesting; I notice that my R410s specify 20Hz to 20kHz - but is this the output (analogue) headphone-amplifier only? If atrac-R is spec'd at 5-20kHz does this mean that the input A-D is limiting the range? Also, is the input digital connection on the R410 still going to process 5-20kHz(+/-0dB) since it is just a data stream, irrespective of model or portable vs. deck?

.... energy is focus on CD and lossless / MP3 recording (with DFX Audio Enhancer in real time, SP mode). Till I have my MDS-B5 deck, I don't listen my MDs with RH900 and RH1 considering they are breakable as I said in another post. I use both Sony RH900, RH1 and N510 alternativly for recording as there all are Atrac 4.5 with type R.

I see here, that you are using portables for recording (in digital). This suggests that there is no difference portable vs. deck (in spdif).

mdmad.

[sfbp]

I notice that my R410s specify 20Hz to 20kHz - but is this the output (analogue) headphone-amplifier only? If atrac-R is spec'd at 5-20kHz does this mean that the input A-D is limiting the range? Also, is the input digital connection on the R410 still going to process 5-20kHz(+/-0dB) since it is just a data stream, irrespective of model or portable vs. deck?

I am not really an electronics buff in the normal sense of the word. However I know what works and that the decks all seem to have really good A->D and D->A conversion. In fact some folks have used the JA series just as a converter.

I think big power supplies and the stability that goes with them probably count for something, too. I know the biggest weakness of the portables is related to when the entire power system has to move the head large distances quickly. Two things can (and probably do) occur:

1. There is power drain, which as you can imagine might conceivably affect recording ability if the recording circuitry is stressed at the same time by loud sounds. So for line in it's a must to run off the DC-in wall charger.

2. There is noise from the lead screw that moves the head, which can easily interfere with microphone recordings it is so loud.

Regardless of specs I would take almost any deck over almost any portable for recording off analog sources. Digital already, that's different, opti in should be fine.

If you want to go that route you probably want to get one of the Sony amps that has MD out; they took the feature out over a year ago and it's not in the current offerings, I think. There might be a super high end model but I didn't even look.

So basically any Sony receiver made in the 2005-2007 time period should do you. PM me and I can share the results of my research with you. I didn't bother (MD decks are cheap, 2nd hand), and even if it works, I'm am not 101% sure that there is analog to digital conversion for the purpose of output. Onkyo (my receiver) refuses to do that (not that there is actually any digital output at all), but Sony might break the mould here. They have long charts about which VIDEO signals don't get converted (to preserve digital rights) but no mention wrt the MD output. After all most digital sounds will be SCMS-restricted so what would be the point in having the connector?

Stephen

[md user]

I am not really an electronics buff in the normal sense of the word. However I know what works and that the decks all seem to have really good A->D and D->A conversion. In fact some folks have used the JA series just as a converter.

....

[1] Regardless of specs I would take almost any deck over almost any portable for recording off analog sources. Digital already, that's different, opti in should be fine.

[2] So basically any Sony receiver made in the 2005-2007 time period should do you. PM me and I can share the results of my research with you. I didn't bother (MD decks are cheap, 2nd hand), and even if it ...

Stephen

[1] Thanks, this is leading me to the conclusions that an md-deck is preferred for analogue recordings; digital recordings can continue on my R410s. (I shall stop using them for [critical] analogue inputs.)

[2] I like the idea of the Sony receiver to do the A->D, especially if I integrate with TV set &c. [one for the future], but, for the cost of these - I might as well use an MD-deck in the short-term? Seems like the same conclusion that you came to. ... Unless you notice that receivers do a better job? If so, I'll PM you for advice on selection.

Thanks to you both , I now seem to have I basic idea of how to handle both analogue and digital recordings, and am really enjoying this 'MD-thing' (albeit years after their hey-day). Your advice has gotten me 'up-to-speed' in double-time!

Thanks.

mdmad.

[sfbp]

Sony receivers second hand should set you back about $200-250 in the USA. The biggest problem I had getting something here in Canada was Ebay vendors unwilling to ship to me (cross-border).

There are several (well at least one) on right now.

[PhilippeC]

I see here, that you are using portables for recording (in digital). This suggests that there is no difference portable vs. deck (in spdif).

mdmad.

No, it is just because

1) my MDS-B5 cannot record digitaly (I pay it very cheap compare to the original price)...

2) anyway it do not have type R

[sfbp]

Hmm, did some review of the docs for the STR-DA5200ES. Not convinced that analog audio signals will be output to the MD out (optical) toslink connector. So you are right, that a deck is the best way, using nice heavy shielded analog connecting cables.

This means (all) the Sony and Onkyo receivers are basically working the same way, with the same restrictions on conversion. They are nice equipment, though, you should get one, for they can be had 2nd-hand for less than the cost of 1 middle-to-high MD portable sold new.

[md user]

[1] Hmm, did some review of the docs for the STR-DA5200ES. Not convinced that analog audio signals will be output to the MD out (optical) toslink connector. So you are right, that a deck is the best way, using nice heavy shielded analog connecting cables.

[2] This means (all) the Sony and Onkyo receivers are basically working the same way, with the same restrictions on conversion. They are nice equipment, though, you should get one, for they can be had 2nd-hand for less than the cost of 1 middle-to-high MD portable sold new.

1. Had a look at the manual, as well. This model is a clever beast! However, what surprised me is that the inputs are rated at 100dB or less (see below). Now, this is not at all bad, but, if most mid-to-high MD decks exceed 104dB on their analogue inputs, then they really are purpose-built. (Having said that, I doubt whether any of my analogue sources exceed 80dB SNR output anyway!)

Personally, I'm not bothered, but if some pay so much for a JA compared to a JB or even JE, then going above 16bit[96dB] resolution IS important?

2. Yes, agreed, but I already have a [DVB-DVD-VCR-FM-PC]->amplifier 'mock-up' (via RCAs). Terrible statistics compared to the above (~60-80dB transfers), being two old stereo-systems, but with 6-speakers and ~350W distributed (no sub-woofer), it's enough. Rough, I know, but it's kinda grown ...

What does look good, though, for future growth, is the ability to HDMI, play SACD &c., the 100kHz bandwidth, and generally tidy up quite a mess. And, as you say, on ebay they are good value 2nd-hand.

[Concerning the conversion restriction, I could not fathom the manual either, and this is probably a question to put to an AV-forum- to those who actually use these devices.]

All in all, though, I'm just plain enjoying MDs for the kind of virtues that stereos had in the 70s/80s - switch on, press record ... pop in the Walkman. I think an MD deck will suit for a while (until the shine wears off).

I'm actually listening to MUSIC again - thanks to MDs!

Regards to you both,

mdmad.

==== REFS =================================================================

Inputs (Digital)

------------------------------------------------

DVD, TAPE/CD-R, SA- Impedance: 75ohms

CD/CD (Coaxial) S/N: 96dB (A, 20 kHz

LPF)

------------------------------------------------

VIDEO 1/2/3, TV/SAT, S/N: 96 dB

MD/DAT (Optical) (A, 20 kHz LPF)

------------------------------------------------

MULTI CHANNEL Sensitivity: 150mV

INPUT, SA-CD/CD, Impedance: 50kohms

TAPE/CD-R, MD/DAT, S/N: 100dB (A, 20 kHz LPF)

TV/SAT VIDEO1/2/3

---------------------------------------------------------

[md user]

No, it is just because

1) my MDS-B5 cannot record digitaly (I pay it very cheap compare to the original price)...

2) anyway it do not have type R

Right, I understand.

But would you use the B5 if it did record digitally? Or would the portable still be preferred?

mdmad.

[sfbp]

What does look good, though, for future growth, is the ability to HDMI, play SACD &c.,

1. SACD depends on the player. My Carousel player doesn't output the SACD signal on its digital outputs (who knows why?), so to get SACD one has to have this cumbersome analog thingummajig of cables ("multi-ch") between player and amp. Duh!

2. The time to get one is probably NOW, because many of the more current models have had things (like Phono, SVHS) removed. Lots of HDMI (see below).

3. I am underwhelmed by HDMI. I get a better picture with component video every time, and more flexibility adjusting the aspect ratio (which is fixed in HDMI) for pre-HD-shaped pictures.

4. There are several more models that will do, the baseline being the STR-DG1000 (with possible DG800/900/1100) and also STR-DA3200ES,3300ES,5300ES, 5500ES and 6400ES (the last two will be criminally expensive but they are also TOO heavy for a reasonable person to want to actually own, the '55 is 50lbs I think).

There's a spot on Sony's website where you can see all the STR's - I recommend it if you are serious. Also I am very pleased with my Onkyo, it just lacks that (possibly useless) MD digital out.

[md user]

2. The time to get one is probably NOW, because many of the more current models have had things (like Phono, SVHS) removed. Lots of HDMI (see below).

4. There are several more models that will do, the baseline being the STR-DG1000 (with possible DG800/900/1100) and also STR-DA3200ES,3300ES,5300ES, 5500ES and 6400ES (the last two will be criminally expensive but they are also TOO heavy for a reasonable person to want to actually own, the '55 is 50lbs I think).

There's a spot on Sony's website where you can see all the STR's - I recommend it if you are serious. Also I am very pleased with my Onkyo, it just lacks that (possibly useless) MD digital out.

Points taken. (Horrified by Point 1!). Point 2 is important to me.

Looks like I'll have to start learning about these things ... and looking on ebay ...

mdmad.

[PhilippeC]

Right, I understand.

But would you use the B5 if it did record digitally? Or would the portable still be preferred?

mdmad.

Sure that I would have tested its recording quality. As I will do when I will get another deck. Portable or deck, neither mind, the final sound quality is the most important thing.

[sfbp]

Points taken. (Horrified by Point 1!). Point 2 is important to me.

Looks like I'll have to start learning about these things ... and looking on ebay ...

mdmad.

I just checked Ebay UK and Sony Europe, looks like you need the STR-DA1200ES (different numbers for the Euro-market, it seems). There's one for sale right now. Not sure about other models but there appears to be a completely different line up... none of the US/Canada models are there.

[md user]

I just checked Ebay UK and Sony Europe, looks like you need the STR-DA1200ES (different numbers for the Euro-market, it seems). There's one for sale right now. Not sure about other models but there appears to be a completely different line up... none of the US/Canada models are there.

Thanks, I've had a look, but both of these are too far away for the pickup/collection offered. Still useful, though, to see what prices they are fetching.

I'll keep my ebay account on a search for this kind of unit.

mdmad.