recording a 24bit-96kHz file to your MD

[PhilippeC]

I have notice it is NOT possible to convert a WAV 24bit-96kHz (convert from Flac) file with Sonic Stage to an ATRAC Lossless file (due to a copyright protection or a technical problem...no 24bit-96kHz files before 2004?). But it is possible to get Atrac 3 and Atrac 3+ files, converted in 16bit-44,1kHz.

So the only way is a REAL TIME analog or optical recording (If the audio card support 24bit-96kHz audio files). Sure that if you have something like a M2tech Hiface plus a DAC NAIM audio, you will get the nirvana of MD recording.

[SileEeles]

I also think it depends on the MD device itself. My computer will output 96kHz optical signal (optical out on the motherboard, not any external device), but my Sharp MD-MT80 will register "no signal" until you switch it to 48kHz, and the same also goes for my Sony MZ-N710. Both work with 24bit 48kHz, but not 96kHz.

[sfbp]

Sound Forge?

[PhilippeC]

I will try...

[THIS SUCKS]

you might get better results using the analog input on the md recorder. doesnt the unit convert internally analog to md digital in 20 bits before converting it down to 16bit 44.1k for the md burn?

[PhilippeC]

you might get better results using the analog input on the md recorder. doesnt the unit convert internally analog to md digital in 20 bits before converting it down to 16bit 44.1k for the md burn?

I think the same, record in real time using the analog RCA connectors. My Sony MDs-JB980 has a "1 bit Dela-Sigma converter (24 bit)", see that colorful page here : http://www.avland.co.uk/sony/mdsjb980/ . The recording is done at 24bit-44,1kHz.(upsampling if the source is 16bit-44,1kHz).

[MDietrich]

you might get better results using the analog input on the md recorder. doesnt the unit convert internally analog to md digital in 20 bits before converting it down to 16bit 44.1k for the md burn?

Not quite. You´ll get the best result with any MD recorder using the digital input.

All (beginning with ATRAC 3.5) will accept 24 bit signals. The best and 'purest' signal is the digital signal only.

The analogue RCA input will add noise, distortions and generally inferior quality.

The MD will and cannot ever work with 96 kHz. Downsampling with modern resamplers is therefore required, downsampling to 44.1 kHz.

[MDietrich]

The recording is done at 24bit-44,1kHz.(upsampling if the source is 16bit-44,1kHz).

When you playback something that is 16 bit / 44.1 kHz it´ll stay that way, no matter if it´s recorded digitally or analogue to MD. It can´t 'improve' or 'upsample' anything to 24 bit.

Recording it analogue does this:

1) if the source is 16/44.1, MD will record it with 24/44.1 precision. This 24/44.1 recording contains only one thing: 16/44.1. Why? Because it´s the resolution of the source used for recording

2) if the source is 24/96 (or 24/48, 24/192 or DSD), MD will record it with the 24/44.1 precision. This recording contains only one thing at best: 24/44.1.

[MDietrich]

You know, I´ve always thought of the MD as being a true HiRes device. By all accounts it indeed is exactly that... but regarding the abilities of 24/96 I´d call it 'HiRes-Lite'.

When the MD is 24/44.1 and HiRes-Lite, MP3 or AAC are the same.

Oh, no one knew?

Well, they are. They encode - just like MD - with real floating point, allowing theoretically unlimited bit-depth. The key is in the decoding, software players decode MP3 and AAC with 32bit floating point, with many hardware players it´s more often than not unclear.

Which means that possible, usable resolutions with MP3/AAC are 24/48 (if one uses NeroAAC even 24/96), with OGG 24/96.

[jammydodger1]

I have notice it is NOT possible to convert a WAV 24bit-96kHz (convert from Flac) file with Sonic Stage to an ATRAC Lossless file (due to a copyright protection or a technical problem...no 24bit-96kHz files before 2004?). But it is possible to get Atrac 3 and Atrac 3+ files, converted in 16bit-44,1kHz.

So the only way is a REAL TIME analog or optical recording (If the audio card support 24bit-96kHz audio files). Sure that if you have something like a M2tech Hiface plus a DAC NAIM audio, you will get the nirvana of MD recording.

24 bit 96khz is essentially FLAC isn't it?

my son uses this codec on one of his many portables and whilst its good quality sound I don't see it as much better than mp3 or atrac equivalent. wont go through sonicstage that's for sure. listen to those other posts, but if it where me personally id redownload the file at the highest mp3 bit rate possible very little difference between this and FLAC.

[MDietrich]

24 bit 96khz is essentially FLAC isn't it?

my son uses this codec on one of his many portables and whilst its good quality sound I don't see it as much better than mp3 or atrac equivalent. wont go through sonicstage that's for sure. listen to those other posts, but if it where me personally id redownload the file at the highest mp3 bit rate possible very little difference between this and FLAC.

Ooooh, very careful here. FLAC isn´t 24/96 or something else, it´s just a container for PCM (Pulse Code Modulation) and this PCM is the essential life-blood of every digital audio system.

Containers (in the literal sense) containing (hence the name) these PCM-data are these:

.WAV

.ALAC

.FLAC

.WAVPACK

.WMA Lossless

.APE

All of these formats contain the same data, their only difference is the company / people who developed them and how the data is packed / organized within the container. These are the pure lossless codecs people always talk about. They come in 16/32, 16/44.1, 16/48, 24/44.1, 24/48, 24/88.2, 24/96, 24/192 etc. Bitdepth and samplerate doesn´t matter to these codecs/containers, they encode/store everything they can.

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

ATRAC, MP3, AAC are completely different. Completely. The PCM-data above is lossless (meaning: no loss of information). ATRAC, MP3, AAC and whatnot are lossy (meaning: loss of information). The PCM-data from above is analyzed by these codecs: What parts of the data can be removed without anybody noticing it? They all do this to save space by fooling our ear / brain. Some lossy codecs are better than others. The best one is - there is no doubt about it - AAC (or MP4). Not one other codec comes close, our beloved ATRAC is far away from being a modern, efficient and flexible codec. There was a time when it was safe to count on ATRAC to save the day. That was more than 10 years ago. That´s a long time for audio-related development. In 2013, ATRAC doesn´t stand a chance against MP3 or AAC.

And the reason SonicStage won´t accept FLAC is because Sony didn´t want it to. They wanted the customers to use their own ATRAC format (more royalities for Sony in case some other manufacturer should pick up the codec; no one did, Sony failed).

And yes, at the highest bit rate MP3 sounds undistinguishable to FLAC, WAV, APE (in short:lossless).

I hope you´re not mad at me - I had to explain codecs and such because 24/96 has absolutely nothing to do with the codec. Really nothing. If anyone tells you that, he/she´s lying or incredibly dumb. And IMO this is something that needs to be understood.

[jammydodger1]

,

Ooooh, very careful here. FLAC isn´t 24/96 or something else, it´s just a container for PCM (Pulse Code Modulation) and this PCM is the essential life-blood of every digital audio system.

Containers (in the literal sense) containing (hence the name) these PCM-data are these:

.WAV

.ALAC

.FLAC

.WAVPACK

.WMA Lossless

.APE

All of these formats contain the same data, their only difference is the company / people who developed them and how the data is packed / organized within the container. These are the pure lossless codecs people always talk about. They come in 16/32, 16/44.1, 16/48, 24/44.1, 24/48, 24/88.2, 24/96, 24/192 etc. Bitdepth and samplerate doesn´t matter to these codecs/containers, they encode/store everything they can.

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

ATRAC, MP3, AAC are completely different. Completely. The PCM-data above is lossless (meaning: no loss of information). ATRAC, MP3, AAC and whatnot are lossy (meaning: loss of information). The PCM-data from above is analyzed by these codecs: What parts of the data can be removed without anybody noticing it? They all do this to save space by fooling our ear / brain. Some lossy codecs are better than others. The best one is - there is no doubt about it - AAC (or MP4). Not one other codec comes close, our beloved ATRAC is far away from being a modern, efficient and flexible codec. There was a time when it was safe to count on ATRAC to save the day. That was more than 10 years ago. That´s a long time for audio-related development. In 2013, ATRAC doesn´t stand a chance against MP3 or AAC.

And the reason SonicStage won´t accept FLAC is because Sony didn´t want it to. They wanted the customers to use their own ATRAC format (more royalities for Sony in case some other manufacturer should pick up the codec; no one did, Sony failed).

And yes, at the highest bit rate MP3 sounds undistinguishable to FLAC, WAV, APE (in short:lossless).

I hope you´re not mad at me - I had to explain codecs and such because 24/96 has absolutely nothing to do with the codec. Really nothing. If anyone tells you that, he/she´s lying or incredibly dumb. And IMO this is something that needs to be understood.

why would I be mad? not at all, love your user picture by the way! anyhow I did learn something by your post albeit very techy for me.

the simplest thing for the member who asked the question to do IMHO would be to convert this hi res file to mp3 320, then use sonicstage to put it onto his/her mini disc at his/her desired compression/sp no compression whatever is appropriate. or analogue the high quality recording over in real time to the mini disc recorder and let the unit do its job by capturing the sound and converting it back to the 16 bit or whatever it does but it should still be high quality.

my mind only works in the simplest of ways when it comes to audio but as I said before there doesn't seem to be that much difference in FLAC (only for example purpose, as you correctly said there are several 24bit codecs but iam just using this as an example) and mp3 at 320kbps. therefore redownload the music to this and transfer it via sonicstage to mini disc atrac? mp3 at that bit rate is near cd quality to me, there you go my head is on a block for lopping but I don't care there isn't any difference to me.

[MDietrich]

my mind only works in the simplest of ways when it comes to audio but as I said before there doesn't seem to be that much difference in FLAC (only for example purpose, as you correctly said there are several 24bit codecs but iam just using this as an example) and mp3 at 320kbps. therefore redownload the music to this and transfer it via sonicstage to mini disc atrac? mp3 at that bit rate is near cd quality to me, there you go my head is on a block for lopping but I don't care there isn't any difference to me.

Well, your mind may be simple or not. It doesn´t matter anyway since you got so many things right. MP3 doesn´t differ so much from ATRAC, as well as MP3 (320kBit/s) doesn´t differ so much from FLAC. It´s indeed the truth that the differences between those codecs are so small that 95-99% won´t ever hear them.

Even the differences between 24/96 and 16/44.1 are so miniscule that they´ll be inaudible to most people around. I mean, I swear by 24/96, but only because I WANT this miniscule difference and because I have the time to pursue it.

This is something that audiophiles will never understand, I fear.