which minidisc? n10 / n1 / r910 / dr7?!

[lumina]

Hi,

The more I read about minidiscs, the less sure I am of which one I want! My close friend just flew back to Japan, and will be picking up an MD recorder for me while she's home for Christmas. I've contemplated getting an md for a while, but this will be my first one.

My original dilenma was whether a sony mz-n1 is "good enough," or whether I should go all the way and get the mz-n10. But I really like the look of the r910 (peach!)... my question is that is, for the non-netmd units, can you transfer from pc -> md in something other than realtime? How does the "pc-link" work, and can you still find them?

Is NetMD really that great? While I like the idea of transferring MP3s to my md, what I really want is to transfer tracks to my computer and NetMD doesn't help with that... and if audio quality is much better transferring from CD player to MD (I have a laptop, without a digital sound card) should I just get the r910?

And to those who own / have checked out both the n10 and the n1, is there really much difference between them? (In terms of audio quality, performance, features, etc... any insight would help me a lot.)

My priority with my md is the ability to record (I'm a musician). I like the ability to change track playback speed (to play along with pieces at a slower tempo for learning purposes). From what I can tell the n10 has a greater speed range, and the n1 has 7 options? Can someone confirm that?

I've been told that the sharp units are better for live recording; is this true? I don't like the design of the sharp units as much of the sony, but this dr7 sounds like it's breakthrough technology... if anyone has thoughts on sony vs sharp, I'd appreciate them.

Another issue is documentation: if I get the mz-n10 or r910, will I be able to figure it out from looking at the n1 english manual (downloaded)? I tend to not rely on manuals but I know nothing about using a md player. And will I need an adaptor to use a japanese model in north america?

And does anyone know what the n1 is retailing for (in the japanese market) right now?

Thanks very much!! I know this is long but if you can reply to any part of it I'd be grateful.

[Bazirker]

Dude, get an MZ-N10. It can do everything that the other players can and more. Sure, the MZ-N1 probably is "good enough," but you get soooo much more if you go the extra few bucks and get an N10. The MZ-R910 is a sweet unit, but it lacks NetMD. While NetMD is somewhat over-rated, it really is a huge improvement over realtime recording. Trust me on that one; I'm used to having NetMD, then my friend totally screwed up my MZ-N707 and I had to start recording in realtime again and it's a pain. If you buy something from Japan and you live in the US, you'll have to buy a different adaptor for charging the internal battery and you'l need to download english software and stuff. It shouldn't be that hard, and an adaptor isn't expensive. I don't know anything about that sharp unit, so I can't help you out there. As far as Sharp vs Sony, I've heard that Sharp is better for live recording. I have three sony recorders and I've never had a problem with live recording; I really don't think it makes that much of a difference. I recommend going the MZ-N10 route.

[me]

You can't transfer faster than realtime without a NetMD unit, the PC link if it's an optical one is a USB soundcard with optical out.

[Leland]

I agree with Bazirker, NetMD is worth having. If I was buying my first unit today, I would definitely get it. (I do have it, see my sig.)

For recording from the MD to the PC, even in analog recording mode, the WIN NetMD program by Christian Klukas is very useful and gives you contol of your MD unit from your PC using the NetMD drivers. This makes analog recording from MD to PC easier with NetMD than without it. See:

http://www.minidisc.org/netmd_analog_uploading.html

Some answers and info:

Changing the playback speed: some units do this but the pitch changes also. With the N10 (not sure about the N1) the pitch is kept constant while speed changes using digital trickery. I think this would be more useful for your application that one that changes pitch also.

The rehearsal track divide feature on the N10 would also be very useful for live recording.

N10 download speeds with NetMD really are 2x the N1 which is really cool.

Only real benefit for the N1 now is battery life, although I do not have direct experience with the N1 and my R900 was overrated. So is the N10 battery life in real usage.

I love the control stick on the N10. This is one of the best controls on a Sony MD unit ever.

There is a translation of the N10 manual on the minidisco website now.

http://www.minidisco.com/minispecs/manuals.../sony_mzn10.pdf

Prices in Tokyo this weekend:

N10, 39,000 Yen

N1, 35,000 Yen, might be negotiable at small shops as last years model

R910, 30,000 Yen

I have no experience with Sharp, but sound quality on all units is superb in my opinion.

[Mystyler]

lumina, nothing beats a Sharp for live recording, or sound reproduction. If you decide against NetMD, grab the DR7. Sharp should soon be releasing a NetMD version of the DR7. (But don't hold your breath) At this time, no one knows a lot about the DR7 - it is due to be released tomorrow! Yay!

The R910 is an N1 less NetMD, and a slightly different design. The N10 is an N1+more, and less weight/size but the battery life isn't the best but it is certainly acceptable.

CD-->MD in real-time, optically in SP mode lays waste to LP modes, and NetMD quality and is the best way to record. I find that MONO is more useful than LP2.

Whatever you buy in Japan will need a US adapter.

I'd get the DR7 or MR250, if I were to get something from Japan. Sony units are a pain to use.

[Bazirker]

I haven't ever had trouble using Sony units...

[Shorty]

I recommend the Sony MZ-N10. It has the ATRAC Type-S DSP, which will make your MDLP recordings sound better. It also has a faster version of NetMD (up to 64X recording at LP4 - DAMN!), so I'd recommend it for that as well.

I'm not sure about the Sharp units, as I'm still on my first one (Sony MZ-N1). Although, it'd be interesting to know the difference (if any) between the Sharp and Sony ATRAC encoders.

[Leland]

Mystyler's comment that

"CD-->MD in real-time, optically in SP mode lays waste to LP modes, and NetMD quality and is the best way to record. I find that MONO is more useful than LP2."

is of course his opinion, but I would disagree with the strength of his statement. The only reason I would worry about the additional quality would be if I was trying to record for a serious demo or something. And you always have that option anyway. LP2 is quite excellent, and better with type S.

[Mystyler]

Ever heard "pre-echo" Leland? That is the most annoying thing about LP2, and the next is that it sounds as if the sound is being played "through a brick wall". Mind you, LP2 is what all my friends record in.

*Shudders*

It annoys me so much that I re-dubbed two CDs in MONO this arvo.

We can only hope that Sony can make LP encoding methods better. Type-S seems like a step in the right direction, but I'll be listening to a JE780 tomorrow to see if it does.

My opinion, of course, and LP4 is worse. :twisted:

Shorty, currently Sony would have the upper hand with it's ATRAC encoders, especially in SP mode with Type-R. H.D.E.S. from Panasonic is also excellent, but what version Sharp are using today is anyone's guess. :mrgreen: All in all though, the differences between the encoding is small to insignifigant in most cases.

[Bazirker]

Congrats Mystyler, you're the first person I have ever heard knock LP2 mode.

I typically equate the sound of LP2 mode with 320 kbps MP3 quality, which considering that LP2 runs at 132 kbps, that ain't bad. I'd have to agree with Leland that LP2 sounds better than mono. Unless you're trying to make professional quality recordings of things, LP2 mode rocks.

Now LP4 mode...well, that's a different story. That does sound like it is "being played through a brick wall," although if you're like me and your car speakers suck so much that you can't tell anyway, then it's great.

[Andy]

In that case, can I knock SP mode?

Well... not really knock - but it does have a little less definition than CD in bass regions (at least, my MZ-R70 does). Seriously, I recommend getting yourself blind tested to see how much difference there really is. I doubt I'd be able to pick MD/CD without hearing both, but there definately is a difference (unless Type-R fixes all that)

[Leland]

Agreed about LP4. It is a utility only used for throwaway tunes to carry in bulk on one MD for quick pop fix.

LP2 however, let me say one last thing and I will shut up.

I don't use it for critical listening with my home component system. I use it when I am travelling on planes or cycling etc. Also, as background music while doing something else. This is headphone listening in general, which in itself is flawed unless you use a processor like the headroom processor to replace the L/R channel delay between your ears.

If I am specifically listening, and not doing anything else, I use my CD player and outboard DA converter through proper high quality stereo speakers.

I can't figure your mono recording. It seems if you are that concerned about quality, can't you carry two minidiscs rather than record in mono?

[me]

I use SP only as I like it with my stereo (ancient technics receiver connected to ancient 20 year old JVC speakers, about 200W). I also listen to those same discs on the bus, and if LP2 is used to save space, well, i suppose it does, but i'd rather use the same disc at best quality than record two discs, one with LP2 and the other SP, and end up wasting more discs.... meh

[Leland]

Me, if you were commenting on my "two discs" question, it wasn't about SP or LP2, it was 2 x SP vs. 1 x mono. I thought mystyler said he would rather record in mono rather than LP2. I think you lose so much quality in mono (the stereo information adds quality to the music in my opinion) that rather than resort to mono, why not make 2 SP discs.

[Mystyler]

That's what I'd usually do, have 2, 3 or even 4 discs in SP. But the two CDs I recorded are ment to be listen too one after the other, so rather than change MD as I would have to in SP (or even just using the CDs themselves), I decided to record in LP2.

Shocker. I can hear things before they are ment to happen, it sounds "metallic" and just "wrong". :?

The CDs are a mix of music and speech, and they sound so much better when recorded in MONO, even for casual listening which is what I do. LP2 took all the enjoyment out of listening, with stereo effects being crackly - worse than having no stereo at all - at least the sound was clear in MONO, which made so much more enjoyable, and backwards compatable with my older recorder.

My sole disc that is entirely music in LP2 will soon be redone in 3xSP discs as soon as I can find the CDs again. While much better than the two other LP2 discs, it still doesn't sound clear, and the low end seems bloated while the higher end is clashy...

Crazy? :mrgreen:

[Guest Anonymous]

I just spent an afternoon I shoulda been looking at differential equations instead comparing the same track recorded first in LP2 with NetMD and then using SPDIF and optical out in DSP Type R on my new MZ-N707 and finally, on my older MZS-R4ST in ATRAC 3.5...

The track was 1st mvt Mozart Piano Concerto 23, originally recorded DDD.

LP2 sounds DEAD IN THE WATER...

listening to cadenza over and over, very hard to distinguish ATRAC 3.5 and DSP Type R. Maybe, just maybe more overtones in DSP Type R.

But DEAD in LP2. I mean, the music's there and all that, but the recording definitely sounds, uh, less alive...

[AtRaCeR]

I totaly agree with mystyler.

LP2 produces a lot of artifacts specialy when encoding tracks with a lot of bass(30-50Hz).

Try to encode some psychedelic-trance/techno tunes with lp2 compression and you'll notice the distortion and metallic sound specially in bass passages.

If you interested i could send you via e-mail a portion of a music track(infected mushroom's B.P Empire-deep mix) to encode,and you'll see what i mean.

The advantage of netMD:lp2 conversion is your computer's job,so a better encoder will solve this problem(hopefully)

[Leland]

Wow, I'm amazed. I find LP2 much better than that. Maybe the type of music I listen to copes better, or maybe I don't pay enough attention anymore. Like I said, I use LP2 for portable listening, not critical listening. My life has too many interruptions for very much critical listening anymore anyway. I don't listen to too much music with "lots of heavy bass". What blows my mind is, if LP2, which is as good as I know it to be, is considered by you guys to be problematic, then what standards do all these guys have who listen to MP3 encoded files all the time? The level of quality you mention sounds like MP3 to me.

[AtRaCeR]

mp3(128kbps fraunhofer,lame HQ=ON) handles better low frequencies.

atrac3-132kbps(lp2) handles better high frequencies.

I can't say which encoder clearly wins.

All(most of them)the mp3 encoders except fraunhofer and lame sounds robotic.

In my opinion the best audio encoder is AAC (Dolby Laboratories).

AAC-128kbps sounds fantastic.

The big disadvantage of AAC: PAINFULLY SLOW!!! (5x realtime-P4 2.3GHz)

Make some tests with a lot of music tracks and a good pair of headphones and see what sounds better to you.

Atrac v.1 sounds terrible(for 292kbps),Atrac v3.5/4/4.5/type-r sounds exceptional.The same with atrac3.Its a new codec and needs a lot of improvements.

Imagine atrac3 type-r.... :shock:

[Mystyler]

As soon as I got my MDR, I quickly realised how shoddy MP3 was.

Haven't touched it since, and I pity the poor fools walking around with 20gigs of "CD Quality" 64kbps .wma files, and 128kbps MP3s. :twisted:

[Andy]

Try and test yourself on CDs versus ATRAC too. This one can be a bit harder to do without "unblinding" the test, but it is a good test of ATRAC (that is, testing it against something which is superior )

[Bazirker]

I'm not as much of a critical listener anymore, but I used to be, and I've spent hours doing back to back comparisons of cd quality vs SP vs LP2 vs LP4. I did these with discs recorded with ATRAC type R through an optical port (SP) or NetMD (ATRAC3.) I was using a Sony CD player (one of the first G-protection ones, sounds great to me) and an MZ-N707. All tracks were played at the same volume. I used Sony MDR-V500 headphones.

I found that I actually prefer SP mode over cd quality. (I closed my eyes and had a friend swicth my headphones between the 707 and my cd player listen to "The Hollow" by A Perfect Circle.)

I can distinguish LP2 mode without needing a cd or SP recording, but that takes great effort. With the original recording, I can easily tell the difference.

LP4 mode, although excellent quality for anything under 70 kbps, sounds like the sound is being played through a rack of empty aluminum cans.

I totally stand behind LP2 mode. Although I am certainly not trying to tell you guys that you're wrong, I honestly don't understand how anyone could be so critical of LP2 mode. Maybe my ears just suck or something...

[me]

I have to get some more 132k ATRAC3 samples and listen to 'em on my stereo.. It's not a mini/micro/midi system either..

[Andy]

I totally stand behind LP2 mode. Although I am certainly not trying to tell you guys that you're wrong, I honestly don't understand how anyone could be so critical of LP2 mode. Maybe my ears just suck or something...

Hey - the more your ears suck, the cheaper things are

I prefer CD to ATRAC, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to ditch my MD. Usually, I doubt I'd even be able to pick which was which without an A/B test. If I don't need to move, then a CD will do, as soon as I move a foot, then go MD

[Mystyler]

Picking CD against ATRAC is pretty hard, but if you listen to Rage Against The Machine - "Wake Up!" there is something in the first five or so seconds that is a dead giveaway. See if you can notice it.

[Leland]

Well I am relieved to hear the common opinion that MP3 generally sounds worse. We aren't so many miles apart in our listening tests then. Whew. Mystyler, if you had said something positive about MP3, I would have lost my mind for fear of it being scrambled. I would be interested in what the albums you record in mono (you described as mixture of speech and music, do you mean rap :wink: ) actually are.

[Mystyler]

Well I am relieved to hear the common opinion that MP3 generally sounds worse.  We aren't so many miles apart in our listening tests then.  Whew.  Mystyler, if you had said something positive about MP3, I would have lost my mind for fear of it being scrambled.  I would be interested in what the albums you record in mono (you described as mixture of speech and music, do you mean rap :wink: ) actually are.

No MP3 for me. Yuck.

EXCEPT!

The albums I record in mono are by The 12th Man. They are a send up of almost all the sports commentators here in Australia, but mainy cricket (I assume you know what cricket is?) commentators, and the sport in general Not rap, but one song on there there is definately rock. I've recorded all my sisters Eminen crap in LP2, and some in LP4. :twisted:

I had originally recorded the discs in MONO before I bought my PC3. When I got the deck I was thrilled with the prospect of having a double CD album on one disc in full stereo, so I re-did all my 12th Man CDs this way, and was totally disappointed with it's sound quality. It uses stereo to exteme and I don't think LP2 can hack it. I tried LP4 (because I recorded an LP4 12th Man disc for my mates) and it was shocking. :shock:

I then moved on to music recording with LP2 and it sounded better, but either too bass heavy or clashy. So I stuck with SP. :?

Anyway, the exception with MP3s (in this case 192kpbs .wma) is that my 12th Man albums sounded better (but not greatly - just better, no, clearer stereo effects). Less "static" from channel-hopping (not white noise), less artifacts and no pre-echo.

I also recorded movies in LP2 and MONO, and MONO is still king, which really does suck, because I get no stereo.

Other than that, I never touch MP3 anymore, and I've kept my original MP3-->MD dubs to remind me why MP3 stinks. :wink:

[Andy]

Yeah, I actually used to do a bit of pirating of music (not much) before I got my MD, once I got that, I realised that the sound quality of an mp3 just doesn't compare to an original, so I started buying all the CDs instead. Now I just add $3 to the cost of any CD purchase, and all is fine.

I still have some stuff which I can only get on MP3, and transferring it from PC->MD always sounds bad. I don't have NetMD or a digital out, just a really crappy soundcard. The level is quite low, which means that I need to put up the volume a fair bit more, and the soundcard is noisy as well, so there is a really obvious buzz in the background... I really don't like MP3s

[Mystyler]

I too stopped once I had heard MD. Even analog CD dubs ripped MP3.

Now I buy CDs, and only use MP3 if I absolutely cannot find it on CD, but most of the time I won't bother. Aslo MP3 is handy just to find out what that song on the radio was.

People! Don't download MP3! Your ears will hate you!

[Leland]

Excellent, thank you Mystyler. That makes perfect sense. Sounds with extreme phase information has been problematic for me also, although I have noticed it most in LP4 mode. Examples are Brown Eyed Girl, by Van Morrison at the beginning or The Prophet's Song, by Queen. (I realize these examples date me, buy I already confessed on the age thread)

I wonder if the movies have problems due to dolby surround encoding, either 2.0 or 5.1.

OT (bad form for a mod), yes I know what cricket is, remember I am an Aussie in-law. Will be in Melbourne next Saturday for the holidays. Your humourous sports commentary reminds me of the tapes I saw of those guys sending up the olympics, you know, the ones with the wombat!

[Andy]

Since the mod started it: Roy and HG with The Dump is what you are thinking of. I've made a computer game featuring the wombat (Fatso the Fat Arsed Wombat), though it was a 1 day job so it was nothing spectacular. I'm not even sure if I have it anymore or if it is on the internet anywhere

btw - Fatso managed to get on one of our postage stamps (one of our athletes was holding him when they took a photo which ended up on a stamp). He's famous

[Leland]

Yes, Roy and HG. And in my defense, I don't mod this forum. Be careful, don't get me fired! But yes, the wombat became famous and that is exactly what is so cool about Australia. Whenever I go to Australia, I get some great new music that I copy to my MD (keeping us ON topic.)

Ever hear of Goanna Band? Great stuff.

[gem]

hello, i had an MZ-R900 but it got broken. i'm thinking of getting a NetMD walkman. i know it records stuff from the pc using software and all (unlike my R900 which i just plug a cable n record like i do with tapes)-- so does can NetMD still record from tape players/ or ordinary cd players? or do i have to rip those into mp3 first before i can record them into minidisc? :?:

which is better to get? the MZ-N1 or MZ-N707? (they don't sell the N10 where i live).

[me]

NetMD can record high speed from the computer, and yes, you can still record just like an ordinary MD recorder, from line sources and such

[Lustral]

Id say best bet is the MZ-N10 All purpose portable MD recorder/player

[digger1914]

Hi there!

I recently updraded from my MZ-R70 to an N1 and am very happy I did! I was very sceptical about the sound quality of LP2, but am pleasantly suprised.

I am re recording my old stuff, classical music using SP and a lot of modern stuff using LP2 via the juke box. As I listen to this music on the train, I cannot hear any real difference between the LP2 and my old SP.

Cheers

[SimonMagus]

Yo.

A couple of things...I am very interested in this topic of conversation, for specific reasons (if you can bear to hear my brief little story):

I have an MT880 right now, and am flirting with the idea of getting a unit that is a mean-ass recorder for the best quality possible...my hunch is it might come down to either the N10 or Sharp's DR7...this would be used while travelling the world and recording ambient sounds with SoundPro's in-ear binaurals (real-time SP recording).

I'm hoping to get some opinions IDEALLY from people who own or have experience with BOTH units, but of course I need all the informed opinions I can get. Brian Youn said at one point he didn't mention Type-S on the N10 because he didn't hear the difference in sound quality...but some people do, I guess. I'm really interested in hearing how the DR7's "advance-record" (up to 30secs before REC is started) works, and whether or not DR7 recording is supposed to be improved from the 770/880; I'm also interested in opinions as to whether the N10's new SP encoding really delivers superior sound quality in a field recording. I'd most likely be using a bass rolloff battery module in the field.

And heck...I'm one of those freaks who even likes LP4 mode (even though I clearly hear the quality difference, I think it can be great for music playback)...

Anyways, I know it might be a lot to ask such a diverse crowd...but these user forums have helped me out so much in the past - I'm really happy with my MT880 - that I thought I'd put this out there in the hopes of getting some more good opinions.

peace

[SimonMagus]

Id say best bet is the MZ-N10 All purpose portable MD recorder/player

Perhaps, but my first impressions are that the jog dial, combined with the internal gumstick battery don't make for incredible portability (unless you stay in your home city or close to your recharging stand). I mention the jog dial because in terms of my own future travels overseas and the recorder I might buy for the job, it seems to be a protrusion that might get jostled and/or damaged as opposed to, say, the DR7, which seems like a much "tighter" (i.e. buttons only) unit, not to mention it seems a little less fragile than the N10.

[highlandsun]

I really have to wonder what all you guys are doing in your "critical listening" sessions. As a musician, I do a lot of critical listening to my MD recordings because they generally are of live performances that I'm trying to learn from, or they're recordings of my own gigs that I'm critiquing to see where to improve. The fact is, I hear the music, no matter what mode I record in, and that, in the end, is good enough. (I used to use Mono when recording long concerts/workshops, but even when only one person is playing, I find the stereo cues indispensable for helping to distinguish individual notes in complex ornaments. And I always record with binaural mics.)

When listening to music just for pleasure, I don't really care about the technical specs. If I did, I would find my FM stereo completely intolerable. All of you folks who are listening to your equipment rather than the music seem to be missing the point. (However, if your hobby *is* listening to equipment, as opposed to listening to music, go ahead. More power to you.)

Here's something I've been contemplating recently, which seems to explain some experiences I've had lately - I think there's more to be gained from psychoacoustic compression techniques, but only under a specific condition - you can't enjoy a compressed recording unless you already heard the original performance. In general, brains never lose information, unless they're physically damaged. Every experience you've ever had is indelibly written into your gray matter, and little reminders (scents, sounds etc.) can bring them all back to the surface of your consciousness in full vivid glory.

When I listen back to recordings I've made of really great concerts I've seen, I feel the excitement and energy in the air, and hear all the musicality of the concert all over again. I think this is in part because I remember what the original live performance sounded like. I suspect, if I were to hand my LP4 recording of such a gig to a friend, who wasn't present at the original performance, they might find it tolerably entertaining, but maybe lacking in punch.

Anyway, since the music is in my head, in full-fidelity, all I need is a reasonably faithful reminder to bring the full experience back. And a binaural LP4 recording does the job admirably.

[Leland]

In reply to comments from SimonMagus:

The jog dial on the N10 is very big and sturdy, not to worry about it being fragile.

Also, the portability of the N10 is fine. The battery life is very good, and you can simply carry the external battery case and use AA's in a pinch, which I doubt you would need to. I have carried it on long trips and have been very happy with the battery life.