Jump to content

Original MDLP Compared To Today's MDLP

Rate this topic


edgeman

Recommended Posts

Yes.

The first-generation MDLP recorder, the MZ-R900, features ATRAC IC: CXD2671-201GA (same as MZ-R700). This was the first version of ATRAC made for MDLP, I believe. The newer models such as the MZ-R909 featured ATRAC Type R, and eventually ATRAC progressed to Type S (introduced with Sony MDS-JB980).

The difference?

The ATRAC featured in first-generation MDLP recorders are not as good as the newer (Type S). The difference isn't very noticeable, but it's there.

k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But my best understanding is that the rough groupings of these things are:

R500/R700/R900: Original MDLP ATRAC series

N505/N707/R909/R910/N1: Added: MDLP Type R+quieter drive+Net MD

N410/N510/N610/N910/N10: Added: MDLP Type S + size drop

So there may be two questions there:

a) is there discernible difference between the original MDLP ATRAC and the MDLP ATRAC Type R? This would answer the question of R700 vs N707 with ATRAC Type R.

cool.gif is there a discernible difference between the ATRAC Type S of the N10 generation and previous versions of MDLP ATRAC (Original & Type R)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can say that the atrac type r on my mz-n707 sounds better than the atrac3 stuff from my r700. I have yet to hear atrac type s...but note that atrac type-s is the same thing as atrac type r but the player just has as better dsp. so in other words, you'll have atrac type R encoding and atrac type S decoding...anyone can confirm? I think that's how it works...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MDLP, especially LP2, is a great benefit for MD. The increased playing time is usually worth the quality trade-off. However, it is still not perfect. The improvements between LP2 before and after Type S might be present, but they are definitely not dramatic. There is still a marked difference between SP and LP2, if you listen for it. I personally wouldn't fret over it or make it a decision point regarding a purchase. This comes from my use of an R900 for about 2 years and my recent upgrade to an N10. In all my notes about what is good about the N10, somehow I have never thought to mention the Type S upgrade, so that is the kind of impression it made on me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But my best understanding is that the rough groupings of these things are:

R500/R700/R900:                Original MDLP ATRAC series

N505/N707/R909/R910/N1:   Added: MDLP Type R+quieter drive+Net MD

N410/N510/N610/N910/N10: Added: MDLP Type S + size drop

So there may be two questions there:  

a) is there discernible difference between the original MDLP ATRAC and the MDLP ATRAC Type R? This would answer the question of R700 vs N707 with ATRAC Type R.

cool.gif is there a discernible difference between the ATRAC Type S of the N10 generation and previous versions of MDLP ATRAC (Original & Type R)?

I'd like to point out that there is no such thing as MDLP "ATRAC Type-R". ATRAC Type-R is just that, ATRAC, NOT ATRAC3! MDLP uses ATRAC3 and is not encoded with ATRAC Type-R at all. ATRAC Type-R ONLY applies to recording and playback of MD SP tracks.

While there may be differences in the ATRAC3 chips in these units, I'm not really aware of any distinct improvements except Type-S which, to my knowledge, is not an encoding technology. Type-S AFAIK only improves the playback of MDLP (ATRAC3) encoded tracks. At least this has been my understanding of "ATRAC Type-S" which is a foolish way of wording the technology by Sony...

What you have to be careful about here is comparing ATRAC coding to ATRAC3 coding--they are essentially completely different things just recorded to the same disc in the case of MDSP v. MDLP.

A better name for "ATRAC Type-S DSP" would be "ATRAC Type-R + ATRAC3 Type-S Decode" but I guess that wouldn't be as simple and that is why Sony just chose Type-S.

Roland M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Guest Anonymous

I use my N707 to do recording via NetMD & my R900 to play it back on. I was using LP2 a lot but needed to fit a few more CD's onto a disc so swithced to LP4 for a few CD's (I know quality is poor but i needed to)

I played back the tracks on my N707, lo and behold they sounded ok, less bandwidth then expected. They sounded like they were being played through cotton wool.

I thought about re-encoding onto 2 discs but to much hassel so put disk in R900 for journey.

Played the tracks on the R900 & they sounded ALIVE, slightly distorted in the treble as you would get at low bit rates but very much better in bandwidth.

I think the new ATRAC3 Chips (type-R) limit LP4 considerably to try and make it have less distortion & i think they went a bit OTT. I will stick to LP4 on my R900 only, it sounds almost as good as LP2 on the N707.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

I use my N707 to do recording via NetMD & my R900 to play it back on. I was using LP2 a lot but needed to fit a few more CD's onto a disc so swithced to LP4 for a few CD's (I know quality is poor but i needed to)

I played back the tracks on my N707, lo and behold they sounded ok, less bandwidth then expected. They sounded like they were being played through cotton wool.

I thought about re-encoding onto 2 discs but to much hassel so put disk in R900 for journey.

Played the tracks on the R900 & they sounded ALIVE, slightly distorted in the treble as you would get at low bit rates but very much better in bandwidth.

I think the new ATRAC3 Chips (type-R) limit LP4 considerably to try and make it have less distortion & i think they went a bit OTT. I will stick to LP4 on my R900 only, it sounds almost as good as LP2 on the N707.

Actually the PC Netmd enc for LP4 is completely different from the hardware encoder in your 707/505.

The pc codec has a wider bandwidth, introducing more distortion because it tries to encode too much frequency components.

The 707 codec has a lowpass filter at ~ 1500hz lower than the pc one, so sounds more muffled but the actual quality of the encoded music is a bit higher.

The bottom line is they both sound crap tho biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...