Jump to content

My "critique" on HiMD - at the crossroads

Rate this topic


Guest Anonymous

Recommended Posts

Guest Anonymous

Atrac Lossless -

Kudos for PCM recording, but what about loseless codecs? PCM can store about 2 CDs at original quality on each HiMD, and 4 CD's equivilent if there's Lossless Atrac!

USB Mass Storage Class Device -

Official annoucements don't stress this, so it's safe to assume HiMD requires drivers on your friend's PC or Mac, even in file transfer.

Sharp AUVI HiMD?

Sound (amplifier) is very important, otherwise I'd settle for an iPod. Imagine Auvi Digital Amp paired with PCM mode of HiMD - The Best sound reproduction possible in a portable device!

Isn't MO slow?

The spec of HiMD states data rates of 1.2MBps (900+Mbps), or about the same as USB 1.1 speeds - probably can't be improved much even under USB 2.0 because of Magneto-Optical mechanism... Current HiMD format isn't fit for video applications.

Navigation?

Seriously, a 6X capacity increase per disc and Sony's still using NetMD-era group functions for music access/management. Despite iPod/ iPod mini's inferior battery life and audio quality compared to Sharp Auvi portables, it is ages ahead in navigation and display, and thus a worthy competitor.

Is this a "standard"?

Is this a standard for industry or a proprietary format with more specifics tuned towards Sony than the original Minidisc? It's no secret that Sony has the unfair advantage as the original developer to add features like MDLP, NetMD, while denying others' innovations if it threatens Sony's appeal. With even more complexity than the original MD, how well does it lend to licensing?

For example, if Sharp wanted to add MP3, WMA, AAC, or even FLAC loseless, would Sony allow that to happen? Or is a more ingenius way of navigation precluded under the "design rules" of HiMD, to which only Sony could make amendments? If licensing to Panasonic or Sharp resulted in better hardware features and styling, how much freedom in software does licensees have other than rebranding SonicStage?

Panasonic made low cost MD portables that were technically great, but they were "obiedent followers" and did not really outshine Sony's hardware. Maybe that's why Sony was so eager to pair up with Panasonic first for HiMD. But now the benign original MD which used standard Optical TOSlink has turned into an OpenMG HiMD, and become mixed up with Memory Sticks and other Sony stuff that is at odds with Panasonic's Secure Digital.

(admittedly biased paragraph/commentary) If Sharp, the avocator of open standards like Linux PDAs, want to keep innovating, this is the moment they opt out of Sony's Minidisc. I think it serves them better to develop their own 1.5/2/4/15/20/40 GB HDD (cornice, hitachi, or toshiba) walkman with AUVI digital amp, using the full suite of technologies developed for their MD portables, while free to add ogg, mp3, and flac support.

If Panasonic grows tired of playing Sony's game, this is the moment they develop 8 cm DVD-based Multicodec players. With the increasing popularity of DVD recorders, and 8cm discs of 1.5GB capacity, they have an answer in the form of a circular, pocket friendly, and open standard player to Sony's "square" HiMD. (Imagine the stylish Sony CD Walkman NE900 shrunk to a tiny 8 cm DVD version.) 8 cm DVD-R/RW's are way cheaper removable media than HiMD's, too.

My suggestions for each company is based on their own strengths and product manufacturing experience (for example Panasonic has been making portable DVD players for a while, and should know how to achieve long battery life...)

Freedom from copy protection is a major reason for the success of the original MD and the iPod. To copy illegally or not is a decision best left to the user. Apple wouldn't alienate users by forcefully making people "check-out" their music from their own computers, would they?

Actually, I'd be rather sad if both Companies go with HiMD, as it is really Sony's burden (copy protection, backward compatibilty, and development costs, etc.) to carry itself. The world can be easily satisfied by clever implementation of each company's strengths and established technologies, cheaply. In the long run, more resources will be spent to improve our choices, rather than the say of One (Sony).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

Despite iPod/ iPod mini's inferior battery life and audio quality compared to Sharp Auvi portables, it is ages ahead in navigation and display, and thus a worthy competitor.
Actually, the iPod has quite good sound quality.

Or did you already know that and you're laying flamebait?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Atrac Lossless -

Kudos for PCM recording, but what about loseless codecs? PCM can store about 2 CDs at original quality on each HiMD, and 4 CD's equivilent if there's Lossless Atrac!

Lossless compression is difficult to manage at higher ratios in realtime.

Considering the increased power requirements for processing that intense, and the relatively low savings in space available with realtime lossless compression, I'd say we'll be waiting a while before this practical to implement.

Lossless compression of 1.5 - 2:1 ratios can be done at between 2-4x realtime on an Athlon XP 2500+ [barton, what my system uses] using nearly 100% CPU. I sincerely doubt that an LSI running from a 1.5V power supply will be able to manage this in the very near future.

Also, PCM cannot store "about 2 CDs .. on each HiMD". A CD holds 74-80 minutes, a HiMD holds just short of 95 minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not compared to a DR7, it doesn't. Sorry.

I've owned a DS8 and I own an iPod Mini right now. I can tell you right now the differences in sonic quality is minimal. They are both excellent sounding portables. The Sharp MD players are to be praised for their digital amp, which enables them to sound nearly as good as the much more powerful iPod heaphone output, but using far less current/voltage. Kudos to Sharp for a great design that prolongs battery life without disregarding sound quality.

Sonically, I'd say the iPod is a bit more airy and neutral (good soundstage, even with canalphones) while my DS8 was just a bit more dark, with recessed mids. I prefer the sound of my iPod; the inability of the DS8 to work with inefficient headphones caused me to have the volume set around 25/30, which tells the DSP to roll off the bass to prevent distortion. This wouldn't be a problem, except that both the Auvi 1-bit units and iPods have output coupling capacitors (to eliminate DC offset voltage that could possibly damage headphones). The output caps are already rolling off the bass (coupled with the input impedance of the internal amplifier, forming a high-pass filter) so you end up with... no bass. tongue.gif (Well, with MD33s anyhow.)

Fortunately the EQ on most of the Auvi units is very good and you can generally fix any issues relative to headphones, output power and whether the player is rolling off the bass or not.

For just listening, there's not much to be desired in terms of the iPod's sound quality in addition to all of its other strengths: ease of use (designed for one handed operation in fact), durability, overall build quality, iTunes (yes, that's a reason all by itself lol) and looks. I actually don't find the big pods to be that attractive, but I do love my sleek little pink Mini. happy.gif

This is not saying that Sharp doesn't design good DAPs. They do. I seriously wish they would turn their attention to the HDD player market and crank out something suitably awesome. Perhaps it would be the "iPod Killer" that actually kills the iPod. biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atrac Lossless -

Kudos for PCM recording, but what about loseless codecs? PCM can store about 2 CDs at original quality on each HiMD, and 4 CD's equivilent if there's Lossless Atrac!

This wouldn't be good for live recording. How could you ever tell record time remaining. It's all going to depend on how compressible each chunk of audio is and would change with each chunk. You could estimate at best and run out of space at worst. For WORM style stuff a lossless codec would be nice however. No SonicStage encoder worse-than-the-DSP issues to deal with either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This wouldn't be good for live recording. How could you ever tell record time remaining. It's all going to depend on how compressible each chunk of audio is and would change with each chunk. You could estimate at best and run out of space at worst. For WORM style stuff a lossless codec would be nice however. No SonicStage encoder worse-than-the-DSP issues to deal with either.

Yes, the lossless would be great for post-recording archiving. It could be a feature built into Sonicstage.

Perhaps, _decoding_ could also be built into an MD unit. Decoding is much less cpu intensive and probably would provide that ratio of 2 to 2.5 cds to fit on a HI-MD disc.

I use flac for lossless archiving of my CDs. It works great and would be an alternative lossless option for Sonicstage users that convert their Hi-MD audio to WAV format....

Edited by AgentK7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the lossless would be great for post-recording archiving.  It could be a feature built into Sonicstage.

..

I use flac for lossless archiving of my CDs.  It works great and would be an alternative lossless option for Sonicstage users that convert their Hi-MD audio to WAV format....

FLAC support has been part of HiMDRenderer for some time now.

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...