EMUSIC-L Digest Volume 56, Issue 14 This issue's topics: Sony Minidisk (7 messages) The kid next door (literally) (was Re: Sony Minidisk) Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon . You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text. The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the University of North Carolina. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1993 21:20:01 GMT+7200 From: CHAOS@SOFTLAB.II.UJ.EDU.PL Subject: Re: Sony Minidisk My personal opinion about MiniDisc: I own this device for some time. I performed some tests, in recording studio. The tests were very amateur. We recorded Roxette CD via analog input. Then we connected my MD recorder and good Technics CD player (I forgot the number) to very good Soundcraft mixing console. We were able to easily switch between MD and CD (the levels and equalization were set exactly the same). Results: I could not hear ANY difference in frequency response. The only drawback of MD was noticable background noise. I didn't heard any results of data compression except this noise. Dynamic range is very good, comparabe with CD, but CD lacks any noise (thanks God!). I don't know if this noise is result of compression or other things (this is very first model, portable, we used analog input, etc.) The convinience of using MD instead of any tape is simply uncomparable. The access time is very short, except when disc is loaded or started to play. When disc plays you can switch to any track instantly. You can simply remove any unwanted tracks, increasing free space on disk. New tracks are always recorded at the end. The disk is very small and convinient. Maciek. chaos@ii.uj.edu.pl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1993 17:04:50 U From: David Williams Subject: Re: Sony Minidisk Reply to: RE>>Sony Minidisk >Both the Minidisc and the DCC use compression that lose data, but of >course the claim is that you can't notice the difference. The only problem >with that is that I heard somewhere (not a clue as to where) that one actually >CAN hear the difference on the Minidisc (but not DCC--they use different >algorithms). Where can one find a good up-to-date summary or discussion on audio compression algorithms? Both for commercial audio and for computer sound files? Dave Williams (dwilliam@ilstu.edu) Illinois State University ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1993 20:57:54 GMT From: Herschel A Gelman Subject: Re: Sony Minidisk In article <9308310804.AA00498@hostsit.cad.cea.fr> hbsk@HOSTSIT.CAD.CEA.FR (David HAUBENSACK) writes: >> Has anyone had any experience with the new Sony Minidisk. Does anyone >> know how much they cost. I'm wondering if it would be a cheaper alternative >> to DATs for two track mastering. >> >I wonder if the compression used really lost datas... I know that the MD uses >a 1Mb RAM to buffer its work and to compress in real-time, but I didn't read >anything about a losing-data-compression-algo. It does. Both the Minidisc and the DCC use compression that lose data, but of course the claim is that you can't notice the difference. The only problem with that is that I heard somewhere (not a clue as to where) that one actually CAN hear the difference on the Minidisc (but not DCC--they use different algorithms). Anyways, I hardly do any of my own music/recording, so this is a relatively uninformed opinion here, but it seems that DAT is still the way to go, given that you can't hear any loss of quality and that its use has become so widespread. I can't really see everyone suddenly forgetting about DAT and running to Minidisc... -- ---------------- Herschel Gelman ----------- hagst3+@pitt.edu ----------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1993 18:06:00 EDT From: John Rossi III Subject: Re: Sony Minidisk Personally, I've heard MiniDisk and I think it sounds quite good. I didn't get a chance to A/B it with a DAT or real CD, however. One thing I can say definately is that it sounds much better than any analog cassette I have ever heard. My guess is that either MD or DCC will eventually replace analog cassettes as we use them now. I still think it is a toss up as to which format will win out (maybe even both) since each has its advantages. Personally, I think that for my purposes in replacing analog cassettes (which lately is for car and walkman use almost exclusively), MD's compactness and apparent durability (no media friction) would win out. John ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1993 19:31:00 EDT From: John Rossi III Subject: Re: Sony Minidisk Mix magazine did a good job about a year ago when the MD and DCC formats were announced. John ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1993 22:58:40 -0500 From: Stephen David Beck Subject: Re: Sony Minidisk I seem to remember a recent issue of Electronic Musician had an extensive discussion on the two formats. I think it was August'93. Then again, what the heck do I know? I'm only an academic composer. They only let me out of the ivory towers on Tuesdays and Einstein's birthday. -sdb ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1993 09:22:35 EDT From: Bill Fox Subject: Re: Sony MiniDisk Dr. J. R. III's response to the MiniDisk topic: > Personally, I've heard MiniDisk and I think it sounds quite good. I didn't > get a chance to A/B it with a DAT or real CD, however. One thing I can say > definately is that it sounds much better than any analog cassette I have > ever heard... I've only had short "glimpses" of MD and DCC and I agree with John. > ... My guess is that either MD or DCC will eventually replace > analog cassettes as we use them now. I still think it is a toss up as to > which format will win out (maybe even both) since each has its advantages. Again, I agree but since it is aimed at the cassette market, I think that while MD and DCC costs are more like DAT than like cassettes, it may take a while. Even the blank and prerecorded media are expensive. And being digital, the machines include SCMS and you pay royalties on the machines and blank media, thanks to Congress' &*%$#@ actions last year. So for about the same cost, you might as well use DAT and avoid the lossy compression. I must say that I like the 10 second buffer that MD uses on playback. > Personally, I think that for my purposes in replacing analog cassettes > (which lately is for car and walkman use almost exclusively), MD's compactness > and apparent durability (no media friction) would win out. Phillips is counting on compatibility to win the market. Since DCC machines can also play cassettes, those who have sizeable cassette libraries might be swayed to DCC to save the time of transferring everything to MD. Bill Fox ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1993 05:17:31 PDT From: metlay Subject: The kid next door (literally) (was Re: Sony Minidisk) >It does. Both the Minidisc and the DCC use compression that lose data, but of >course the claim is that you can't notice the difference. The only problem >with that is that I heard somewhere (not a clue as to where) that one actually >CAN hear the difference on the Minidisc (but not DCC--they use different >algorithms). There are several recent audio tests in various mags that claim better fidelity for DCC. Electronic Musician comes to mind.... >Anyways, I hardly do any of my own music/recording, so this is a relatively >uninformed opinion here, but it seems that DAT is still the way to go, given >that you can't hear any loss of quality and that its use has become so >widespread. I can't really see everyone suddenly forgetting about DAT and >running to Minidisc... Quite true. >---------------- Herschel Gelman ----------- hagst3+@pitt.edu ----------- Totally irrelevant parenthetical notes: 1. To everyone on the list except Herschel: This fine young man is the son of my next-door neighbor! Nothing is weirder than seeing a comment from the kid you remember seeing off to elementary school on your favorite bboard.... at least now I know why he was so avidly following the discussion after hours at the barbecue my mom threw last Saturday night. Never said a word but stayed until 130AM, absorbing everything like a sponge. Heh! Actually it's too bad he had to crash...the really weird topics didn't come up until about 330 or so. |-> 2. To Herschel: Hope you had fun on Saturday. If I'd KNOWN you were into emusic, I would have taken more effort to get you involved in the conversation. I certainly would have at least given you a formal introduction to all of the net.famous who were sitting around the table, for Heaven's sake! Ten years from now, Andrew Crowell's gonna have to say, "I went to a barbecue with Herschel Gelman way back when, and nobody introduced us. Talk about a brush with fame!" And don't mind John Rossi... he's ALWAYS like that. |-> -- mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * metlay@netcom.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Wow, now my hand's all sticky! Yum." (metlay's wife) ------------------------------ End of the EMUSIC-L Digest ******************************