Hi MD vs. HD-based players

Bri

Ok,

Somehow I've been living in the dark and just found out about Sony's Hi-MD this week...you know, MDs that hold hours and hours of music whilst still playing (and expanding) the old discs they've had for 10 years. Intriguing considering the size of my MD collection and the robustness of my old MD players through the years.

Now, I've already got an iPod. Not impressed a year later I have to say. Battery life is terrible - just waiting for it to start decreasing - and then of course I can't just buy a replacement battery myself. Boo hiss. I agree having all songs with you is great but not at the expensive of battery, etc.

Then there's the new Sony HD player (20GB methinks?) and the iRiver which seems the best of that bunch.

SO, what would you recommend?

I personnally don't like the iPod - nice idea but not exactly value for money. The Sony HD player looks the same. I believe you can drag n drop the iRiver without any irritating software just like any removable drive? But what about sound quality?

Can anyone tell me why I shouldn't buy a Hi-MD player from the states and basically have the option of old MDs, LP MDs and a couple of Hi-MDs (lets say by genre/big artist collections) so when I leave to go into town I just pick what I'm in the mood for, the rest are safely at home or I can bring a few in my pocket. Am I mad and not future-proofing at all or is it actually the decent choice? I havn't had the opportunity to use the check-in/check-out system or see Sony's copyright control but I gather it's just 4 copies of the song at a go.

Any feedback appreciated.

ZENER

Now, I've already got an iPod. Not impressed a year later I have to say. Battery life is terrible - just waiting for it to start decreasing - and then of course I can't just buy a replacement battery myself. Boo hiss. I agree having all songs with you is great but not at the expensive of battery, etc.

Not an entirely accurate comment I have to say.

http://www.eurobatteries.com/sitepages/stereo.asp

The second and third entries are worth noting.

I've never been impressed by Sony's ATRAC technology because there is very little control over the anount of compression applied to media, while MP3 is not ideal it at least offers control over this very important area IMO of the technology.

ZEN

Bri

Fair enough you can pick me up on the accuracy - I've never attempted to unscrew the iPod but I still stand by the point that it's not exactly appealing to be using tools on portable players. Thanks for the link though I thought they were more expensive. I've had plenty of hassle with Lithium thingy batteries over the last few years. The Sony replacement is 20eu in the high-street and pops open.

Battery life still sucks.

I'd be more interested to hear what you thought of the players and future-proofing to be honest!

Civilian_Target

I recommend the Rio Karma.

There was a good review in the computers board but it seems to have disappeared.

Bri

Thanks...

So you figure HD players are they way to go? Why (aside from the obvious no need to carry disks...what about the fact most seem to be would up in annoying software, etc. and seem to be a bit limited?)

enda1

Definitely hd players md is becoming redundant and trying a last gasp attempt at staying up. iRiver all the way. Battery life 16 hours (stated) really a bit over 12 or so. Which is great! Drag and drop all right and no drivers for win xp. so you can use it on any computer with win xp with out installing anything. It can also be used as an external hd simultaneously. Supports mp3, wav others and best of a ll ogg. This is a great little format that kicks mp3's ass for similar bit rates!

In summary get the iRiver.

www.mx2.co.uk <----I got it here. (good service free delivery)

Bri

Thanks enda1. I'm convinced from all I've seen that iRiver all the real ones to go for in HD machines if your going that way. Thing is there's two major snags (as well as undeniable pluses!):

12 hours battery life is good relatively but it doesn't compare to 37.
The price of the iRiver home and abroad (I think) is high. Hi MD are much lower (not in Irl).

I dunno if I'm being clear about why I'm cautious about HD players but after buying the iPod a year ago I feel I made a bit of a mistake in regards to value for money and future-proofing. I really like the option to still make physical copies of individual albums (works in my car player too without stupid FM transmitters etc!) and still being able to carry loadsa compressed music with you either. Does that make sense? I'm not big into showing off a 'collection' its more that I don't feel the songs on the iPod are totally secure cos it's quite happy to crash or die or whatever unlike my good ol' MD.

Thanks for the feedback!

ZENER

Personally I prefer the simplicity and looks of the iPod.

The Sony HD player uses the same compression technology as their MD recorders/players. Correct me please if I'm wrong here but I read somewhere that it does not support MP3 but rather converts the files to ATRAC before loading them onto the player - anyone else read this or was I dreaming ? If this is true I dread to think what the sound quality would be like for files transferred in this way, of course files created directly from original CD's should be fine.

IMO the iRiver is ugly and has poor sound quality - at least the 20GB I heard had. I think it had line in though which was interesting - anyone try this feature ?

ZEN

Pacifico

Man i cant believe sony dont drop the MD at this stage :rolleyes:

Apart from battery life there is no advantage of mini disc over any type of HD based player.

Bri wrote:

I don't feel the songs on the iPod are totally secure cos it's quite happy to crash or die or whatever unlike my good ol' MD

Having a iPod myself i agree with you here. Any time i have to format my PC the iPod throws a fit and needs a restore :rolleyes: It is nice having a music collection in one place though and not on numerous MD's

I'd go for a HD player anyway unless you're gonna be throwing your player around the place, in which case i'd go for MD

Pacifico

ZENER wrote:

I read somewhere that it does not support MP3 but rather converts the files to ATRAC before loading them onto the player - anyone else read this or was I dreaming ?

Yeah afaik this is still the case.

Do the new players come with/Use SonicStage? It really does suck :eek:

Makaveli

ZENER wrote:

Correct me please if I'm wrong here but I read somewhere that it does not support MP3 but rather converts the files to ATRAC before loading them onto the player - anyone else read this or was I dreaming ?


ZEN

Yeah read that too. So not very appealing at all.

Bri

Dunno bout the Sony HD player but the Hi-MD does convert the files when using the USB cable (i.e. not recording the old school way) which sounds very tedious. There's a selection of compression settings. Don't know what ATRACplus is but heard of it in the shops...

Sorry to ask but why say the quality of pre-ripped MP3s being converted would be awful?
I don't claim to know much about the latter format but sure most downloaded MP3s are awful quality in the first place. Surely if I'd ripped a CD in EAC and then made the Sony thing convert I'd be no worse off. I thought ATRAC had better compression rates anyway?

Minidisc.org say this

Through a combination of various techniques including psychoacoustics, subband coding and transform coding, ATRAC succeeds in coding digital audio with virtually no perceptual degradation in sound quality. Listening tests indicate that the difference between ATRAC sound and the original source is not perceptually annoying nor does it reduce the sound quality. Furthermore, the system is sufficiently compact to be installed in portable consumer products. Using ATRAC, the MiniDisc provides a practical solution for portable digital audio.

http://minidisc.amulation.com/aes_atrac.html

Sounds good to me!

P.S. I think it's fair to say ALL provided software sucks so only the iRiver is the winner in this case. iPod's do have a good few alternatives thankfully but I've only heard about 1 Sony alternative and that was for ripping I think and not transferring AFAIK.

ZENER

Bri wrote:

Sorry to ask but why say the quality of pre-ripped MP3s being converted would be awful?
I don't claim to know much about the latter format but sure most downloaded MP3s are awful quality in the first place. Surely if I'd ripped a CD in EAC and then made the Sony thing convert I'd be no worse off. I thought ATRAC had better compression rates anyway?

I point out that I haven't used the software but I believe the reason the Sony doesn't directly support MP3 is to avoid paying license fees plus they feel (perhaps rightly) that ATRAC is better than MP3 anyway. I would imagine that the supplied software converts the CD audio directly to ATRAC and does not use an intermediate format - that would be silly now ! However converting a CD to MP3 compresses at 11:1 (128Kbps) ATRAC compresses 8:1 (I think) which in theory equates to a 32Kbps approx MP3 or thereabouts - very appealing !!

P.S. I think it's fair to say ALL provided software sucks so only the iRiver is the winner in this case. iPod's do have a good few alternatives thankfully but I've only heard about 1 Sony alternative and that was for ripping I think and not transferring AFAIK.

I take it you haven't tried iTunes so ! The methods that I mentioed above referres to both ripping and transferring which by the way is only moving files accross to the device.

ZEN

Pacifico

ZENER wrote:

I take it you haven't tried iTunes so !

iTunes does rock!

Bri

The compression rates I saw in a new manual last week went upto about 256 I think so I hope your wrong with the 32 figure. Ouch that would suck.

I've got iTunes (got an iPod member?!) but I meant they suck because of the fact the removal drive option doesn't let u just drop your files yourself. Plus I don't find iTunes that amazing at all - nice to look at but I've just downloaded Winamp again in an effort to just play my music quickly and without fuss. Maybe that's why I'm still drawn back to MDs - I like the control you can have with old-style recording as well as being at the mercy of Sony when using the newer Hi-MDs!

Edit: For instance my iPod was so tempermental with XP that I used a friends Mac and even that had a fair share of problems recognising 2 iPods being connected at any stage and led to many reset iPods. Bah. Yes I am bitter!

On a side note:

Sony has announced plans to address this limitation by releasing a free application in the fall of 2004 called "Wave Converter". According to Sony, the promised application will allow users to export their recordings to WAV format and free them from any and all copyright restrictions. The bottom line is that with the new Hi-MD units, you can upload your recordings via USB, but it will be at least a few months before you'll be able to use them to burn audio CDs or create MP3s.

From: http://www.minidisco.com/digital-upload-note.html

Sounds very unlike them I must say...

ZENER

Bri wrote:

I've got iTunes (got an iPod member?!) but I meant they suck because of the fact the removal drive option doesn't let u just drop your files yourself.

Not quite sure what you mean but it is possible to drag files into the ipod when it's recognised by iTunes in my experience.

Plus I don't find iTunes that amazing at all - nice to look at but I've just downloaded Winamp again in an effort to just play my music quickly and without fuss. Maybe that's why I'm still drawn back to MDs - I like the control you can have with old-style recording as well as being at the mercy of Sony when using the newer Hi-MDs!

Well if MD is how you were brought up then stick with it but you will notice the limitations when the MP3's you download from the net have to be converted before you can play them on it. with regard to connecting the ipod to Mac and PC:

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=60920

Questions 6 and 7 seem applicable to your problems.

One nice feature of iTunes btw is it's ability to share music. This is cool if you have a large computer with all your music on it and a laptop connected to your stereo system with a wifi connection connecting the computers. I have a mac G4 in the attic with about 10GB of music shared through iTunes 4.6 and my iBook and WindowsXP laptops - impresses the sh!t out of visitors

On a side note:
From: http://www.minidisco.com/digital-upload-note.html

Sounds very unlike them I must say...

What ?! . . Sony promote piracy . . never !!

ZEN

Bri

ZENER wrote:

Not quite sure what you mean but it is possible to drag files into the ipod when it's recognised by iTunes in my experience.

True I just find doing it through provided software less appealing because when it works it works grand but if there's less control than say, putting your own directory structure on a zip disk (just an exampe). For instance the iPod might be awkwardly not responding to a previous eject command or not get picked up straight away in iTunes even though Windows (!) managed to get it as connected.

ZENER wrote:

Well if MD is how you were brought up then stick with it but you will notice the limitations when the MP3's you download from the net have to be converted before you can play them on it.

Yeah it is always a personal thing I guess. I have a Sony Car headunit that's quite old and can only read the original MDs, about 400 MDs which is relatively big I guess, and a few other peices of kit. Hence, I figured I'd keep recording good albums onto the original 70/80min discks (no LP used) and then buy about 10 of the Hi-MDs and replacate the best parts of my iPod. If it was good then I'd buy some more. That way I'd just grab what suited on the day and have the rest safe at home (and editable/wipable). It's probably just my experience with HD players but immeadiatley this appeals more than either an iPod or a Sony HD player. Maybe I should just get over it but there ya go! It also means I can continually expand (at a price!).

Thing is I havn't been able to get a clear answer on how the 'grouping' system works on MD. The staff arn't trained well enough to actually know more than the spec and so on and I've had little success online. I gather you don't have the ability to make a directory strcuture or even sort by genre but merely 'bunch' tracks. Anyone got a Hi-MD or even a Net MD who could help me out there? If this element is really crap I might be forced away from MDs. Kicking and screaming of course.

ZENER wrote:

with regard to connecting the ipod to Mac and PC:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=60920
Questions 6 and 7 seem applicable to your problems.

Thanks for that!

ZENER wrote:

One nice feature of iTunes...impresses the sh!t out of visitors

Sounds excellent.

Bri

ZENER wrote:

However converting a CD to MP3 compresses at 11:1 (128Kbps) ATRAC compresses 8:1 (I think) which in theory equates to a 32Kbps approx MP3 or thereabouts - very appealing !!

I've been reading up on this ATRAC vs. MP3 thing (ignoring the time problems associated with conversion):

"MP3's sound quality is far more inferior than MD. MP3 was develop to compress data at the ratio 1:10 ratio. MD's ATRAC technology, on the other hand, was developed for professional music industry and compress sound data in 1:5 ratio by eliminating noises and inaudible frequencies, preserving the dept of sounds. MiniDisc can actually sound better than a CD. MP3 cannot."
(from http://www.minidisct.com/md_vs_all.html)

Am I getting this mixed up? If ATRAC compresses less surely it's better quality than an mp3? I get your earlier point about lack of control, but otherwise - surely it's better in terms of sounds? I read that MD has always worked with ATRAC even before NetMDs: that's how they make them physically smaller than uncompressed CDs...You can buy Sony Discmans (discmen?!) that use ATRAC too - and they offer 132 kbps for definate. Most mp3s off the web are 128 and only higher if your lucky - rarily in VBR too.

In summary, if you rip your own CDs I reckon you can 'MD' 'em at no loss in sound quality. If you d/l with P2P etc. then your screwed regardless and sound quality is the same either way. What do you think? I'm happy to be corrected!

Edit: I've just seen on Amazon that ATRAC3plus can compress @ 256 using Hi-SP mode also. The entire article is actually very interesting (a bit repetitive) listing the following as reasons to pick Hi-MD over HDD:
Unlimited Capacity: where as HDD has a fixed capacity, Hi-MD offers you the flexibility of choosing the capacity you want, from 1GB to 200GB.

Battery Life (removable, longer), Music and Data Recorder (hifi, live, pc, etc), Shareable Media (no fixed capacity & more security in case of damage/loss),
Robust Media (more durable, scratch proof and shock resistant), Sound Quality (I'll let you guys decide on this one) (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/tg/feature/-/528987/ref=br_bx_1_6/026-2166362-3741206)

ZENER

Bri wrote:

I've been reading up on this ATRAC vs. MP3 thing (ignoring the time problems associated with conversion):

"MP3's sound quality is far more inferior than MD. MP3 was develop to compress data at the ratio 1:10 ratio. MD's ATRAC technology, on the other hand, was developed for professional music industry and compress sound data in 1:5 ratio by eliminating noises and inaudible frequencies, preserving the dept of sounds. MiniDisc can actually sound better than a CD. MP3 cannot."
(from http://www.minidisct.com/md_vs_all.html)

ATRAC in theory should sound better than MP3 thats true, as it's a lossy compression (i.e. some of the sound is lost) then an MC copy of a CD contains 5 times less detail than the original CD so I can't see (or hear) how it could sound better than the original !!!

With regards to the quote by me you have used, if you first compress some material using MP3 at 128Kbps or 11:1 and then further compress that material using ATRAC at 5:1 then you have, I think, 16 times less material than you started out with !!! The part I'm a bit hazy on is that if the MP3 has already had removed the "un-needed" sound then whats left for the ATRAC to remove ???

I read that MD has always worked with ATRAC even before NetMDs: that's how they make them physically smaller than uncompressed CDs...You can buy Sony Discmans (discmen?!) that use ATRAC too - and they offer 132 kbps for definate. Most mp3s off the web are 128 and only higher if your lucky - rarily in VBR too.

Yeah ATRAC is what MD was formed with. 132Kbps works out at about 11:1 compression but I think the technology has been improved upon unlike the MP3 format.

In summary, if you rip your own CDs I reckon you can 'MD' 'em at no loss in sound quality. If you d/l with P2P etc. then your screwed regardless and sound quality is the same either way. What do you think? I'm happy to be corrected!

There will be a loss in quality - but otherwise you've got it !

Edit: I've just seen on Amazon that ATRAC3plus can compress @ 256 using Hi-SP mode also. The entire article is actually very interesting (a bit repetitive) listing the following as reasons to pick Hi-MD over HDD:
Unlimited Capacity: where as HDD has a fixed capacity, Hi-MD offers you the flexibility of choosing the capacity you want, from 1GB to 200GB.

Not sure what you mean here, surely a single Hi-MD has a finite capacity i.e. 1GB. The advantage of being able to swap disks makes it attractive if that's what you mean but I don't see any mention in the spec for putting 200GB on a disk !! 256Kbps should sound pretty good but result is less space on the disk for music.

Don't forget that the quoted capacity for HDD players is usually based on 128Kbps encoded songs, say 1000 for the iPod Mini but you will half that if you goto 256Kbps or double it if you can live with 64Kbps quality.

ZEN

Bri

Thanks for the quick reply Zen!

Ok that's got my head around the whole thing a lot more. Fair point about repeated compression leaving you with diddly squat!

The 200GB thing was actually pasted. I guess they mean 200 disks! Infinite size if you have the cash to keep buying them too.

Anyway, thanks again for the feedback.