Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
DAT vs minidisc
I apologize if this is the wrong newsgroup for a newbie. I want to make
digital recordings from an analog source -- mostly transferring albums and tapes to a lossless digital format. Are there any sound and performance advantages of DAT vs MiniDisc? Thanks in advance! -crabshell |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Crabshell wrote:
I apologize if this is the wrong newsgroup for a newbie. I want to make digital recordings from an analog source -- mostly transferring albums and tapes to a lossless digital format. Are there any sound and performance advantages of DAT vs MiniDisc? Well, MiniDisc isn't lossless. DAT isn't bad, but there's no new equipment being made for the most part. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Crabshell wrote:
I apologize if this is the wrong newsgroup for a newbie. I want to make digital recordings from an analog source -- mostly transferring albums and tapes to a lossless digital format. Are there any sound and performance advantages of DAT vs MiniDisc? DAT is lossless, MD is lossy (ATRAC). |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Dorsey wrote:
Crabshell wrote: I apologize if this is the wrong newsgroup for a newbie. I want to make digital recordings from an analog source -- mostly transferring albums and tapes to a lossless digital format. Are there any sound and performance advantages of DAT vs MiniDisc? Well, MiniDisc isn't lossless. DAT isn't bad, but there's no new equipment being made for the most part. --scott There is a new format Hi-MD using 1GB MD disc which allows Linear PCM for recording. Therefore, the only difference left between Hi-MD and DAT is HiMD is 44.1kHz (same as audio CD), while DAT is 48kHz (same as DVD audio). |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
S O'Neill wrote: Crabshell wrote: I apologize if this is the wrong newsgroup for a newbie. I want to make digital recordings from an analog source -- mostly transferring albums and tapes to a lossless digital format. Are there any sound and performance advantages of DAT vs MiniDisc? DAT is lossless, MD is lossy (ATRAC). The latest generation, Hi-MD, can record 16 bit uncompressed PCM. Info at: http://www.minidisc.org Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Crabshell" wrote in message ... I apologize if this is the wrong newsgroup for a newbie. I want to make digital recordings from an analog source -- mostly transferring albums and tapes to a lossless digital format. Are there any sound and performance advantages of DAT vs MiniDisc? Yes, MiniDisc uses a data-reduction principal (ATRAC) similar to MP3. the sound is inherently compromised. DAT uses linear PCM, and remains on replay pretty much the same quality as the original AD conversion. Ideally .... geoff |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Is there a reason why you don't want to record the records onto a
computer and burn them onto CDRs? Mini Discs and DAT tape are a lot more costly than CDRs, as well. Al On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:12:35 GMT, Crabshell wrote: I apologize if this is the wrong newsgroup for a newbie. I want to make digital recordings from an analog source -- mostly transferring albums and tapes to a lossless digital format. Are there any sound and performance advantages of DAT vs MiniDisc? Thanks in advance! -crabshell |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
play on wrote:
Is there a reason why you don't want to record the records onto a computer and burn them onto CDRs? What's wrong with just putting the records on and listening to them too? I have a Lionel Hampton LP on the Fairchild right now and it sounds just great. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Would I need a high powered audio card to do that?
play on wrote in : Is there a reason why you don't want to record the records onto a computer and burn them onto CDRs? Mini Discs and DAT tape are a lot more costly than CDRs, as well. Al On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:12:35 GMT, Crabshell wrote: I apologize if this is the wrong newsgroup for a newbie. I want to make digital recordings from an analog source -- mostly transferring albums and tapes to a lossless digital format. Are there any sound and performance advantages of DAT vs MiniDisc? Thanks in advance! -crabshell |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Well, MiniDisc isn't lossless.
HiMD is lossless... and the portabel recorders for it are already cheaper than the old ones. A new one might even be cheaper than or same price as a used DAT recorder, that you donīt know much about. DAT isn't bad, but there's no new equipment being made for the most part. which is a big disadvantage as itīs also getting harder to get DAT tapes... There is a new format Hi-MD using 1GB MD disc which allows Linear PCM for recording. Therefore, the only difference left between Hi-MD and DAT is HiMD is 44.1kHz (same as audio CD), while DAT is 48kHz (same as DVD audio). I have used DAT recorders that could handle 44.1 kHz as well... Phil |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Philipp Wachtel wrote:
I have used DAT recorders that could handle 44.1 kHz as well... Phil Not sure what you want to say here. Being able to handle sampling rate of 48kHz is certainly better. 44.1kHz is sufficient to my need though. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:19:20 GMT, crabshell
wrote: Would I need a high powered audio card to do that? No, but you will get better sound with a better card. You don't have to spend too much to get something half decent. Al play on wrote in : Is there a reason why you don't want to record the records onto a computer and burn them onto CDRs? Mini Discs and DAT tape are a lot more costly than CDRs, as well. Al On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:12:35 GMT, Crabshell wrote: I apologize if this is the wrong newsgroup for a newbie. I want to make digital recordings from an analog source -- mostly transferring albums and tapes to a lossless digital format. Are there any sound and performance advantages of DAT vs MiniDisc? Thanks in advance! -crabshell |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 04:16:11 GMT, chris wrote:
Philipp Wachtel wrote: I have used DAT recorders that could handle 44.1 kHz as well... Phil Not sure what you want to say here. Being able to handle sampling rate of 48kHz is certainly better. 44.1kHz is sufficient to my need though. If you plan on burning a CD you are much better off with 44.1 Al |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
crabshell wrote:
Would I need a high powered audio card to do that? You'd *want* one that sounds good, but I'm not quite sure what you mean by "high powered". Unlike (say) video, two track audio just doesn't require that much processing power to simply record[1] or play back. Arny Krueger has a nice list of good-quality audio cards he http://www.pcavtech.com/soundcards/compare/index.htm Some of the cards listed are a few years old, and there are probably some newer cards not listed, but it might give you some useful information anyway. As for software, I haven't used it, there is a 30-day "tryout" version of Adobe Audition available, and I *think* it should be able to do everything you need based on the description of which features are disabled (not many) in the trial version: http://www.adobe.com/products/audition/main.html Hope that helps. - Logan [1] The corollary is that all these super-deluxe consumer sound cards that have been released over the last few years rarely do anything that an SoundBlaster PCI128 doesn't do, except maybe surround sound, which is just the addition of a few more channels. Well, some of them do some 3D audio effects, but most of those effects sound like crud to me. Also, some of them do MIDI in hardware, but these days MIDI can easily be done in software, so that's mostly useless as well... |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
crabshell wrote in news:mUGFd.1851$2e7.1610
@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com: Alas, no turntable in the Honda... If you're going for car sound, the difference between $10K converters and those in your computer will be just about nil. I find that hi-res MP3 is the ideal car format. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Can you correct me if I'm wrong-- it appears to me that the new Hi-MD
still records in a proprietary compression algorithym, but you are able to convert it to a wave file on your computer. If true, that would make it considerably less attractive as a medium, wouldn't it? Bob Cain wrote: S O'Neill wrote: Crabshell wrote: I apologize if this is the wrong newsgroup for a newbie. I want to make digital recordings from an analog source -- mostly transferring albums and tapes to a lossless digital format. Are there any sound and performance advantages of DAT vs MiniDisc? DAT is lossless, MD is lossy (ATRAC). The latest generation, Hi-MD, can record 16 bit uncompressed PCM. Info at: http://www.minidisc.org Bob |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
I find it rather strange-- or is it just me?-- that I can buy a 50 mm
rifle with which I could shoot down a Boeing 747 (at take-off), or penetrate 1/2" steel plate, without much difficulty. But if you buy a minidisk, it is assumed that you are trying to steal music, and therefore hardware inhibit mechanisms must be built in to the device before it can be allowed on the market. Recording engineers need a better lobby. Minidisks don't steal music. People steal music. Sure, get tough on copyright pirates, but I should still be able to walk into a Best Buy, in my recording engineer sweats, with my microphones and pre-amps strung around my neck, and walk out with a minidisk no matter what the guy behind the counter thinks. Or do we need to register minidisk users? Crabshell wrote: I apologize if this is the wrong newsgroup for a newbie. I want to make digital recordings from an analog source -- mostly transferring albums and tapes to a lossless digital format. Are there any sound and performance advantages of DAT vs MiniDisc? Thanks in advance! -crabshell |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
On 2005-01-14, Bill Van Dyk wrote:
I find it rather strange-- or is it just me?-- that I can buy a 50 mm rifle 50mm would be artillery, not a rifle. You must mean 50 calibre, also known as (literally) "armed for bear". with which I could shoot down a Boeing 747 (at take-off), or penetrate 1/2" steel plate, without much difficulty. Don't take for granted what it can do. When I say "armed for bear", I mean it -- 50cal BMG is about what it takes to penetrate a bear skull. 12ga shotgun slug won't do it. .357 magnum won't do it. As far as easily penetrating a 1/2" steel plate, again, don't bet your life on it. But if you buy a minidisk, it is assumed that you are trying to steal music, and therefore hardware inhibit mechanisms must be built in to the device before it can be allowed on the market. I hate the way my minidisc recorder locks me out of my own music that I have composed and performed. I don't think that's right, and in fact, this damned machine has asserted control of my copyrighted materials. I think I should be able to sue Sony over it. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"Bill Van Dyk" wrote in message ... Can you correct me if I'm wrong-- it appears to me that the new Hi-MD still records in a proprietary compression algorithym, but you are able to convert it to a wave file on your computer. If true, that would make it considerably less attractive as a medium, wouldn't it? No, you are wrong. There is a linear PCM mode of operation. geoff |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Van Dyk wrote: Can you correct me if I'm wrong-- it appears to me that the new Hi-MD still records in a proprietary compression algorithym, but you are able to convert it to a wave file on your computer. It just packages it uniquely. The data in the files is truly uncompressed if that's how you record it. The utility doesn't change the data but just the package around it from their .omg file to the standard .wav file. If true, that would make it considerably less attractive as a medium, wouldn't it? Sure would. There is still a gotcha. It is reported that it will allow you to upload (or attempt to upload) only twice before erasing your recording from the disc. Should both uploads fail for whatever reason (system crash, power outage, etc.) your recording is lost. Come to think of it, though, I haven't actually heard anyone who reports this problem say that they pulled the plug part way through the attempts to see if the mark or "erasure" occurs at the start of the transfer or after it is complete. Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Cain writes:
Bill Van Dyk wrote: Can you correct me if I'm wrong-- it appears to me that the new Hi-MD still records in a proprietary compression algorithym, but you are able to convert it to a wave file on your computer. It just packages it uniquely. The data in the files is truly uncompressed if that's how you record it. The utility doesn't change the data but just the package around it from their .omg file to the standard .wav file. If true, that would make it considerably less attractive as a medium, wouldn't it? Sure would. There is still a gotcha. It is reported that it will allow you to upload (or attempt to upload) only twice before erasing your recording from the disc. Should both uploads fail for whatever reason (system crash, power outage, etc.) your recording is lost. Come to think of it, though, I haven't actually heard anyone who reports this problem say that they pulled the plug part way through the attempts to see if the mark or "erasure" occurs at the start of the transfer or after it is complete. Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein Dear Bob, It is hard to defeat Sony's upload limit. Or any other DRM for that matter. It seems to upload about 2/3 the way, then it access/writes the disc, then continues. If you turn on write protect on the disc, the upload won't start at all. The simplest and safest way is to just do realtime transfers. Somehow, via hardware or software, loopback the computer's sound signal from output to input, use Sony's program to play the sound and run a second program to capture. This is realtime, but hey, DAT is no faster! I've tried the upload and then the WAV converter, but they are not all that fast anyway. About twice the speed of realtime. So I just go realtime and have zero risk of losing my data. By the way, I've just bought a used Nomad Jukebox 3, but I haven't even had a chance to use it. The minidisc is just so convenient and portable. No external power or preamps are needed. Richard |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1105658621k@trad... ...any DAT that you buy will be second-hand. These tend to not be maintained so you may have a couple of hundred bucks worth of refurbishment before you can get full performance out of it. That's a point against DAT. A more important one is that for the past five years the only new DAT tapes that have been of high enough quality to not light up my Sony 7030's error lights like a Christmas tree have been made by Fuji. Now that DAT is no longer a major computer backup format while remaining among the most expensive, there is a serious question of reliable DAT tape stock remaining available. -- Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined! 615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Rivers wrote: By the way, what's the media cost on the high resolution Minidisk? How much time (uncompressed) can you record on a blank disk, and how much do blanks cost? If they're cheap, you can just file them like cassettes or CDs, but I don't think they're that cheap yet, so, like with flash card recorders, you're probably compelled (by cost) to just have a few disks and recycle them. Flash cards don't wear out (that we know about anyway) but disks do. They're $7.00 at J&R. For detailed info on capacity at various record modes check out: http://www.minidisc.org/hi-md_faq.html#_q93 For the FAQ main page see: http://www.minidisc.org/hi-md_faq.html Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
On 2005-01-15, Bob Cain wrote:
Flash cards don't wear out (that we know about anyway) but disks do. Flash memory does have a limit on writes. It's not usually a practical issue, but it is enough of a consideration to be a certification problem for flash devices in aviation electronics. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
eBay: Sony MDS-JE630 Minidisc Deck + EXTRAS! | Marketplace | |||
eBay: Sony MDS-JE630 Minidisc Deck + EXTRAS! | Marketplace | |||
eBay: Sony MDS-JE630 Minidisc Deck w/ BONUS EXTRAS | Marketplace | |||
FA: Sony MDS-JE630 Minidisc Deck | Pro Audio | |||
Edirol UA-1A with minidisc? | Pro Audio |