My sister needs to record her own violin play and has given me the task
of finding a suitable set of hardware . First it seemed that a
portable MD player like the Sony MZ-N710 would be the obvious choise.
Then I learned that it's really problematic to transfer the result to a
computer. One can't copy the tracks directly and no MD portable has
a digital out so one has to use the line out and plug it into the
soundcar resulting in two AD conversions (first from the mic to the MD
player then from MD player to the hardisk).

So can one use a MP3 player? Apparently there are some with a mic in and
in these one can transfer the result (the files) directly to a computer
through USB(2) connection.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/...316605-7219852

Still it seems that most people are using MD
portables for recording. Why? Is the AD conversion in mp3 players crappy
compared to MD players? Or is the resulting audio quality weaker for
some other reasons? Any help appreciated.

--

"Tamim" wrote in message


My sister needs to record her own violin play and has given me the
task of finding a suitable set of hardware . First it seemed that a
portable MD player like the Sony MZ-N710 would be the obvious choise.
Then I learned that it's really problematic to transfer the result to
a computer. One can't copy the tracks directly and no MD portable has
a digital out so one has to use the line out and plug it into the
soundcard resulting in two AD conversions (first from the mic to the MD
player then from MD player to the hardisk).

So can one use a MP3 player? Apparently there are some with a mic in
and in these one can transfer the result (the files) directly to a
computer through USB(2) connection.


http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/...316605-7219852

This is a top unit, much more than just a portable MP3 player.

Still it seems that most people are using MD
portables for recording. Why? Is the AD conversion in mp3 players
crappy compared to MD players?

No, portable hard drive recorders are relatively new, while MD has been
around for years.

Or is the resulting audio quality weaker for some other reasons?

Convenience and resistance to change are the more likely explanations.

Any help appreciated.

As always you can't judge sound quality by class of device, but you can get
some clues about basic limits of the technology that is used.

Any lossy compression scheme whether it is MP3 or ATRAC (MD) runs the risk
of audible sound quality losses, Things get worse when you cascade lossy
compression schemes, such what happens when you record your master with MD
and then later distribute your music as MP3s.

Given a reasonable opportunity to avoid lossy compression with a reasonable
amount of effort and cost, most picky listeners will chose to avoid lossy
compression.

The iRiver IHP-120 you cite happily records in formats that are not
lossy-compressed. IOW it records uncompressed .wav files. Front-end it with
a portable mixer with mic preamps like the Behringer MXB 1002, and you're
stylin'

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Tamim" wrote in message


My sister needs to record her own violin play and has given me the
task of finding a suitable set of hardware . First it seemed that a
portable MD player like the Sony MZ-N710 would be the obvious choise.
Then I learned that it's really problematic to transfer the result to
a computer. One can't copy the tracks directly and no MD portable has
a digital out so one has to use the line out and plug it into the
soundcard resulting in two AD conversions (first from the mic to the MD
player then from MD player to the hardisk).

So can one use a MP3 player? Apparently there are some with a mic in
and in these one can transfer the result (the files) directly to a
computer through USB(2) connection.



http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/...316605-7219852

This is a top unit, much more than just a portable MP3 player.

Still it seems that most people are using MD
portables for recording. Why? Is the AD conversion in mp3 players
crappy compared to MD players?

No, portable hard drive recorders are relatively new, while MD has been
around for years.

Or is the resulting audio quality weaker for some other reasons?

Convenience and resistance to change are the more likely explanations.

Any help appreciated.

As always you can't judge sound quality by class of device, but you can
get
some clues about basic limits of the technology that is used.

Any lossy compression scheme whether it is MP3 or ATRAC (MD) runs the risk
of audible sound quality losses, Things get worse when you cascade lossy
compression schemes, such what happens when you record your master with MD
and then later distribute your music as MP3s.

Given a reasonable opportunity to avoid lossy compression with a
reasonable
amount of effort and cost, most picky listeners will chose to avoid lossy
compression.

The iRiver IHP-120 you cite happily records in formats that are not
lossy-compressed. IOW it records uncompressed .wav files. Front-end it
with
a portable mixer with mic preamps like the Behringer MXB 1002, and you're
stylin'


Could you imagine Arny "stylin'"?




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---