IDM Mailing Archive

on the subject of minidisic what do other people think of the quality of Minidisc - i've tried recording some tracks onto it thru line ins on my portable sony minidisc and found that the compression system didn't handle fast transients or wide frequency ranges very well. Gave an interesting effect but didn't sound like the original tracks

quoted 46 lines -----Original Message-----

> -----Original Message----- > From: Aca [SMTP:eclaca@lucs-01.novell.leeds.ac.uk] > Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 1998 8:47 AM > To: idm@hyperreal.org > Subject: (idm) nu __ge[minidi]scom > > > From: multsanta@juno.com (mult santa) > > Subject: (idm) nu __ge[minidi]scom > > > > just some more dada i snipped from the mdos catalog:: > > > > Gescom: > > 'MiniDisc' MD > > Only 3 > > OR > > 45 tracks: 67:07:00 > > Bar Code: 5027803330320 > > Without wanting to start a crazy 'MiniDisc' thread, I must say that > this is the most interesting & exciting thing I've heard about for > quite a while. I've been a huge MiniDisc fan for about a year now. > Let's hope more artists take up the idea. > > > "This is the first ever MiniDisc only release" > > (Alan Phillips, Sony Software) > > "MiniDisc is very important to me. I've got > > MiniDisc in the car, MiniDisc at home and > > MiniDisc in the studio. I'm always checking > > mixes and its a great way to do it. And I love > > the way you can change things around - moving > > track marks and even entire tracks. And > > whatever anyone says, I reckon it sounds every > > bit as good as CD." > > Excellent quote. Spot on. > The track listing looks wicked too. I particular like: > > > 46-interchangeable world > > 67-squashed to pureness > > When exactly is it due out? > > Cheers, > Aca > > Rare IDM Auction: http://www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~eclaca/auction.htm

David Hodgson wrote:

quoted 2 lines on the subject of minidisic

> on the subject of minidisic > what do other people think of the quality of Minidisc

All compression is evil. Everyone should buy vinyl as their TOP priority! Goddard once said that film was truth 24 frames per second. Actually we all know that film could not possibly be TRUTH, and in fact Goddard was commenting on how easy it is to lie with film. Digital recording is the same! It can not possibly do music justice even if the sampling rate is above our "comprehensable" rate and the bit depth is "enough for us not to tell the difference"... It is still digitized and therefore not the pure sound. If you add digital compression into the picture this problem is ESCELATED! At the same time, I do admit that I own a CD player and own quite a few CD's. Their portability is invaluable for on-the-road listening (in the car, snowboarding, biking, running...). However, in these settings the all the background noise renders perfect reproduction unimportant. I know I am in the minority here, but I own a Technics 1200 with an Ortofon needle and a JBL power amp and JBL studio monitors. While, these are not the finest nor the top of the line pieces, I can DEFINATELY hear the suberp sound quality and dynamic range that I get out of vinyl over my CD player plugged into the same system. Albeit, I don't have a top quality CD player but for the $500 price tag of the turntable + the needle vs. the $500 price tag of my CD player I CAN tell which is better. Obviously this is my very biased analog junkie opinion. -rbcIII robot

quoted 6 lines these are not the finest nor the top of the line pieces, I can

> these are not the finest nor the top of the line pieces, I can > DEFINATELY hear the suberp sound quality and dynamic range that I get > out of vinyl over my CD player plugged into the same system. Albeit, I > don't have a top quality CD player but for the $500 price tag of the > turntable + the needle vs. the $500 price tag of my CD player I CAN tell > which is better.

a cd, which is (given good mastering) an exact digital copy of the dat tape that left the studio, or vinyl, which has been converted from dat to analogue, cut with a lathe into a piece of metal, then pressed into a piece of soft plastic, then tracked through a dust filled groove with a diamond connected to a magnet, then put through an riaa equaliser, before you hear the end result. which did you say sounds better? cd sounds 'better'. but i still love vinyl. one of those things <waves>

On 22 Apr 98, siliconvortex wrote

quoted 1 line a cd, which is (given good mastering) an exact digital copy

> a cd, which is (given good mastering) an exact digital copy

There you said it "DIGITAL". All cut up into millions of little bits and jammed back together, not one smooth sound curve. It samples at 44 thousand.1 times per second....

quoted 5 lines or vinyl, which has been converted from dat to analogue, cut with

> or vinyl, which has been converted from dat to analogue, cut with > a lathe into a piece of metal, then pressed into a piece of soft > plastic, then tracked through a dust filled groove with a diamond > connected to a magnet, then put through an riaa equaliser, before > you hear the end result. which did you say sounds better?

It's not quite as simple as that. The actual vinyl has "give" in it, meaning that the walls of the vinyl contract and expand - causing a certain amount of compression that happens in the vinyl itself which sounds attractive to the human ear. It's called "Wellie" (coming from the visual image of a kick up the bum with a wellington boot). If you go above clip in digital you get a terrible distortion but in any analogue medium it givies it more 'wellie'. That's why certain recording artists deliberately go from their digital master onto 1/2" analogue tape to saturate the tape which gives it a much better "warmer" sound - and then transfer it to CD from THAT. And many rock artists only record directly to analogue multi-track tape and then use the Apogee UV22 process to achieve analogue-like "warmth" on CD. The mastering process on the CD is the most important : there is a *big loss* between original analog mastering to digital - unless 24-bit mastering is used (which is already available). A well-mastered vinyl 12" can contain harmonics up to 30 kHz, which would be chopped dead on CD at 20 kHz. Brick wall. I * np : The Black Dog Live In Toronto (*** thanks!!)

quoted 1 line a cd, which is (given good mastering) an exact digital copy

> > a cd, which is (given good mastering) an exact digital copy

[of a DAT]

quoted 3 lines There you said it "DIGITAL". All cut up into millions of little

> There you said it "DIGITAL". All cut up into millions of little > bits and jammed back together, not one smooth sound curve. > It samples at 44 thousand.1 times per second....

well this isn't exactly accurate but i know what you mean. by the way you misunderstood me - i was making the point on the basis that the master tape is on DAT (which almost all recordings are made onto). so there is no point telling anyone that vinyl sounds better than cd for the vast majority of recordings because the cd is (or should be) an identical copy of the DAT master, down to the last bit. and of course i take sounding 'better' to mean sounding as close to the original as possible. but i still love vinyl..

quoted 1 line If you go above clip in digital you get a terrible distortion

> If you go above clip in digital you get a terrible distortion

this is not always the case, in moderate clipping the waves are simply squared off, not bounced from 32768 to -32768 <waves>

<snip, minidisc, vinyl and cd (and every other medium)> people! can't we all just get along...? :-) ObIDM: i think i finally understand black dog's 'music for adverts' when i bought it, i thought it was shit, but kept it anyway 'cause a friend of mine said its the most original hip-hop album in the 90s (or something)... i think he was right... :spacecake: