Article View: rec.audio.misc
Article #22Re: Best Recordable Port'MD Player?
From: Johan Haspeslagh
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 00:00
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 00:00
35 lines
2663 bytes
2663 bytes
Giles wrote: .... > They might be buying up MDs fast in Japan but sales are stagnant or > falling elsewhere . I have seen posts from people in the US who want > to know where they can obtain blank disks because stores are not > stocking them anymore due to low sales of the players and disks. .... > Why is MD better for home listening? The format uses compression > that discards a large part of the original information that one > supposedly can't hear. Using Low-Fi headphones or speakers maybe but > using good headphones I certainly can hear the difference. The sound > quality of MD is inferior to that of DAT. ... How did you do your test ? What are the differences you perceived ? I did tests on a DCC (which uses the highest quality MPEG I compression) and I could never be sure that there was really a difference. If there is a difference it is really minor. > I will grant you that DAT is theoretically prone to tape/head wear but > it has not been noticeable to me as yet. I think I would grow tired > of the music before a tape had audible wear. I saw a post by someone > who played the same DAT tape every night to go to sleep to and had > played it several thousand times with no audible degradation in sound > quality. If this is typical I don't think tape wear is a real issue. Are there any hard numbers on tape-wear somewhere ? greetings Johan
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<32DCE9E8.167EB0E7@rc.bel.alcatel.be>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<Pine.OSF.3.91.970110151227.22197G-100000@godiva> <32d8399a.2908168@news.uwa.edu.au> <32d8866d.86394698@nntp.ix.netcom.com> <32dadd06.6281113@news.uwa.edu.au>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f749a,4a56868ab364f8db X-Google-Attributes: gidf749a,public X-Google-Thread: 109f11,4a56868ab364f8db X-Google-Attributes: gid109f11,public X-Google-Thread: 147b40,4a56868ab364f8db X-Google-Attributes: gid147b40,public X-Google-Thread: 10d85e,4a56868ab364f8db X-Google-Attributes: gid10d85e,public X-Google-Thread: 108c0a,4a56868ab364f8db X-Google-Attributes: gid108c0a,public X-Google-Thread: fb1f8,4a56868ab364f8db X-Google-Attributes: gidfb1f8,public X-Google-Thread: 10238b,4a56868ab364f8db X-Google-Attributes: gid10238b,public From: Johan Haspeslagh <haspeslj@rc.bel.alcatel.be> Subject: Re: Best Recordable Port'MD Player? Date: 1997/01/15 Message-ID: <32DCE9E8.167EB0E7@rc.bel.alcatel.be> X-Deja-AN: 209974832 references: <Pine.OSF.3.91.970110151227.22197G-100000@godiva> <32d8399a.2908168@news.uwa.edu.au> <32d8866d.86394698@nntp.ix.netcom.com> <32dadd06.6281113@news.uwa.edu.au> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Alcatel Telecom Research Division mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.opinion,no.audio,fj.rec.av,aus.hi-fi,red.audio.hight-end,rec.audio.tech x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3_U1 sun4m)