This is topic MD compression and sound quality in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=001199
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 08-28-2002, 08:34 PM:
Whereas a CD is 650MB, IIRC, an MD is only 120. So, it would stand to reason that audio gets considerably compressed to make an entire audio CD fit onto an MD. If that's true, it would stand to reason that the quality would be considerably less than the original CD.So, how close am I to the truth? I know that MiniDisc is supposed to be true CD quality. But then again, most people think that MP3's are, and we know they are not. So, what really is the quality of MD?
It would also stand to reason that audio has to be compressed even further when recording in MDLP mode, since you can fit twice the audio (or four times with MDLP4) on a single disc. Does the quality suffer even more in that case?
What I'd really like to know is how does an original CD compare to a copy of that CD recorded
- using an analog connection
- using an optical digital connection
- using MDLP
- using MDLP4
Unfortunately, I can't test this myself because my CD player does not have a digital line out, and my MiniDisc recorder doesn't support MDLP. Any info anyone has would be greatly appreciated. I've really been wondering this stuff for a long time.
------------------
This one time, at Projection Camp, I stuck a xenon bulb....
Posted by Josh Jones (Member # 447) on 08-28-2002, 08:40 PM:
MD's sound very good, partly because the use a compression algorythm that if I'm not mistaken, Dolby developed. Avoid the MDLP feature. I dont really notice a quality degrading on MDLP2 but the MDLP4 is pure shit, so I've enver used it. Avoid sony, they are too flimsy and dont hold up that well. I had one I went running with for about 6 months and after that the antiskip lost its edge. The G-protection they put in those units now is very good, I have yet to hear mine skip.
as for the various recording options, it doesnt make much difference, unless you pick up hum or something.
Josh
------------------
"Film is made of silver, video is made of rust"
'nuf said
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 08-30-2002, 01:48 PM:
I always though Sony was the best. But I don't go running with my player. Actally, the one I'm currently using is a Sharp, but that's only because it was on sale.C'mon, guys! I know Josh isn't the only one here who uses MiniDiscs. What do the rest of you have to say?
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 08-30-2002, 02:49 PM:
I agree with all of the positive comments about the sound quality of Mini Discs but Sony's quality standards SUCKS when it comes to their portable MD and CD players! It does not matter if the procuct was made in Japan, Hong Kong or elsewhere, they still suck! Another thing I dislike about Sony's MD players is their inability to listen to music louder than the maximum sound level of the player. The sound level is kind of ok on their crappy headsets but it is very soft when I use my Bose acoustic noise cancelling headset. Although the volume control on Sony's portable CD players is better than their MD players, my Sony portable CD player 'died' after only three months of use 
-Claude
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 08-30-2002, 03:05 PM:
Now that I had expressed my opinion about how bad Sony's MD & DVD players are, I was wondering if all of you who have a MD player know that there are 80 minute discs available. I have found the 74 minute discs was fine when recording most movie soundtracks and 'New Age" music but was much too short when I record many classical music Cds especially operas which I love very much. With the 80 minute disc I can record an entire CD no matter how long it is because that it the maximum amount of program content they hold. -Claude
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 08-30-2002, 04:31 PM:
I use the 80 minute discs, too. If a CD will fit on a 74, I use that. If not, I use the 80. Also, when I am making custom mixes, I use 80's since I can get two or three more songs on a disc.
Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 08-30-2002, 06:21 PM:
The Sony MD uses a lossy coding technology called ATRAC (Adaptive Transformitive Acoustic Coding) to reduce the amount of digital data from standard PCM. Incidentally, ATRAC is also employed in SDDS, only for SDDS they use a more complex version of ATRAC than for MD. ATRAC is too complicated to explain in a few words, but I am sure you can easily find detailed information on the net.
Check this URL: www.minidisc.org/aes_atrac.html
You can also find information about MiniDisc and some links on www.howstuffworks.com. It´s a bit simplistic but still a good introduction. I suppose there will be some information on the Sony website, though I haven`t checked.
Michael
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 08-30-2002, 11:19 PM:
I was talking to a Sony technician who was assisting us with the install of the 6th or 7th SDDS unit in the country (Ian help me out here if you're reading this... which SDDS did the Greenwood get?). Anyway the tech told me that SDDS uses ATRAC 2.0, same as MiniDisc, but operates differently in that it can have 6 or 8 full discrete channels, along with an MDLP4-type back up track. He did not actually use the term "MDLP4" since that was not available at the time, but that's what it sounds like to me. Minidisc is up to ATRAC 4.x I think. My Kenwood has ATRAC 4.5. Of course that is only for encoding... it can be played back on any MD player. Sharp MD recorders do not officially use ATRAC but their own compatible codec which is more or less the same.I agree that the Sony players suck much ass. They are way too quiet, no matter what type of headphones you use. The Sharp portable I have plays at sufficient volumes and sounds better than any other MD player I have ever heard bar none. The Sony's are designed to break down so that you buy more units. The same can be said for PlayStation and PlayStation 2 videogame consoles. A programmer for Capcom of Japan (the creator of the "Resident Evil" series, in fact) even said that publicly on the radio about Sony. Just buy another brand.
As far as copying from analog or digital, I do prefer digital, but analog can be very good as well if you have a good connection. You just record any noise that may or may not be present in the line. I wouldn't freak out about it if you are forced to record in analog... you actually have more control over the volume and such when you do. It is unlikely that you will notice the difference unless you do countless A/B comparisons.
MD's really missed the boat when Zip discs were popular.
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 08-31-2002, 12:29 PM:
Does anyone know the audio bitrates (and compression types) used by the music only channels on digital satellite dishes? The audio quality seems pretty comparable to MP3, but not quite as good as a real CD. My Yamaha RX-V995 receiver has a number of digital output jacks on it, including one specifically for MiniDisc players. I'm wondering what kind of results I can expect from hooking up a portable MD unit to the receiver.Also, is there any way to interface an MD player to output audio into a computer's sound card or specialty audio capture card?
Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 08-31-2002, 12:43 PM:
I am going to play devil's advocate here and say that I disagree with the earlier post on MP3 is not as good as cd. It really all depends on the codec you use and the compression you use. In fact, you can get very close to the cd that the human ear will not be able to detect a difference, regardless of the system it is played on.I know that the discussion is mini disc, but I had to chime in on the defense of mp3. I use the latest Fraunhoffer codecs and use a high vbr bitrate. It gives a file size about twice that of the normal mp3, but the quality is much much better.
Dave
Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 08-31-2002, 12:51 PM:
I've yet to hear an MP3 that I thought was listenable too, but I'm always willing to try.I too love MD. I don't have a portable, I have a full size Sony deck, packed with features, and all of them useful, which is unusual. Co-ax and optical digital in and out too! Was ridiulously cheap considering eveything it does and how good it sounds.
Posted by Josh Jones (Member # 447) on 08-31-2002, 02:07 PM:
Before my deck had the USB interface, I'd use the optical out on my creative soundcard to record stuff. Worked really well, and when the Sony software(which sucks major ass BTW) crashes, that's my default method.I'll look for a short clip on my computer and post it to show how good high rate MP3's can sound.
Josh
Posted by Josh Jones (Member # 447) on 08-31-2002, 02:14 PM:
See what you think of this one....
((click hear 
)) Josh
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 08-31-2002, 04:27 PM:
Sounds good... I just can't place the videogame that you took that from. It's driving me crazy!Edit: It's not a video game it's Princess Mononoke. You do realize they are coming out with Princess Stereonoke, correct? Actually the Princess Mononoke soundtrack did have some hiss and noise in it on many tracks. Not exactly the best recording ever.
Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 08-31-2002, 06:40 PM:
I have always been very impressed with MD audio quality.
Posted by Josh Jones (Member # 447) on 08-31-2002, 07:00 PM:
Overall, I thought that soundtrack was quite good. The original japanese disk is probably the best source to compare, I had the american version, But I still think it sounds quite good. Classical music really isnt the best way to torture the MPEG format, rock is. That is where I notice the most difference, especially in the upper treble.Josh
Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 08-31-2002, 07:32 PM:
Josh, Sibilance? I thought that was a bad side effect in MPEG formats to begin with.
Claude, how old is your MD unit, and what was the model number? I bought my first one about 11 years or so ago. It was a great sounding unit, and when I used it with my Audio Technica mixer board, that thing kicked butt! Problem is, it died only because I had to take it apart to retrieve my disk. It was about three years old when I tossed the MD unit in the trash. The second one I got didn't like to be bounced around that much. It was just too small. It was about 3 inches square, and about 1/2 inch thick. It opened like a clamshell. The third one could stand up to severe vibrations without too much trouble. 
The big problem I see with the MD Recorder/Players is contamination from the atmosphere, smog, and general dirt and dust that can easily find its way when it is opened to change disks.
A small piece of dirt in the MD recorder/player is comparable to a peanut butter & jelly sandwich being stuffed into a VCR. 
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-01-2002, 01:55 AM:
I still own the Sony MZ-1, which was actually a good unit since it was the first MiniDisc player/recorder ever made, and therefore Sony was trying to promote the coolness of the new format instead of their usual antics. The unit no longer works. It will accept and eject a disc but cannot play it. It has a giant rechargable NiCd battery with an amazing 1 hour life. The thing sounded really good. It was the only portable unit I have ever seen that offered digital optical in AND out. Most Sony units only offer digital in, even on their decks. The Kenwood is cool since it offers TOS-link optical digital AND coaxial digital in AND out. I like coaxial better... cheaper cable (you can use ANY RCA type cable) and less jitter in the digital signal.
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 09-01-2002, 02:06 AM:
Paul: 11 years ago!?? I didn't think MD was round back then!! It must have been in its infancy, and damned expensive, too!Joe: I saw the MZ-1 on display at Sony Wonder in NYC. I thought to myself: "Holy shiot! That thing's as big as a portable CD player! Why would anyone want it!?" But I suppose that's because I'm used to today's disc-sized players. Even so, if the player is the same size, I guess I'd rather cary around one that could play and record MD's, rather than just play CD's.
My Sony MDS-JE510 deck offers optical digital in and out. Never used it, though, because my CD player doesn't have digital out. But you're right about the portables: I don't think I've ever seen one that has digital out. My Sharp 702 portable recorder has digital in only. So do all the ones (I think) currenty offered on minidisco.com.
Which came first: optical digital or coax digital? In either case, why was the second one invented?
Sorta getting back to my original question: So we all agree that MD sound quality rocks! If it uses compression, and MP3's use compression, why do MP3's not sound as good as a CD?
Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 09-01-2002, 02:10 AM:
Joe, that was the same model I had. At the time mine died, Sony offered a flat rate of 200 bucks to repair it. I sent it in, and I received a note from them saying that I screwed it up really bad. It was still repairable, but they could not do it and guarantee it at the same time. So, I elected to throw it away. Yours still might be repairable. Price might be different, but that thing is so cool that it might be worth taking a look at and consider having it repaired. I would presume it depends on the availability of parts.
Yeah, Ken. That thing costed me about 625 bucks then....
Posted by Bernard Tonks (Member # 809) on 09-01-2002, 06:12 AM:
I installed two Sony MD machines at my cinema when they first came out, only updating once to the MDS-JE530. Recording appropriate music suitable for the film, often from CDs of the soundtrack, was far better than programming up a CD for each showing, particularly if you wanted to use a 2 box set or other CDs as well. Recordings were made from a good Marantz CD-63 mark II player. I just love all the editing features that MD audio format offers.It is now all connected up in my home along with a Revox A77 mk4 open reel, and I won’t part with any of it.
Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 09-01-2002, 11:06 AM:
XM wrote:
>So we all agree that MD sound quality rocks! If it uses compression, and
>MP3's use compression, why do MP3's not sound as good as a CD?Well if it's not the same compression then it is bound to sound different and also, such flaws as each scheme has may show up on different types of material. I've never used MD. Is it actually better at comparable compression rate & file size? Is there a software implementation of ATRAC?
Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 09-01-2002, 12:43 PM:
When it comes to mp3's, most people encode them at a cbr of 128. I use a 2-pass vbr of 128-320, with a high frequency filter. The nomal mp3 file takes up a meg or two, while the majority of mine take up about 5-8 megs. The sound quality is excellent, and have used them on high wattage systems with no discernable distortion or sound degradation.Like I pointed out, it is in the encoding process where you lose it. Most people can't tell the difference of the crappy mp3's you are referring to. We all seem to. That is why I don't encode that way.
I never got into MD. Mostly because I didn't see a need to. I know they have excellent quality, but I feel that I can match it.
Dave
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 09-01-2002, 01:23 PM:
Although I do not like Sony's portable MD players because of their low volume control and poor workmanship, I have had absolutely no problem with their home deck I have been using to record my minidiscs. The MD deck I have was the top of Sony's regular line when I bought it about three years ago. It is the MDS JB920 and has almost all of the features that was on their more expensive ES model. Recording on it is very simple because the MD deck is a part of my home theatre system and it sits right on top of another excellent Sony product, my long lasting DVD-S3000 dvd player. With a digital cable from the DVD player connected to the MD deck, it is very easy to record music from my CDs on to a minidisc. The nice thing I like about my MD deck is the ability to list selection titles on to the discs.-Claude
Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 09-01-2002, 08:01 PM:
Hey Dave,
why do take the trouble at all to encode to mp3 when at your compression rate you approach the data rate (10MB/min) of uncompressed PCM, or at best you save 50% data which doesn`t make so much sense to me, since recordable cds are so cheap these days?
Michael
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-02-2002, 08:03 PM:
The problem I have with many MP3 files is most are encoded at a low 128kb/s bitrate. Even with the best codecs, I can easily tell the difference between that file and a full LPCM CD quality bitstream. Yet many encoders claim 128kb/s to be "CD Quality". 
. 192kb/s is a little better, but it sounds the same to me as DD 2.0 at 192kb/s. With a good codec and a higher bitrate (in the 256kb/s to 320kb/s neighboorhood) the MP3 will stand up well to a CD original in comparisons.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-02-2002, 08:41 PM:
What's the best MP3 encoding software? I've only personally used the "LAME" encoder, which is freeware, but I'm told that some of the commercial encoders are significantly better. On the other hand, stuff encoded with LAME sounds better than many of the mp3 files that I've heard that were encoded with other software (not sure what).As for MD--I've not had much experience with the format, but one place where I run 16mm film sometimes has a pair of Denon MD-Cart machines, which are presumably the modern-day equivalent to the standard radio-style cart machine. It seems like a great idea for sound effects for live theatre productions (which is what they are used for).
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 09-02-2002, 09:28 PM:
Does anyone have any comments about the Apple iPod? The original 5 GB iPod model is still available at a hundred dollars cheaper than it was when the system was first introduced late last year. There are now two more models beside the original iPod with higher capacity. One has 10GB of storage capacity and the top of the line has 20Gb. How is the sound quality of iPod compared to the sound from a MD? I would like to buy one but do not know what model to buy. I am kind of leaning to the least expensive 5GB model but I dont want to regret later when I am faced with the need for more storage space. I have a new G4 imac and downloading music from that computer will be a breeze.-Claude
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-02-2002, 11:16 PM:
Isn't the iPod simply a device for playing MP3 files? I haven't read up on the thing and whether it can play full LPCM tracks or audio in other formats like Dolby Digital AC-3 (remember Liquid Audio?). At any rate, it would seem the primary determining factor of audio quality would be the compressed file itself that you are playing. A poorly encoded MP3 is going to sound like crap on an iPod just like it will sound like crap on a Rio player or any other portable digital music device.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-03-2002, 12:18 AM:
While Scott is asking what is the best mp3 encoder, I will ask what is the best mp3 decoder (to wav)? Winamp used to have this built into their player and it made excellent conversions (given the source material), but all of their latest "upgrades" no longer have it.
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-03-2002, 02:44 AM:
The answer to Brad's question is "SoundApp PPC". Too bad it's not available on Windows!
Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 09-03-2002, 09:00 AM:
In answer to an earlier question as to why I bother with MP3 conversion if my file sizes are so big they get close to the original LPCM file, actually, they are considerably smaller. While most mp3 conversions by the average user get to nearly 20/1 compression, I usually reach a 8/1 compression, not the 2/1 compression thought.
The commercial packages allow for greater flexibility. I have heard both complaints and praises of just about all of the codecs, so it really is all up to the end user.
Dave
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-03-2002, 05:09 PM:
MP3 music files encoded at a high, yet superior, bitrate like 320kb/s will commonly result in file sizes around 8MB to 12MB depending on song length. That is a big savings considering an average length song in full LPCM 2.0 will gobble around 50MB of disc space.With hard discs boasting giant capacities, CD-Rs being cheap and even portable music players having lots of disc space, I think it is kind of silly to encode MP3 files at rates as low as 128kb/s like most people do.
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 09-03-2002, 05:36 PM:
Another MD question. Minidisco.com sells alot of portables from Japan. What do you guys think about these models?
Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 09-06-2002, 08:19 AM:
I have noticed fewer and fewer MD units in stores. Best Buy had none in the stores and the discs are only in one place. Other retailers are similar. Is this a dying or dead format? Looks like it to me.
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 09-06-2002, 11:35 AM:
Sharp and Sony keep coming out with new models every few months. MD doesn't seem too popular, but it certainly isn't dead. Seems like is has sort of a "cult following." Check out www.minidisco.com for all your MiniDisc needs.
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 09-06-2002, 01:13 PM:
I will still continue to use my minidisc player only when I go to the gym for workouts. For all of my other portable music needs, I have decided to purchase and use a Mac iPod. I just ordered the standard 5GB model yesterday from a friend who is a Mac dealer here in Honolulu and he told me that the same iPod he personally use is better than minidisc because of the different compresson setting I can use to download music from Cds on my new G4 iMac. When recording from the lowest compression level, I was told that the sound quality will be almost as good as the original CD. At the next level, the quality will be better than a minidisc and set at the highest compression setting I will get sound one would get from a standard brand audio cassette minus the hiss because the iPod records in digital. Set at the lowest level, I can dowload about seven CDs. The next level should allow me to download about 16 and double that at the highest level.-Claude
Posted by Chris Markiewicz (Member # 1415) on 09-06-2002, 07:08 PM:
First post, having been lurking for a while. MD and CD-R are common with touring live dance and theatre shows. Several dance companies we have booked for this season are requesting MD playback for music and effects. MD has largely replaced DAT, despite the lossy compression.
Posted by Jeff Skallan (Member # 891) on 12-02-2002, 12:40 AM:
Some time ago, I snatched up a pair of Sony earbud headphones, model MDRE888SP from www.minidisco.com and was astonished by the sound quality! They fit so comfortably inside my ears that while listening to music I often forget that I have them in. I've even been out mountain biking with them and never had them fall out.
I listen to my MD portable nearly everyday at work while threading the first set of shows, but now I have a problem. I accidentally stepped on one of the buds and it is crushed beyond repair. ![[Mad]](mad.gif)
Being that I love these things, I wouldn't think twice about buying a new pair for $75, but before I take the plunge, does anyone know of any outstanding in-ear phones to recommend?
Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 12-02-2002, 12:53 AM:
![[Smile]](smile.gif)