naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: More on MKH and a little story abt. Nagras

Subject: Re: More on MKH and a little story abt. Nagras
From: "richpeet" <>
Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 05:15:00 -0000
Well I guess I gotta vent a little hear.
As one of the few if not the only guy ever to show up at the LNS 
field class with a consumer MD as his equipment.

Consumer MD equipment far exceeds any cassette out there.

It is not sub-standard and can yield professional results and still 
fit in your shirt pocket.

100% of the time I can get better audio than a phd sitting behind a 
desk with their mkh's while using my little shirt pocket md in a 
swamp.

I bet my consumer md uses a higher bit rate than the hhb portadisk.

Rich Peet

> Certain persons in Cornell tested the very earliest ATRAC, which did
> change the sound in unacceptable ways and declared the technology
> totally useless, and then closed their minds to even testing it 
again.
> I'm not sure they were even open to the technology before testing. 
They
> also raised technical objections that showed a lack of 
understanding of
> the physiology of hearing in vertebrates. And did not relate to what
> ATRAC actually does. Many nature recordists got their start at 
Cornell,
> and tend to not question what they say and give it too much weight 
over
> other sources of information. Ever since, even into this year, 
Cornell
> continued to do the same thing. Their website section on equipment 
has
> had that original report as the entire thing to say about MD all 
this
> time. In most discussions, that report is virtually always quoted to
> show what's wrong with ATRAC. A number of us have tried to 
counteract
> this over the years with some limited success. Each person we get to
> actually seriously try MD generally finds just how wrong Cornell has
> been when it comes to modern ATRAC. Cornell has even gotten into MD 
in a
> very limited way, they were pretty much forced to equip themselves 
to
> handle recordings sent in on MD. But, so far they don't seem to use 
the
> recorders in the field. Stubborn bunch tied to old technology.
> 
> I'm interested in the solid state and microdrive setups for the 
future.
> Right now I feel the cost of media is a big disadvantage. And for 
anyone
> who keeps the actual original recording they are, of course a 
problem
> and will have to be transferred to more durable storage for 
archiving.
> Not a big issue, I keep my original MD disks, but in reality never 
go
> back to them once I've transferred the recordings to aiff files on
> optical disks. I use the PCMCIA type III cards in my digital 
camera, a
> Minolta RD-175, and have yet to have one fail in many years of using
> that, and I understand the microdrives are just as good. I do, of
> course, transfer the photos off disk to optical, generally the same 
day. 
> 
> I expect by the time I manage to wear out my HHb Portadisc there 
will be
> some really good stuff out at reasonable prices. That is assuming 
that
> the music industry does not kill sound recording separate from 
them. Of
> course I may die before the Portadisc wears out. In my experience MD
> recorders are very durable. As is the media. I have no need to 
change now.
> 
> A last note, when I got my first MD, I got it because I considered 
tape
> unreliable and wanted a more durable and reliable storage medium. 
With
> the heat and humidity of Georgia, cassette, or any tape system was
> unreliable. I also wanted to go digital, I was moving from cassette 
and
> reel to reel. I was familiar with optical disks, having used them 
with
> my macs for some time and knew how reliable they are. I agonized 
quite a
> bit over ATRAC, was very mad the recorder did not have a 
uncompressed
> recording mode. I read the Cornell report for the first time back 
then,
> but also read quite a bit that was available that clearly 
demonstrated
> that the report was not longer valid back then. So, with a lot of
> reluctance I bought my first MD, the then just out Sony MZ-R30. The
> excellent recordings I got quickly swept away any fears. And the
> sonograms I did reinforced that this was a quality recording 
system. I
> have never regretted going MD. Who cares if it's compressed, it's
> results that matter.
> 
> Walt
> 



________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU