naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Hi-MD recorders

Subject: Re: Hi-MD recorders
From: Walter Knapp <>
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 17:46:57 -0500
From: Rob Danielson <>

> I was surprised too. In portables supporting electronic file 
> transfer, MD becomes a more competitive "removable" medium maybe only 
> surpassed by larger capacity ide drives that can be taken out and 
> mounted on a pc/mac. What else is lackiing?--preamp quality, 24bit, 
> additional record channels? And the option of non compressed is a big 
> plus. Not sure I agree there are more and more inside recordists on 
> the list, maybe more start up recordists with less experience 
> outside?  Hi-MD is looking like a solid starter investment and that's 
> big for outdoor interests. Rob D.

I certainly agree, it looks that way, and I hope it will work that way.

If you read all the pdf's Sony provides on it one thing you will find is 
that this not only incorporates the older SPDIF copy protection of older 
MD's but additional copy protection similar to the NetMD recorders, and 
maybe still a third level. I did not fully follow all the in's and out's 
of NetMD, but got the impression it did interfere, particularly in 
transfer to the computer. All that is not going to become clear until 
some brave souls buy one and try it. But it might be good to not get 
hopes up too high on these first models. They are definitely not aimed 
at the original recordist.

Of course I'm hoping for a new portadisc model from HHb. Or, even better 
a upgrade path from the current model. But, I'm not holding my breath, 
and will live on even if they don't do that. I do not consider Hi-MD a 
step up in sound quality. More like it will do current sound quality longer.

It's big advantage for those on long trips is in not having to process 
the recordings off the record medium immediately in order to insure 
their safety. In the respect of being a archival medium itself it's got 
it all over a hard drive or solid state. You don't have to get into the 
care and feeding of a laptop or some other machinery on a trip.

I'm very glad to see that a alternative may be available in the future. 
I can survive a long time on my current recorder, but if I live long 
enough I'll probably eventually be in the market again.

I am commenting on what the list discusses, what it get's excited about, 
and what it does not discuss or shows little interest in. Not so much a 
head count as a activity count. The easy way to see the difference is to 
go back and read the early threads in the group. You will find a 
considerable difference. I do believe that the proportion of the 
membership that's new to nature recording is a whole lot higher than 
those early days. But, I also believe that a large proportion of those 
came into the group from inside recording and carry a lot of those 
habits with them. Nature recording is a different thing, and a lot of 
those habits and ideas may not be appropriate. Or, at minimum are a 
different type of nature recording.

We talk about machines doing perceptual encoding. So do recordists, in 
how they record, their expectations of recordings, they do perceptual 
encoding modifications that are easy to hear and demonstrate. Using the 
indoor recording methods and standards is perceptual encoding. It is 
well to be aware of this and make decisions as to what encoding you do, 
you will do some form.

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