Re: Mini disc

Brian M. Doser (bdoser@WESLEY.IT.EMERSON.EDU)
Thu, 4 Jun 1998 23:29:25 -0400 (EDT)

I just caught part of the thread on Minidisc, and although I'm a great
fan of them and have used the MZ-B3 often I think it's important that
people not think they are "just as good" as a DAT recorder. The
processes are quite different in the way the digital sound is captured
and played back and the frequency response and dynamic range of the
Minidisc do not even compare.
Tha being said I still prefer the Minidisc in situations where
durability is required and the quality need not be that of a DAT, but
better than a cassette. I have had tapes jam in my portable DAT machine
more than once, but have yet to have a Minidisc eaten.
If your doing pro stuff DAT's still the best. Dat's it for now.

Brian M. Doser
My Other Hat Studio
Lynn, MA
Myotherhat@aol.com

[Alan sez: Well put, Brian. Though I did a little bit of research and see
that the new ATRAC chips sample at 20 bit accuracy and, at least
theoretically, may feature a *greater* dynamic range than CD or DAT. The
frequency range of my MZR-30 is 20-20kHz +-3dB. That's not as good as a
DAT, but better than the mikes I record with or the headphones that I
listen thru...

The best suggestion I have for anyone who is considering a MiniDisc is to
listen to it for themselves and let their ears decide. I know people who
think that MiniDisc sounds better than DAT. (I'm not one of them.) I just
found the practicality of the MiniDisc such that I could leave home my DAT,
my Cassette recorder, and my CD player when I went on trips. The media was
tiny and durable and is now finally getting cheap. For anyone who isn't
recording music to be pressed and released commercially, I think that the
MiniDisc deserves serious consideration.]