Klarinet Archive - Posting 000377.txt from 2001/11

From: "Benjamin Maas" <benmaas@-----.com>
Subj: RE: [kl] Random bits (long reply)
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 12:59:05 -0500

> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Guy on the Couch [mailto:jnohe@-----.Edu]
>
> Okay, so I'm going to buy a minidisc recorder...(yes yes...I can hear it
> now, "Check the archives!!!")...after hearing it in action several times
> over the past few months (our department head has one), I've decided that
> this really is a tool I can use for myself and my students.

I've written on minidisc several times.... Check the archives for my
thoughts... To give the quick summary though, Minidisc is indeed a cool
tool to have. It has even found its way into some professional
applications. Recording isn't one of them, though. MD is a great
replacement for the cassette but that is the level that I consider it to be
at. Also as far as brands of players go... Buy Sony, not Sharp. The sharp
has this nasty compressor that you can hear pumping. If you want dynamics,
don't buy Sharp.

<<Snippage!>> and now to change over to Mr. Robert Moody:

> << The fact is...I understand what "Line In" means, but I don't understand
> why the "(OPTICAL)" tag was there, and I'm wondering if this
> means that you
> DON'T hook a mic up there...you just hook up the MP3 converter that comes
> with it.>> - da Guy on da Couch
>
> Most of the time with a generic "Line In" marking, you can use
> any means of
> input that has a mini- or full-sized plug like you find on common
> headphones. But since it says "Optical" as well, I'm afraid that you will
> probably not be able to use your microphone directly. Optical usually
> implies the use of fiber optics which, in this case, is major
> over-kill for
> this device. It's a "sound kewl" thing as most people who have
> the ability
> to use optical transfer of information also have the standard
> min- and full
> jack capabilities.

Gotta clear up some mis-information here... Mr. Moody is a tad bit off.
Line in versus Mic In versus Optical In. These are three different kinds of
inputs with their own specific uses. The first I'll hit is the optical
input. This is for inputting a digital signal from another digital device.
This usually (in the world of MD) means a CD player with a Toslink digital
output. The digital signal is converted to light impulses that are carried
down a piece of fiber-optic cable. This is actually a pretty common thing
in professional circles. There are Fiber connections in the pro world that
can deliver up to 8 channels of high bit-rate information (the ADAT
protocol).

Line in vs. mic in... These are not quite as cut and dry, especially in
consumer electronics. Line level is generally a much stronger level of
signal than mic level. The impedance of the inputs is generally different
as well. What does this mean? If you plug a mic into a line in, you won't
get as much signal (as you can't get as much amplification) to your tape as
if you plug the mic into a microphone input. The line level jack is meant
to take an analog output from a consumer device with analog outs on it (ie.
a CD player, Tape deck, etc...)

While you *may* be able to make one of these cheap microphones work with a
line input, I certainly wouldn't recommend it.

> [Note: The reason I say the optical is over-kill for this device
> is that it
> probably cannot record fast enough to make any good use of the speeds the
> optical can deliver. Other, more standard, means of delivery through the
> usual mini-jack connection into/with your "mic" can transfer at
> rates plenty
> fast enough for recording "real-time" which is what I gather you intend to
> do.]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here, but the inputs have NOTHING to
do with speeds of recording.

> In order to input using optical means, you will require having a
> device that
> converts the information to digital AND delivers via fiber optics.

This is pretty much right. You can only feed digital information via the
optical input. In consumer electronics, this is meant to be for making
digital copies of CDs. The advantage of doing this is that you bypass the
recorder's analog to digital converters which are NOT good at all. This can
mean a pretty substantial improvement in sound.

Mini disc employs data compression to fit all that information on a little
disc. This compression is a Lossy compression scheme (much like MP3) which
means that when you expand the data for playback, you will not have an
identical reproduction of the waveform. (this is opposed to MLP or
Merridian Lossless Packaging which is the compression scheme that will be
used for DVD Audio which is a lossless codec.... but I digress) If you are
using substandard A-D converters AND have lossy compression, you won't end
up with a good sound. If you have just the compression, you'll have a
better sound.

> In short...get the cheaper one and get to work. Or..get the "I've got the
> latest and greatest one..nnnnnanaananaaaaa" and figure out a way
> to do what
> you are wanting. :-)

Nope.... I'd say get the more expensive one. If you want to plug a
microphone in and record, you'll need the mic input jack. Sorry to be the
bearer of bad news. If it is a Sharp, though, drop and run. Get the Sony
and when you record, make sure there isn't any "level control" on it.

--Ben

Benjamin Maas
Freelance Clarinetist and Recording Engineer
Los Angeles, CA
benmaas@-----.com
http://www.fifthcircle.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------