Mp3 vs Minidisc

  • Thread starter Thread starter SoUlGuY
  • Start date Start date
S

SoUlGuY

New member
Can anybody make a comparison between these 2 formats and decide which format is more superior, sonically?
 
i would assume mini disc has a higher sonic quality , being that it compresses data at a lower rate then mp3 ...but i must ask , why are you comparing mp3 and mini disc ?

- eddie -
 
Just curious. I've heard sound engineers actually making a copy of their trial mixes in minidisc and playing 'em in the car or hi-fi stereos. I was thinking that instead of burning your final mixes on CD (and wasting your CD), you can copy them into either minidisc or mp3 over and over again and listen to them on various hi-fi units ; which boils down to the question on sonic superiority between mp3s and minidisc formats.
 
But if you want to hear what it's going to sound like on CD played on ordinary CD players then you've gotta burn a CD. You can't just mix to .mp3 and say to yourself, "It'll sound even better when I finally burn to CD" even though it might. It'll definitely sound different, that's all. Also you have to specify what bit rate .mp3 you are using. My encoder goes from 16Kbps up to 360Kbps. Major difference in sound between these two ends.

[This message has been edited by drstawl (edited 11-07-1999).]
 
also , prices for blank cd-r's hover around a buck , so it wont break your bank to burn one or 2 rough cut cd's...

- eddie -
 
Thought most are no longer interested in MiniDisc...

The issue with MiniDisc versus MP3 is two-fold. #1. If one is more interested in quantity than audio quality, then MP3 is the way to go. An MP3 player will hold a lot more tunes than an SP mode MiniDisc. #2. If one is more interested in audio quality, then MiniDisc is the way to go. The difference lies in the various compression techniques. Contrary to somewhat popular belief, the original/first MiniDisc format (SP recording mode) was, and still is, superior to MP3 frequency formats. The difference in audio quality is readily noted when comparing the two formats on good quality audio equipment. It's a shame that Sony chose to not make MiniDisc computer-compatible much earlier. Sad.

Medleyman
 
I used to use minidisk for theatre playback and, to my ears, the ATRAC compression they used was noticeably superior to a "typical" 128kbps MP3. However, the thing with MP3 is that you can choose your bit rate and once this goes up, the quality can get a lot closer to minidisk. Once you get above 192kbps the quality is definitely improving...and by 256 or 320 I'd wager it's comparable with minidisk/ATRAC.

Can you tell I'm not an MP3 fan? For a century or so, developments in recording were to improve quality--then along comes MP3 which is to improve quantity at the expense of quality. I seriously wonder, if computer memory and disks had been as cheap 15 years ago as they are now...would anyone have bothered with MP3?
 
Am I reading this Correctly? Is the original post from 1999?
 
Five posts... four of them in this thread. What was the other one?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top