yamaha md8

  • Thread starter Thread starter triple
  • Start date Start date
Re: tO cONTINUE...

I agree with all of the above and that md is still a great media -- good quality and easy to handle. I also think that the mixer section of the MD8 is the weakest part. A combination of a hard disk plus md recorder would be my dream *sigh*.

What I'd be interested is if anyone has ever tried to cut a vinyl or get out "commercial" CDs based on recordings made with the MD-8!?
 
well that's it...i'm gonna buy one...my friend doesn't want to sell his anymore but you can get 'em pretty cheap on ebay...i kept coming back to this thread to read what's going on and there seem to be more positives than negatives coming through so i think i'll take the bite...i'll use it mainly as a notebook at my girl's apartment and then bring in home to unload the tracks through the individual track outs on the back into my main unit...after that i'll think i'll buy a tascam 488mkII...there's one place that still has one that's brand new in the box...i don't know what it is about the recorders but i like buying them more than guitars and basses...
 
MD-8 for sale

I consider selling mine, if you interested (mint condition :-)
 
MD review in "Recording" magazin

Here's an interesting review of a song, recorded on minidisk, I've found today in the July issue of "Recording" magazine (page 59):

... Everything was done direct - no mics. He first filled up eight tracks on the little digital Boss BR-8 track mixer, then bounced a mix of these 8 tracks to a MiniDisk and back on two tracks on the Boss. He recorded backwards guitar parts on a Tascam 246 cassette deck. They ended up on the Boss, and a final mix from the Boss went again to a MiniDisk that he sent as the production master to a professional CD replicator. How does it sound? CONTRARY TO THE LAMENTTS WE KEEP HEARING ABOUT MINIDISKS AND THEIR ATRAC (LOSSY) DATA COMPRESSION SCHEME, THIS TRACK SOUNDS FULL AND RICH WITH PLENTY OF LEVEL. We hear NO signal degradation, NO digital artefacts none of the nasties that are often ascribed to the MiniDisk format. The proof is the pudd...errr, listening.
Click to expand...
I should add that this review was written by a professional sound engineer.
Sounds like just because people KNOW about the (lossy) compression, they THINK they can hear it ;-) What's your opinion?
 
When listening very closely I can hear the ATRAC (and mixer) artifacts.
Every recording format, however, has its' pros and cons though.

Chris
 
I don't think the quote is in the proper context.

The quote I believe is talking about a MD recorder that is not a multitrack. Alot of the the newer stereo MD recorders are using the latest and greatest ATRAC version that is considerably better than the md8. The other thing Im assuming is that a digital transfer was done, meaning the bounce never goes through the ATRAC converters. The conversion happens after the ADC converter with most minidisk recorders so a digital conversion would be nearly transparent. Has anyone ever asked if its possible to mod the md8 to add digital outs? Another thing, can anyone determine the difference between ATRAC artifacts and Dithering artifacts? Anyone have a white MD8?

Any other info..opinions? I got lotsa opinions... :eek:

SoMm
 
Just curious-is "Mixerman" the recording pro really your dad?
(no this isn't an attempt to figure out his REAL name!)

Good point about the ATRAC version, I was wondering about that.
Unless Steely Dan calls me up for their next album, my recording set-up
works fine for now.

Chris
 
chessparov said:
Just curious-is "Mixerman" the recording pro really your dad?
Click to expand...

Nope..our ages are too close together for him to be my father.

SoMm
 
BTW, did some comparisons recently between the recordings
made from my Tascam 564 MD recorder, and a 8 track 1/2"
recording made about 12 years ago.

Anyway...
Have to rate the TSR-8 reel to reel as having somewhat better
sonics (approx. 90+db signal to noise ratio), versus the 564 at
about 87+db signal to noise ratio. My guess is that a 564 has
somewhat better "objective"sound than a 8 track 1/4" reel to reel
running at 7 1/2 ips with dbx, and is in the same sound class as a 4 track 1/4" reel running at 7 1/2" ips with dbx noise reduction.
(A Reel Person will have a more accurate judgment as he has
a Tascam "Studio 8" 8 track 1/4" reel to reel.)

The last incarnation of a MD multi-track, the Yamaha MD4S has
a signal to noise ratio of about 96 db.
A reel to reel, however, does have the "charm" of analog sound!

When we take into account that for many years a standard recording chain for even artist demos was a semi-pro reel to reel
into a DAT or 2 track reel to reel, ending up on cassette, it's clear
we can make excellent sounding recordings even using a good cassette portastudio if the rest of the "chain" is strong.

Chris
 
I think you're right in your assessment, chess.

Besides, you've done the actual first-person comparison of formats, and I have not, with these specific formats.

I have done other comparisons of other formats, though.

There's nothing I can add to that [chess's] post.It's concise, well written, and IMO, factually correct.
 
Thanks Dave (Reel), the single best thing to improve my recordings
would be to train my wife to run the recorder! It's so much easier not
to have to juggle recording and singing/playing at the same time.

Chris
 
I've had my 8 year old son work as tape op.

I'd do all the basic setup, and then have him hit play, record, rewind, etc. To an 8 year old, that's a cheap thrill.;)

I'm 40, and home recording's still a thrill, but not necessarily cheap!;)
 
I have yet to give my newly acquired 564 a good workout.

One thing, is that although being billed as having nothing wrong with it beyond a few little scratches, upon arrival and first test spin, I've determined the PLAY button was flat, but still functions. This is something I'm disappointed in, but can live with until venturing to get it fixed. I'm not sure if the button assy is a DIY'er type of repair on the 564.

The Tascam 564, in general, is a really swell unit, by far better IMO than the Yamaha and Sony MD 4-trackers.

Back on topic, for MD technology, the Yamaha MD8 is still a swell unit, and one that get's my stamp of approval.;)
 
Since ya both (Chess and Reel) have the MD format and access to an analog r2r recorder, can you also test what kind of bandwidth your getting from each of the units? I know tape formats should have more bandwiidth because there are no 20 to 20 ADC converters to brickwall and sort specific frequencies into bins, but a real comparison for homies would be appreciated by other users.


SoMm
 
Due to the time my business demands, I won't have time to directly experiment with my Teac 40-4 4 track recorder until
at least the holidays. Based on 8 track 1/2" recordings I've
heard over the years, however, their sound seemed somewhat
superior to the ATRAC 2 data reduction system used on the 564.
The Yamaha MD4, MD8, and Sony MD multi-tracks all used the
ATRAC 2 as far as I know. The Tascam, however, has a better mixing section than any of the others, including a sweepable
mid EQ control. Any of these semi-pro formats seem way more than capable of producing up to "artist demo" recordings IMHO.
Having good product support at Tascam is also another consideration in getting the 564 BTW.

The data compression (more accurately data reduction), has been
evaluated by Paul White of Sound on Sound Magazine fame as being relatively less liable to tamper with audioo fidelity as dbx noise reduction. The real issue seems to be mainly the signal to noise ratio of each recording format. The famous producer, Tony Visconti has put out major releases on cassette 8 track(!) after he has done extensive editing via Pro Tools before release.
Also there is a certain value in the tradeoff between a little hiss
and a lot more analog warmth!

Chris
 
Oops! Just remembered that when my Tascam 244 was tested it had an effective range of up to 18Khz, and that's cassette!
So as long as a reel to reel is in good shape don't worry too much
about bandwidth as they can easily go over 20Khz.

Chris
 
Actually the Sony MDM-X4 is ATRAC 3.5 rather than ATRAC 2.
It's superior ATRAC version is negated, however, by the noisy input channels,
and mixer section (based upon Sound On Sound's review of it).

Chris
 
The MD8 is ATRAC 3.5 as well, and it only has 18k of bandwidth per the propaganda at Yamaha. Im in negotiation in assimilating the equipment from a local project studio where the owner is moving outta state and doesn't have an interest in doing music anymore. He told me he would rather "loan me the equipment indefinitely" than waste his investments on Ebay. I was an assistant Engineer for his original studio, and we ended up working together as design engineers on a couple of military programs when business had slumped really bad when ADAT flooded the market. Im pretty excited about it, even though it may not work out. He had a G-16 Fostex 1/2 inch 16 track, a Ramsa WR-T820, all the snakes and a pile of Lexicon stuff. If it works out Im going to have to change my user name to something like Smiling Mixerman. I don't think I'll ever get rid of the MD8 though, its so nice for recording low budget projects, like local quartets at weddings and what not. Well thats enought of that babbling eh! :rolleyes:

SoMm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top