Ivica Petrovic wrote:
> "closer to the original", it goes right into my direction; ATRAC has its own
> limits ( and the one you should hear) so you cannot improved it 'in general'
> by using better DACs and so on.
You are misinterpreting my statement. "closer to the original can mean beyond
the ability of the human ear to tell the difference.
> And what we are talking about, a cheap way
> to record music or high end ES series MDs of 600-1000 $ range? And they do
> the same; it's still 5:1 compression. The same applies to the other mediums
> as well, you need a better CD player to hear your CDs better. What's the
> point of having 100 $ CD player and 1000 $ MD recorder who provided "closer
> to the original CD sound" of 100 $ CD player???
One of the fundamental things you have wrong is this 5 to one compression. It
is not compression. If set up correctly 80% of the digital information on a CD
not heard by the human ear.
Don't confuse bit wise reduction with compression. Compress schemes pose
limits, like FM cutting off frequencies above 15,000 CPS. ATRAC does not do
this.
That the set up program on Windows 98. It is only about 30 MB. Yet when all of
the Cabs are opened, you will have several hundred MB of space used up on your
hard drive.
Larry
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
