Which one: new iPod or minidisk player?

[tsukiyomichris]

i am thinking of purchacing either an ipod or a minidisk player. i was wondering what ya'll think and which one would be the best bet. i am not leaning to either side, but the ipod does look pretty cool. i would like some help on deciding, so please leave your comments and/or suggestions. Thanks!

[JayBee]

one word - storage.

A friend of mine has a minidisk player - those disks are bulky. Four of five albums is about the most you can carry around without needing a bag of some sort.

Additionally, you can only listen to one album at a time etc etc.

The old argument was that you could take minidisks anywhere and either plug the player into a hifi, or use the minidisks IN your hifi's minidisk player.

That argument dies as soon as iPod has a line out - which the docking station now does...

Finally, minidisks have a tendancy to clip sound at the top and bottom end of the frequency scales. This is one way they achieve such large compression ratios. iPod lets you encode your music how you want, so you don't have to put up with any default compression crappiness.

just my 2pence worth

[wayneyoung]

I have been using minidisc for about ten years. They sound MUCH better than MP3, but not sure about AAC- I would assume it is still better than AAC because minidisc was designed to be near CD quality, it may be as close as one can get. You can't do live recording to an iPod, and you need your computer to add songs. With minidisc you can record live on most units, and record from any sound source with an output - TV, DVD, VCR, cd player, tape player, radio,video game, etc. With the new NetMD recorders, you can set the unit to record at different levels. You can put one, two, or four cds on one minidisc. The option for four is lesser quality, but it does have its uses. The only drawback for Mac users is that we need to record at real time, the software to do fast transfers doesn't work on the Mac, and it is useless in Virtual PC - way too slow.

[Jacques]

For listening, the iPod of course - AAC at 190 bitrate or higher is very nice!

For recording, the MiniDisc of course - iPods do not record, bummer.

[wayneyoung]

What did you decide? Or are you still on the fence?

[nkuvu]

Sound quality is a personal decision -- MP3 is fine for my ears.

Personally I'd prefer the capacity of the iPod. How much does a minidisc hold, anyway?

[wayneyoung]

An 80 min MD holds about 150 MB of data. This equates to one CD in SP mode. The second mode is LP2, it uses a different format, and will cause a MD to hold about two CDs. The third mode is LP4, the most lossy of the formats, and it will put about four CDs on a single MD. I normally use SP or LP2. I use SP in my car, because that's what the in-dash unit will play, but at the gym, or out on a walk, I use LP2. LP2 quality is really good, at least as good as the best MP3s i've encoded. I have heard LP4 isn't bad, but I'm in no hurry to try it - except maybe for voice recordings - or if I really need four or five hours of music on one MD. So, really, for less than $2.00 US (price of a MD), I can have a MD with two CDs worth of music in 150 MB of space. I can carry multiple MDs with me, so MD is better (and cheaper) than any RAM based MP3 player. It has great skip protection; I never have a skip when using the MD, even at the gym.

[nepalipunk]

I have both 5G ipod and sony netMD. I prefer ipod. I haven't touched MD for months.
1. Ipod is easier to use than MD.
2. I think transfer rate is also fast.
3. Storage space of ipod is great.
4. You get additional feature photo and video in ipod.
5. ipod is smaller.
6. I think there is not way to get the songs from MD to PC.

I think I can go on and on....

But believe me ipod is better.

[bedouin]

The iPod. You can sync your entire iTunes library in 2 minutes, as opposed to 7 days, then have it all accessible to you without switching discs or guessing which disc contains what (or marking each disc). MDs are cool for doing live recordings, but please -- nothing beats being able to shuffle all your music.

iPod doesn't need batteries -- just charge it through the firewire or USB port; iPod has a superior interface. The MD format will be dead soon enough, though unlike reel to reel tapes and vinyl, nobody can claim any perceived sonic benefit to keep using them despite their inconvenience.

[ldrury]

iPod - if sound quality is that important, buy a 60GB Pod, and only use AIFF - you would still about 2000 tracks on it - whats that - 100 or so mini discs at that quality.... I know what I'd prefer to have in my pocket, as opposed to a full backpack of minidiscs..... :)
My degrading ears have a tough time picking a decent bitrate mp3/AAC from AIFF anyway!

[funkycfunkydo]

instead of AIFF, you could use the Apple Lossless. They say its the same quality as WAV but half the space.

[vickishome]

iPod all the way! I have a 60GB Photo and import my songs using AIFF from my CDs (I may give Apple Lossless a try). And then I use Shure E5c earphones to listen to the music. You just can't beat the quality and convenience of that combination.

As a closet audiophile for decades, Apple has finally given me a way to crank the music with the quality I want while not disturbing everyone around me. I am in heaven! :D

If quality is really important to you, do not skimp on your earphones. It won't matter how great the audio file is (AIFF, AAC, MP3, etc.) if your earphones aren't very good.

http://www.shurestore.com/earphones/eseries_e5c.html

[nkuvu]

Considering that this is a nearly three year old thread, I'd hope that the original poster has made up their mind by now... ;)

[fat elvis]

LOL, nepalipunk must be on dial-up still.

Nepali-punk? Perhaps he's in Nepal. I was in Kathmandu a few years ago and couldn't find a fast connection to save my life (Thankfully it wasn't in danger).