[playby]

I currently have a Sony MD player (mzr 900 series) with those big silver Sony DJ headphones and the sound quality is absolutely fantastic. However I'm looking into getting an iPod and I am concerned that the sound quality might be a bit of a dissapointment after my MD experience(mainly because of how awful my $3000 powerbook's headphone jack sounds). I understand that an MP3 is compressed to hell and loses some of it original 'cd quality', So I'm actually looking to compare the sound from a .aiff file.

Any helpful advice?
b

[phantomdragonz]

I have the MDR-v700 to, the broken but I have them. and I have an iPod. and the quality is awesome. I have never listened to a MD player with the phones but i will tell you, it is not a drop in quality, the DAC is quite good. I wish I could get new headphones though. they cost me $100 and they broke like 98 days after I got them and I dont have the receipt. oh well
go for the ipod, its an audio device, do you think apple would skimp on the quality at $399/$499???

P.D.

[thirsty]

The sound quality on MD is no way near that of CD and if someone tells you different then thier deaf . Look at this way take your MD to an aplle retailer and have a listen if you unsure, I beleive that the sound quality of MP3 vs MD is so close they both have a high level of compression ( i don't know the technical specs, but it can't be far )
Plus 1 MD disc holds only 80 Minutes of music what 20+ songs iPod holds now upto 2000 songs. MD is like flogging a dead horse it's history. If you want the best sound buy a CD walkman forget MD
But really the iPod is the only logical choice!!!!

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by thirsty:
<STRONG>Plus 1 MD disc holds only 80 Minutes of music what 20+ songs iPod holds now upto 2000 songs. MD is like flogging a dead horse it's history. </STRONG>

That's not entirely accurate. Now you can store hours (up to 3-4 hrs, not exactly sure how many) per disk depending on the compression you choose. The range is similiar to mp3 rates. Sound quality will vary, just like mp3.

With the newer players (NetMD) you can download without having to be in real time. Granted it's only USB so far.

The real difference is in price. I can get disks for about $1 each. So I can have hours of music on one disk. Hours & hours for a few bucks. Can't beat that.

Plus, I think the industrial design is MUCH better on MD players. I've been using one for years to jog with.

I like the iPod but not worth the price yet.

[Parvulesco]

This is actually a somewhat difficult question to answer, since the iPod can support MP3s of any bitrate. Standard MD audio (as opposed to the LP2 and LP4 modes, which allow you to store more music on each disc by increasing the rate of compression) sounds outstanding, notwithstanding the comments above. ATRAC is more mature than MP3, and absolutely trounces MP3 sound quality at typical bitrates (128-160 Kbps). However, when compared to high bitrate MP3s (256 Kbps and above), it's probably a wash.

For portable audio purposes, 192 bps/VBR should do you well, and from one MD user to another, I think you'd be quite satisfied with the sound quality of the iPod.

Don't let anyone tell you that MD is crap technology. Let's look at some of the advantages that MD has over iPod:

1. Even smaller and lighter.
2. Much, much longer battery life--newest MD portables offer 40-50 hours of playback time.
3. Although capacity per disc is much less than iPod, there is no fixed limit to the amount of music you can have on the device at any time. You're only limited by the number of discs you can afford--and since they're so cheap, this will not be a problem.
4. Can record with MD
5. Significantly cheaper than iPod.

This isn't to say that the iPod is not a great device. But both the iPod and MD have their advantages and disadvantages, and in no way can anyone say that one is clearly superior to the other--it depends how you intend to use the device and what tradeoffs you're willing to make.

I only wish that Sony hadn't somewhat crippled NetMD, and that they'd release an iLink/FireWire implementation.

Hope that helps!

[lextek]

I use 192 VBR and it is pretty close to a CD. Remember it is a portable format.

[G4ME]

Originally posted by playby:
<STRONG> So I'm actually looking to compare the sound from a .aiff file.
b</STRONG>

AIFF is the CD information Bit for Bit, it is cd qualitiy, can't get any better then that. its when you convert the AIFF into MP3 you losse the quality, not much if you encode right, 192 seems decent, cuts your storage down though only 950 songs. The ipod sounds a lot better now that it has the EQ, the bass boost is great with the origoinal head phones.[/LIST]

[playby]

Thanks for the advice.

I'm not looking to replace my MD player. As a half-assed digital musician, its live recording function is invaluable... plus its good for sending out demos.

however, as a music player that can hold my entire cd collection and large files (pretty much eliminating the need for a zip drive) i like the idea of an iPod as a casual alternative.

having spent the last few years going through various stereos and portable CD players, the MD has so far given me the best quality of sound through headphones. But I guess its about time to try the iPod.

b

[G4ME]

I hear you, just go and try one out, make sure that the MP3 is encoded at a decent rate and the Eq will really shine. I don't know what kind of cash you have but for some one to consider the iPod as a casual alterniative, you must be well set up. Ah its just money splurg and go for it, thats what I did. never had any regrets

[dvd]

so umm if u play an aiff file on the ipod, it would sound as good as a cd player?