When I got my MP3 I thought I'd be retiring my minidisc but it didn't take
me long to realise that my little Ebay Sharp MT270 would be in service for
as long as I could keep it going.
For the MP3
1. It's smaller and lighter than my MD
2. It's easier to wear around your neck.
3. You can load stuff directly from your PC
For the MD
1. I play operas, not individual tracks. My many opera CDs are ready
recorded in MiniDisc and I can choose the Opera I want to listen to
instead
of loading the whole 2 or 3 CDs onto an MP3
2. MP3's with built-in batteries seem to die a slow painful death after a
year or 2 of re-charging so I bought one with an AAA battery.
It lasts a day and a half. The AA on my MD lasts at least 5 days before I
need to change it.
3. I can record on my MD from a stereo without needing a PC (thanks for
that
recording of Nozze de Figaro, Mum!)
4.Bet my 9 month old MP3 dies well before my bought
second-hand-3-years-ago
MD does!
Evi
"Michael Lang" <dwissl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:MPG.216a00bb6b9fb7dd989688@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cato Major wrote:
>
> > > little doubt that a recorder/player format with NO moving parts
> > > should be superior.
> >
> > If it' s able to do the same service, all right!
>
> Well, the MZ-RH1 for instance has a quiet preamp, which can be very
> useful, when recording classical music. The modern flash recorders often
> don't have such a quiet preamp. You might try the Edirol R-09 and a
> microphone with a good open circuit sensitivity, so that you don't have
> to turn up the mic preamp of the recorder that much. If you don't like
> the Edirol, just wait, there will be lots of new flash recorders in the
> next years. Number one might be the Marantz PMD620, which could be
> available at the end of this or the beginning of next year.
>
> <*** Michael Lang ***>
|
