From: Frank2.Simon@arbi.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de (Frank2 'Biber' Simon)
Subject: Re: DAT, DCC and MD
Organization: University of Oldenburg, Germany
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 11:14:57 GMT

ritc0003@student.tc.umn.edu (Kent Ritchie) writes:

>I can't believe what Sony and Phillips are trying to do with MD and DCC.
>I am offended that both of these companies think that I will be willing
>to pay top dollar for a music system that is inferior to what is already 
>available, CD and DAT.  I am even more upset by those who are seriously 
>considering purchasing one of the new formats.  

I'm one of *those* people...

>Whoever posted the "Music Lite" article about DCC (or was it MD?) nailed
>it right on the head.  Both Sony and Phillips are trying to sell less for more.

You have to proof why MD (or DCC) is less than CD !!!

>What makes me sick is that they are trying to make these formats standard.
>I believe, as consumers, we control the manufacturers, or at least we should.
>So why are we letting some slick ad agencies get us in bed with something
>inferior to what we could have at the same price - DAT.  DAT has proven to 
>be superior in audio quality to both DCC and MD.
STOP here, I think you didn't read the tests about MD and DCC exactly:
At first all tests are very unjust because of the differences between the
participants:
On the one side is the new MD MZ-1 of Sony, a *cheap* set to introduce
into the new technic. And it's portable. On the other side there is a
expensive high-end-CD-Player (Marant* ***), not portable and (!!!) not
able to write to the CDs.
After that the results are showing the following:
The MD has got a *bad* sound about 12KHz. At first this result is only
seen on the oscilloscop. The second point: Who hears about 12KHz ??
Maybe dogs, but no human about an age of 20 !!!
If you want to *see* music on an oscilloscop it's ok but I want to
*hear* music !!!

>Granted it does not access
>tracks as fast as MD, but it kicks DCC'c ass....
Not but !!! Why do you think the CD has killed the LP ?? Not because
of the sound (Some people still hear LP because of the full sound).
It's because of the feature you get with it:
Free track-changing (fast), CDs aren't sensitive and the CD-technik
is very robust.
All these features aren't given in DAT !!! Also DCC hasn't got all
features but MD.
So I believe and hope that the MD is the new format for music !
Finally you are able to write music to a non-sequential format,
over 1Million times, you are able to delete music-parts of the
middle of the disc, you always are able to make your own sampler,
you have digital qualitaet without the sensitive Video-Technic (VCR)
Please let be your advertising for an *antik-technic* and don't prevent
the progress of technic.

>The optimal format would
>be a re-recordable non-lossy optical disc.  But in the lack of presence of
>such a format the consumer should pick the next best format, DAT.  DAT has
>proven its quality and reliablity in pro-audio applications.

But only there !!

>If the pros
>use it I am convinced it is good enough for the average Joe.  C'mon people!

I hope nobody come with you !

>Get out there and demand DAT on your next big purchase, not MD or DCC...
>Let's not dig our own grave here.  MD and DCC are a step in the wrong 
>direction.

If progress is the wrong direction for you ok, it's your live but
don't demand to be all in your direction..

>As always I am open to discussion....
It's ok. I'm of course too.
-- 
FRONT242FRONT242FRONT242FRONT242FRONT242FRONT242FRONT242FRONT242FRONT242FRONT
    E-MAIL-ADDRESS:      ~       I am       ~      MAIL-ADRESS:
    Frank2.Simon@arbi.   ~       because    ~      Frank Simon
    informatik.uni-      ~       somebody   ~      Alexanderstr. 156
    oldenburg.de         ~       dreams me  ~      2900 Oldenburg
Newsgroups: rec.audio