Summary Details

Query:	Minidisc use in field and lab
Author:	Steve Hartman Keiser
Submitter Email:	click here to access email
Linguistic LingField(s):	Computational Linguistics
Summary:	Several weeks ago I had posted a query about minidiscs: Linguistlist 13.3421. Users of MDs say they perform well in the field: more durable and reliable than tape players and less prone to scratching than CDs. The small size (very unobtrusive) is also a plus. Motor noise is a problem for some models, but easily worked around. As for back in the lab. In current models digitizing must be done in real time. Organizing and splicing tracks is easily done. A big question mark remains with respect to using MD data for acoustic analysis. Several persons gave general warnings about limitations due to the compression algorithm which apparently cuts out some frequencies (don't know which ones) and affects amplitudes thus interfering with analyses. So MDs should be avoided for at least fine acoustic analyses. But until these deficiencies are more precisely described, I cannot rule out using MDs for at least some types (intraspeaker?) of analysis. Perhaps others can respond to this unanswered part of the query. Thanks to respondents Robin Shoaps, Mark Jones, Lauren Hall-Lew, Mike Cahill, Dennis Preston, Claire Bowern, and Jen Mah. There is a boatload of info on minidiscs in general at http://www.minidisc.org/.

LL Issue:	14.79
Date Posted:	10-Jan-2003
Original Query:	Read original query
Back

Sums main page

New from Cambridge University Press!