TD-9 Sound Module MP3 Playback

[project_mercy]

So the TD-9 Module is pretty handy. The song playback feature is marred by the need to rip to WAV. I already have my catalog encoded in MP3, but to use the internal playback features, I need to either re-rip to wave, or convert my MP3s to wave before I use them.

Patching it so it would play MP3s would be handy.

[daveybabes]

No probs

I don't have the 9 but i do use Acoustica MP3 to Wav converter, two mouse clicks, 10 seconds and bang it's done, don't see any hardship doing it really

[Colquhoun]

....don't see any hardship doing it really

It's not the converting that I mind so much, it's the size of the dang things. I mean, mp3s are a manageable size, but wavs are honkin' HUGE!

[daveybabes]

aha oh!

It's not the converting that I mind so much, it's the size of the dang things. I mean, mp3s are a manageable size, but wavs are honkin' HUGE!

wow! yeah you are right i just converted a 3 meg MP3 to Wav and it came out at 31 megs!

I have Ableton live recording software and that only handles Wav, there's gotta be a technical reason for it somehow, something to do with the performance recording part, otherwise it would just have a built in MP3 player that records, maybe Drew the Roland guy will throw an answer, i'm quite interested to see why they use wav.

[Colquhoun]

I'm sure that it has to do with the fact that wavs are completely uncompressed. There's nothing for the module to do but play it from the usb drive right through the module. If it were mp3, it would have to uncompress it on the fly like an mp3 player does. However, mp3 players are not rocket-science.....and I wish they had included one built in to the module.

[eric_B]

As said before: how much does an MP3 player cost these days? Compare that to the price of TD-9!

It's a very strange decision of Roland. You have to convert small, lossy MP3 files back to uncompressed, lossles WAV files, which are huge in size. Also the max of 99 isn't enough for my drum sessions. Not that I play that many songs after another, but I like to choose.

Now I keep on buying more and more memory sticks and keep switching them. Maybe Roland has a lot of Kingston shares ?

[Colquhoun]

Every project in development has the point where you have to say "enough". I guess to Roland, it was not worth putting an mp3 player inside. Especially since most folks have one and can easily plug it into the module. I think the main reason for Roland to add the USB port was to make backups and save settings. The fact that it streams wavs was an added bonus. Instead of buying lots of memory sticks, just add one of those tiny mp3 players...I think that's the direction that I'm headed.

[Chris K]

[QUOTE= I think the main reason for Roland to add the USB port was to make backups and save settings.[/QUOTE]


At least Usb will have more life time, I see future problem with Spd-s new owner compact flash cards, since it accept at 32mb to 512mb max only and this is start to be hard to find now, most sold minimum 1gig and more, I can't imagine a product without memory available on the market, either remove the product or update firmware to allow more compact flash capacity.

[eric_B]

Instead of buying lots of memory sticks, just add one of those tiny mp3 players...I think that's the direction that I'm headed.

My objection: a TD-9 has a large screen, larges buttons and a jog dial. Easy to read, easy to operate. I don't want to add another device with a small screen and hard to operate tiny buttons. If Roland didn't want to add audio playback: then why did they decided to go for it in the end and chose an old fashioned file format for a brand new drum kit? That's a great add: "Brand new drum kit, new sounds, new features, bla bla bla..... and also: out-dated limited audio support!!"

(Excuses, just a little frustrated. Hmmm, still no explanation/answer from Drew....)

[Colquhoun]

My objection: a TD-9 has a large screen, larges buttons and a jog dial. Easy to read, easy to operate. I don't want to add another device with a small screen and hard to operate tiny buttons. If Roland didn't want to add audio playback: then why did they decided to go for it in the end and chose an old fashioned file format for a brand new drum kit? That's a great add: "Brand new drum kit, new sounds, new features, bla bla bla..... and also: out-dated limited audio support!!"

(Excuses, just a little frustrated. Hmmm, still no explanation/answer from Drew....)

Don't get me wrong... i agree with you. I'm just speculating on why Roland did not include the mp3 player. My best guess is that it would have been a more time/money issue that they deemed not worth it.
I actually would have paid a few bucks more for a module that had it in there. The reason it was wav, is that there are very few formats that are uncompressed, and wav is pretty universal for uncompressed sound.

[BarT]

It could have been quality:

Uncompressed WAV files are quite large in size, ... However, it is still a commonly used, relatively “pure”, i.e. lossless, file type, suitable for retaining “first generation” archived files of high quality, or use on a system where high fidelity sound is required and disk space is not restricted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wav#Popularity

There are several limitations inherent to the MP3 format that cannot be overcome by any MP3 encoder. ... Time resolution can be too low for highly transient signals, may cause some smearing of percussive sounds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mp3#Design_limitations


But I'd guess the global MP3 licensing minefield was a factor:

A large number of different organizations have claimed ownership of patents necessary to implement MP3 (decoding and/or encoding). These different claims have led to a number of legal actions, and legal threats, from a variety of sources, resulting in uncertainty about what is necessary to legally create products with MP3 support in countries where those patents are valid.

In short, ... the legal status of MP3 remains unclear in countries where those patents are valid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mp3#Licensing_and_patent_issues

Bruce

[Colquhoun]

But I'd guess the global MP3 licensing minefield was a factor:

A large number of different organizations have claimed ownership of patents necessary to implement MP3 (decoding and/or encoding). These different claims have led to a number of legal actions, and legal threats, from a variety of sources, resulting in uncertainty about what is necessary to legally create products with MP3 support in countries where those patents are valid.

In short, ... the legal status of MP3 remains unclear in countries where those patents are valid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mp3#Licensing_and_patent_issues

Bruce

Roland didn't seem to have any trouble getting THIS to market
Edirol R-09 Wave MP3 Recorder
Oh, I GET IT!
They want me to get one of those too!
.....actually I do want one.

[BarT]

Roland didn't seem to have any trouble getting THIS to market
Edirol R-09 Wave MP3 Recorder

True. I'd forgotten about that.


Bruce

[snick59]

Don't get me wrong... i agree with you. I'm just speculating on why Roland did not include the mp3 player. My best guess is that it would have been a more time/money issue that they deemed not worth it.
I actually would have paid a few bucks more for a module that had it in there. The reason it was wav, is that there are very few formats that are uncompressed, and wav is pretty universal for uncompressed sound.

Should have gotten the td-12, that was my biggest reason for not buying the td-9.I'm so happy I bought the td-12 with the built in sequencer you can record, create patterns using the backing instruments etc. no fussing with the usb...it was a couple of bucks more but well worth it.

[Colquhoun]

I would have gotten the td-12, but it was above my price-point.