[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
How much is the new shuffle?
Don’t think I saw the price.
Ipods definitely rock. Being able to download a movie onto the thing and know that if you’re in a waiting room or taking a dump you have access to your favorite films is just way too cool for school baby.[/quote]
$79. I’m getting one for the gym. Ships in October.
[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
marathe wrote:
plus vinyl doesn’t sound like shit the way an mp3 does.
cool lookin shuffle though.
I never understood the fascination with vinyl. If you get a high quality MP3 it sounds perfectly fine. I never could hear the “warmth” of vinyl,but maybe I’m too young to know the difference.[/quote]
It’s takes a good truntable/cartrdge(at least 1$K) combo,preamp and setup. No surprise vinyl waned.
man I would have loved an 8GB Nano when I purchased my iPod earlier this year. It just seems to be the right size.
Eh’ well, it should have been expected since new iPods come out quite often. Regardless the new products look pretty sweet. I like the fact that they brought back the sort of “shell” that used to come on the Mini.
-Matt
[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
marathe wrote:
plus vinyl doesn’t sound like shit the way an mp3 does.
cool lookin shuffle though.
I never understood the fascination with vinyl. If you get a high quality MP3 it sounds perfectly fine. I never could hear the “warmth” of vinyl,but maybe I’m too young to know the difference.[/quote]
It’s all in the way the signal is stored. Vinyl is analog, meaning it produces perfect, curvy sinusoids, whereas mp3s are digital approximations. It’s the difference between drawing a smooth curve and drawing a series of steps to approximate it. Obviously the smaller the step width (higher the sampling rate), the better the approximation.
So vinyl sounds warmer because it produces a continuous signal whereas mp3s are just a string of values. The more holes in between the values, the less warmth. This is why even though supposedly 128 kbps is the limit of the human ear, there is a noticeable difference in warmth for some people at the higher sampling rates (up to 320 kbps for CD audio and higher for DVD audio).
That was a bit long winded but hopefully someone learned something. =)
By the way, for video mp3 players, the Creative Zen Vision: M absolutely trounces the iPod. Better sound quality, better battery life, better interface, better screen, better price. It’s hard to argue with that. 
[quote]wfifer wrote:
Lonnie123 wrote:
marathe wrote:
plus vinyl doesn’t sound like shit the way an mp3 does.
cool lookin shuffle though.
I never understood the fascination with vinyl. If you get a high quality MP3 it sounds perfectly fine. I never could hear the “warmth” of vinyl,but maybe I’m too young to know the difference.
It’s all in the way the signal is stored. Vinyl is analog, meaning it produces perfect, curvy sinusoids, whereas mp3s are digital approximations. It’s the difference between drawing a smooth curve and drawing a series of steps to approximate it. Obviously the smaller the step width (higher the sampling rate), the better the approximation.
So vinyl sounds warmer because it produces a continuous signal whereas mp3s are just a string of values. The more holes in between the values, the less warmth. This is why even though supposedly 128 kbps is the limit of the human ear, there is a noticeable difference in warmth for some people at the higher sampling rates (up to 320 kbps for CD audio and higher for DVD audio).
That was a bit long winded but hopefully someone learned something. =)[/quote]
Exactly, you summed it up great. Hence the reason I want to use DVD audio to record my LP’s.
Yes, DVD audio is very promising. 5 channels with 9.6 Mbps, that’s good stuff. It’ll be nice once the standard really takes off, but from what I’ve seen people are happy with the bare minimum (my cousin gave me some music at 96 kbps, ouch), so I’m not sure when or if that will happen. I’ve got one of those dualdiscs with DVD audio on one side, and damn it’s so nice to hear music in 5.1 surround!
[quote]wfifer wrote:
By the way, for video mp3 players, the Creative Zen Vision: M absolutely trounces the iPod. Better sound quality, better battery life, better interface, better screen, better price. It’s hard to argue with that. ;)[/quote]
I just picked up a Creative Zen Nano Plus mp3 player, 1 gb, comes with armband and carrying case, at Wal-Mart for like $67. The best part is the interface which is just drag and drop as opposed to iTunes which is horrible and constantly tries to do everything for you and screw up your music (like the Dawson’s Creek Trapper Keeper episode of South Park the damn program just takes over).
I’m a Rio fan myself. Personally I use the Rio Nitrus. Small, fast loading, holds enough for the gym (2.5GB I believe) and sounds awesome. I like Rio players as a whole better than the iPod line.
[quote]wfifer wrote:
Yes, DVD audio is very promising. 5 channels with 9.6 Mbps, that’s good stuff. It’ll be nice once the standard really takes off, but from what I’ve seen people are happy with the bare minimum (my cousin gave me some music at 96 kbps, ouch), so I’m not sure when or if that will happen. I’ve got one of those dualdiscs with DVD audio on one side, and damn it’s so nice to hear music in 5.1 surround![/quote]
Yes it is, I picked up Dark Side of the Moon CD with 5.1, pretty damn good. Creative has some great Audio Cards, perfect for transfers.
[quote]Five wrote:
wfifer wrote:
By the way, for video mp3 players, the Creative Zen Vision: M absolutely trounces the iPod. Better sound quality, better battery life, better interface, better screen, better price. It’s hard to argue with that.
[/quote]
I have a Zen Vision and it’s awesome. Excellent picture and sound along with FM Radio which the IPods lack. I think IPods are very overrated.
That shuffle looks pretty nice. I’m a big believer in Iaudio’s gear. They just came out with the iaudio T2. You can hang it around your neck. This of course may not work to well with front squats. The specs:
MP3, OGG, WMA, FLAC, WAV, FM Radio listening and recording, and voice recording
High Capacity Internal Flash Memory (2GB), File Copy/Delete Capability
High-Speed USB 2.0 Interface
0.9 inch OLED display with 96x96 resolution and 65K colors.
Long Contiunous Playback Time: Up to 12 hours (Based on company test result. Play time may be shortened if OLED is used often.)
Multi-language support
Enhanced Integrated file navigator
Play/Pause during Playback, Record/Pause during Recording
Next Track/Previous Track, Fast Forward/Fast Rewind, Infinite Loop
Resume, Fade In, Auto Play feature support
Search Speed, Skip Speed Setting
Digital Volume Control : 40 levels
Various EQ and Sound Effects (JetEffect)
I am waiting for the all touch screen Ipod to come out before I upgrade.
Anyone heard of Super Audio CD’s?
Suppose to whoop on regular CD’s in terms of quality of the sound (ie smoothness of the wave)
[quote]wfifer wrote:
It’s all in the way the signal is stored. Vinyl is analog, meaning it produces perfect, curvy sinusoids, whereas mp3s are digital approximations. It’s the difference between drawing a smooth curve and drawing a series of steps to approximate it. Obviously the smaller the step width (higher the sampling rate), the better the approximation.
So vinyl sounds warmer because it produces a continuous signal whereas mp3s are just a string of values. The more holes in between the values, the less warmth. This is why even though supposedly 128 kbps is the limit of the human ear, there is a noticeable difference in warmth for some people at the higher sampling rates (up to 320 kbps for CD audio and higher for DVD audio).
That was a bit long winded but hopefully someone learned something. =)[/quote]
Not to be a dick, but this is really a gross oversimplification of what is involved. To throw an engineering cliche at you, sampling a signal at double the original frequency is sufficient to recreate the signal.
Also, signal storage is only one issue of many. Reproducing the signal and getting it onto the medium is a large factor… garbage in, garbage out. Whether or not the signal on the vinyl is continuous is an entirely different from whether or not the recorded signal is faithful to the original.
Just because information is stored digitally doesn’t mean that values can’t be interpolated.
And while I realize you’re specifically talking about mp3 compression (which is lossy), I’ve heard this same reasoning applied to CD audio. Of course, I’ve also heard that you should get fat power cords to ensure good sound quality.
Finally, I invite you to consider the error involved in etching a signal into a physical medium… material instability, small perturbations in the process that create variability between recordings, whatever. Digital reproductions are more stable in that regard.
…i kinda regret having bought the iPod Shuffle. I wasn’t aware of the 1 on 1 link with iTunes software, and the fact you can’t listen on, or download music from someone else’s computer. I bought it on a whim though, that wasn’t too smart i guess. Soundquality is good i must admit, the fact it weighs next to nothing and looks nice is a bonus, but on a whole i wouldn’t recommend buying a Shuffle…
[quote]wfifer wrote:
Lonnie123 wrote:
marathe wrote:
plus vinyl doesn’t sound like shit the way an mp3 does.
cool lookin shuffle though.
I never understood the fascination with vinyl. If you get a high quality MP3 it sounds perfectly fine. I never could hear the “warmth” of vinyl,but maybe I’m too young to know the difference.
It’s all in the way the signal is stored. Vinyl is analog, meaning it produces perfect, curvy sinusoids, whereas mp3s are digital approximations. It’s the difference between drawing a smooth curve and drawing a series of steps to approximate it. Obviously the smaller the step width (higher the sampling rate), the better the approximation.
So vinyl sounds warmer because it produces a continuous signal whereas mp3s are just a string of values. The more holes in between the values, the less warmth. This is why even though supposedly 128 kbps is the limit of the human ear, there is a noticeable difference in warmth for some people at the higher sampling rates (up to 320 kbps for CD audio and higher for DVD audio).
That was a bit long winded but hopefully someone learned something. =)[/quote]
Good post. I would be verious curious to hear the warmth difference between a 44.1 kHz 320 kbps mp3 and vinyl, if it exists. Other than super high frequency harmonics, I can’t see why a very high sample mp3 could mirror vinyl effectively.
[quote]wfifer wrote:
By the way, for video mp3 players, the Creative Zen Vision: M absolutely trounces the iPod. Better sound quality, better battery life, better interface, better screen, better price. It’s hard to argue with that. ;)[/quote]
Is it just because of the earphones? Technically, your MP3 should have the same ‘basic’ sound regardless of the MP3 player. I sure saw a difference between the Wal-Mart and RCA earphones when comparing 2 similar priced MP3 players.
earphones will make a world of difference in sound. There is a reason some cost 100 dollars(and more) and some are 4.99. Any audiophile will tell you once you go high quality you never go back.
[quote]dre wrote:
I have 3rd Generation 15gb Ipod and I’m not that impressed with it. The battery life sucks balls. If I didn’t get it for free I would be pissed that I spent that much money on the damn thing.
When I get a bigger one i’m looking at different brands. Anyone have any good suggestions? [/quote]
The new generation iPods have I think 35% longer battery life than the 5G’s and mine lasts about 8 hours of constant playing at a loud volume.