OT: MP3 players vs Ipod question
purrffecttbliss
I took advantage of the sale that Best Buy had going on before
Christmas where if you buy any MP3 (excluding sony and ipods) you get
a $50 gift card. The only problem was that in order to get more songs
on it, the files had to be in WMA format.
It was doable...but it annoyed me to have to convert songs to WMA to
get them on the player. Enough to make me really want an Ipod
instead. I'm considering using the gift card toward an Ipod shuffle.
So, Ipod vs. Mp3?
Cos360°
true it is - with their massive market share they'd hate to lost ground on
something as obvious as poor sound circuitry
"purrffecttbliss" <purrrfffe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:63pgr1luga0hd4ign...@4ax.com...
2006 rulez!
limitations of your purchase. Spend a little time learning about the
various devices on the market and how you plan on acquiring new music.
Short Answer: Get an Ipod. The Shuffle is a great choice. Ignore
Cos360's comments. The Ipods even among audiophilies are known for
their sound quality (lacking in bass). The Shuffle offers the "best"
sound quality (consensus among sensitive listens, but your ears may
differ). It is cheap, indestructible and forces you to really learn how
to create playlists. Check out ilounge.com, even the Apple haters
praise the Ipod.
Caveat? If you can wait a month, reliable rumor has it that Apple will
be unveiling a new line of Shuffles that are even smaller. In fact, I
believe the 1gig version of the current line is hard to find now. Apple
is no longer manufacturing the current line.
As with most technology purchases, don't too much time (months) and
energy figuring out the best purchase, just look at was it available
and try them in person and buy based on your experience with the
product. If only I could follow that advice!
-Jason
purrffecttbliss
<kw...@nospam.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>I've been told the sound quality on the Ipods ain't the best. Not sure how
>true it is - with their massive market share they'd hate to lost ground on
>something as obvious as poor sound circuitry
>
I think ease of use is probably going to be the primary deciding
factor for me. I figure that I can fix sound quality w/ better
earphones.
purrffecttbliss
wrote:
>Abrreviated Long Answer: I think you are rather confused by the
>limitations of your purchase. Spend a little time learning about the
>various devices on the market and how you plan on acquiring new music.
>
>Short Answer: Get an Ipod. The Shuffle is a great choice. Ignore
>Cos360's comments. The Ipods even among audiophilies are known for
>their sound quality (lacking in bass). The Shuffle offers the "best"
>sound quality (consensus among sensitive listens, but your ears may
>differ). It is cheap, indestructible and forces you to really learn how
>to create playlists. Check out ilounge.com, even the Apple haters
>praise the Ipod.
>
>Caveat? If you can wait a month, reliable rumor has it that Apple will
>be unveiling a new line of Shuffles that are even smaller. In fact, I
>believe the 1gig version of the current line is hard to find now. Apple
>is no longer manufacturing the current line.
>
Ding ding ding!!! $$$$$
So I wonder does that mean that the old versions will be going on sale
once the new ones come out? I hope so. Or even better, the older
versions start finding their way to some of the discount retailers.
TJ Xenos
Intern.
Cillit BANG aka Easy-Off BAM
Gosh... Those dis(s)cussions about better or worse quality of MP3 players
are really getting on my nerves. How can you talk about "quality", when it
comes to an MP3 format, a format that is a LOSSY one?!?
If you want to have a good quality, with zillion bits and all the fountains
and gimmicks, get yourself a discman or a portable DVD-Audio player, stop
arguing over the importance of Easter and Christmas. It's a lossy format
anyway, and the sound quality depends on how strongly the file is compressed
in kbps and/or the headphones, the rest is unnoticeable for an average
listener... And if you are an audiophile, you should screw MP3s and WMAs,
anyway. Period.
--
cheers,
Cillit BANG
Cillit BANG aka Easy-Off BAM
Gosh... Those dis(s)cussions about better or worse quality of MP3 players
are really getting on my nerves. How can you talk about "quality", when it
comes to an MP3 format, a format that is a LOSSY one?!?
If you want to have a good quality, with zillion bits and all the fountains
and gimmicks, get yourself a discman or a portable DVD-Audio player, stop
arguing over the importance of Easter over Christmas (and vice versa). It's
Sumran
Just because it's a lossy format, doesn't mean that what you use to play
it doesn't affect the sound.
Yeah the encoding rate and the error correction of the encoder is vital,
but the hardware/software at the other end that will be decoding and
playing it is pretty important.
Sumran
Well based on the MP3 players I've listened to, the Zen sounds a bit
better than the iPod. However I use pretty decent headphones with my
Zen so that makes a difference in terms of clarity and bass. Of course
using a decent encoder makes a difference as well, if you use the LAME
encoder to encode your mp3's then the iPod sounds pretty decent I've found.