Dinosaur needs updating - no MP3 just cd's

[thanks]

Should I get an iPod and which one

Video now or just Audio

And is iPod still the way to go considering the recent Microsoft / MTV
Deal should I wait a bit longer before investing, to use one of these
into my home stereo and car audio.

Car using the wireless transmitted to radio attachment and home audio
using the hard line attachment.

Will be replacing a Sony ES changer and selling both it and the cd's
once I make digital copies of them.

Holding on to CD's at this point seems non audio beneficial - If I copy
them digitally to a HD and then put them onto my MP3 player - all the
debate/chatter I have been hearing is that I can't hear the difference
anyway and the fidelity is as good as CD's

Theoretically MP3 less fidelity than CD sampling rate etc. but in
listening ???

[Kalman Rubinson]

I am intentionally ignoring all your questions since the answers to so
many of them are too subjective. I suggest you buy the cheapest iPod
and use/play with it. Then you will know what you want to do.

Kal

[Geoff@home]

"thanks" <sp...@net.com> wrote in message news:WZFsf.8054$L75...@fe12.lga...

the difference
> anyway and the fidelity is as good as CD's
>
> Theoretically MP3 less fidelity than CD sampling rate etc. but in
> listening ???

Depends on what you mean by 'listening'.

geoff

[Kevin]

Over the years I have had several format players which I have used and
abused. At home I stick to CD/DVD's mostly but also have a a PC that
acts as a media server streaming MP3's. I also have an iRiver portable
CD player that plays CD's, MP3's, and other formats. However, this year
I bought the latest video iPod and haven't looked back.

Having an iPod has driven me to rip all my CD's to my media server and
then import these to the iPod. Quality of music is dictated by the file
size of the ripped CD and the format of recording (lossless etc.)
generally the higher the bit rate of the recording, the more
information it records therefore the frequency peaks and troughs don't
get chopped and flattened. So quality shouldn't worry you, storage
space should. If you have a reasonably large CD collection, say 1000 or
more CD's then you will be pushing the limits of the iPod to store all
the ripped CD's on the device at a quality which will deliver the
richest listening experience. I currently rip at around 180 bit rate
which I am told is similar to CD quality.

The beauty of the iPod or other device is that I can plug it straight
into the back of my amp and play my music through it. It's also compact
and portable. No need for a CD player anymore. In addition, I now buy
most of my music from the internet (no I don't file swap) and then burn
an Audio CD as back up.

One word of caution. So far the video functionality is wasted as there
is little content in the UK to play. I have not tried ripping my own
films and transfering it to my iPod yet, that's another project on the
list.

IHTH.

Kevin.

[Geoff@work]

"Kevin" <kevin.j...@gmail.com> wrote in message

> richest listening experience. I currently rip at around 180 bit rate
> which I am told is similar to CD quality.

You are told wrong. Have a listen.

>
> The beauty of the iPod or other device is that I can plug it straight
> into the back of my amp and play my music through it. It's also compact
> and portable. No need for a CD player anymore. In addition, I now buy
> most of my music from the internet (no I don't file swap) and then burn
> an Audio CD as back up.

So sad when lower fidelity becomes so attractive.

geoff

[Kevin]

Geoff, Seems you are correct
http://hometheaterhifi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1655 but to be
honest, I am not a music fidelity buff. I like technology and what it
can do to make my music available to me in a package I find useful. I
think if you are more into the depth and warmth of the recording then
you should look at quality separates, but if you are into ease of use,
management of your collection and a reduction in space required to
store your collection then technology can help with devices like the
iPod and music formats such as MP3.

[thanks]

Scarecrow you are

[thanks]

That's right it's audio tech can't expect you to answer my question
unless it's so specific a pin head like me could figure it out

[thanks]

Wow an answer, interesting, exactly what I was wanting to start to,
understand thanks

[thanks]

Specific enough for you now to come out of the negative woodwork, so
then you could have answered my original question in kind

[thanks]

Looks like I'll be sticking to my CD's and portable CD player. If even
at the high rip rate they aren't CD quality AND considering I'm one of
those would have liked 88.2kHz sampling no way I'll be able to listen to
MP3. Of course Geoff will probably say a human with perfect hearing
can't hear above 22kHz Sampling but fuck them. Thanks all.

[Richard Crowley]

"thanks" wrote ...

> That's right it's audio tech can't expect you to answer my question
> unless it's so specific a pin head like me could figure it out

Its considered bad form to insult the people you are seeking
free help/information from. Expect that many people who
could have helped you won't even bother reading your posts
if you ever return.

[Kalman Rubinson]

On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 10:02:42 -0500, thanks <sp...@net.com> wrote:

>Scarecrow you are

OK. I think (iPod) sampling rates significantly less than CD
(16/44.1) are beneath consideration on a subjective listening basis.
I also cannot see the net value of the effort involved in transcribing
CDs to another medium since I do not carry an iPod nor stream audio
from room to room. Finally, your questions about whether you should
buy an iPod now and, if so, should it be a video one are questions
only you can answer. I've bought several iPods, but just for my
grandchildren.

Kal