Author Topic: Ipod or not 2pod  (Read 5609 times)

evilizac

  • Member
  • Posts: 340
Ipod or not 2pod
« on: October 24, 2007, 09:02:00 am »
I think I'm the only person angry that they're most likely going to buy an ipod. Only because it seems that there is a huge lack of pro and con research and dialog out there on these interweb machines.
    Is the ipod really absolutely the cream of the crop out there in mp3land? How much can be held on the say an 8 gig nano? I've been looking at other products like the Sansa with it's SD card upgrades. Does anyone own (or know the owner of one of these)? What sizes do SD cards come in?
    My main impetus towards ipodism is the fact that I am currently studying music. Between the eight CDs worth of classical music, individual songs to learn in my private lessons, songs for the world music ensemble that I play with and of course any random piece I want to learn on the side it would be highly convenient to to have a place with easy to read track information to store those for reference. Not to mention raiding the school library for the set of remastered Talking Heads albums (now I know who bought the last cube from Tower).
    Main points, can tracks flow seamlessly into each other? that's important of the classical pieces which are split not only into movements but into pieces of each movement. Out of whatever products you own or have heard of what's the battery life like?  How long have you one without recharging? What is the sound really like on these MP3 players?
    I feel like I'm 90 asking these questions.... and lamely like a conformist because I was always like "blah blah blah, I love CDs" and I still do but I need convenience. Isn't that  part of human nature?
 
 
 on another note. was there ever a Cat Power follow up thread. I enjoyed that show thouroughly.
WHAT?

chaz

  • Member
  • Posts: 5111
  • este lugar es una mierda
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #1 on: October 24, 2007, 09:24:00 am »
For an mp3 player i really wouldn't buy anything but an ipod.  Which one you get depends soley on how much storage you need.  The apple site tells you how many songs they hold, but those #'s are based on the highest compression rates I think so ymmv.  
 
 They do support gapless playback so that should not be an issue.  I think with classical music the biggest drawback with any player is going to be getting the tracks tagged automatically (at least I've heard this can be a pain).
 
 Battery life on the new ipods isn't an issue.  I have the 160 and left in on repeat for 24 hours and when I came back still had over 50% left...

Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #2 on: October 24, 2007, 09:25:00 am »
My ipod has 8GB and I can fit perhaps 90 albums on it.

TheDirector217

  • Member
  • Posts: 999
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #3 on: October 24, 2007, 09:45:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by chaz:
  The apple site tells you how many songs they hold, but those #'s are based on the highest compression rates I think so ymmv.  
That would be incorrect.  Apple's advertised song storages are based on 128kbps compression in AAC format, which is even lower file size than an mp3.  With that being said, 128k compression makes for wack sound.  In ANY format.  For more bang for your buck, I would think it's quite silly buying a Nano.  With those you ante up $149 or $199 for 4/8 GB, when if you pay $250 you can now get 80 GB.  Or if you only need 30 GB, you can surely find one on eBay brand new for a real nice price.  Or even better, you can cop one straight from Apple @ 1-800-My-APPLE.  (Phone order, as they don't sell older models online.)  I'm sure they'll sell you a new/refurb 30 GB for no more than $175 - $200.  
 
 Obviously, it's quite silly to go with anything other than an iPod.  I'm definitely not one of those cats drinking the Apple/Steve Jobs Kool-Aid, but as far as mp3 players go - they got the game on lock.  Hope this helps.  And for killer sound quality (especially since you listen to classical music), don't think of ripping your mp3s with anything other than  EAC (Exact Audio Copy): w/ LAME 3.97 Encoder. Anything less is uncivilized.  Hope this helps . . . Need any other tips, I'll be glad to offer some input.

evilizac

  • Member
  • Posts: 340
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #4 on: October 24, 2007, 09:58:00 am »
I guess the one thorn in my side still there about the ipod is that you can't replace the battery. What is the lifespan of the physical battery? what happens when it ends up like an old cell phone and wopn't hold a charge for more than a few hours. That factor has kept me from just purchasing a used or refurbished player. WOuld buying a new one from best buy or somethign with an extended warranty cover battery life? Does anyone know?
WHAT?

thirsty moore

  • Member
  • Posts: 6131
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #5 on: October 24, 2007, 10:01:00 am »
You leave it in your Bose Sounddock and save for a new one.  At least that's what I'm currently doing.
 
 Stupid?  Probably, but my iPod acts as my stereo at home anyway.
 
 
Quote
Originally posted by evilizac:
 what happens when it ends up like an old cell phone and wopn't hold a charge for more than a few hours.

tigersscareme

  • Member
  • Posts: 414
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #6 on: October 24, 2007, 10:02:00 am »
i think you can now replace the battery. there's a dr. pod tool kit i believe. it's not cheap.
 
 i had a mini that i would connect to my car's stereo via this thing called "the monster" which drew power from your cig. lighter. it also charges the pod, but i think it dicked with the battery which was a paltry 8 hours in the begining

evilizac

  • Member
  • Posts: 340
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #7 on: October 24, 2007, 10:03:00 am »
how long did it take for it to reach that point?
 Also I'd like to note that I don't think I'd be using itunes as a music store. I still love buying CDs and most of what I buy is used anyway so it's well below the $0.99 that itunes asks per song. Does that alter anyones thoughts... Probably not.
WHAT?

tigersscareme

  • Member
  • Posts: 414
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #8 on: October 24, 2007, 10:19:00 am »
i would say i noticed a signifigant loss of battery life after using the monster for 2-3 months or so.
 now a full charge lasts me about 24 minutes.
 
 i plan on getting a new, fancier pood, and relegating the pink mini to the car. as long as it's hooked up to the monster, it's fine.

TheDirector217

  • Member
  • Posts: 999
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #9 on: October 24, 2007, 10:39:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by evilizac:
  I guess the one thorn in my side still there about the ipod is that you can't replace the battery. What is the lifespan of the physical battery? what happens when it ends up like an old cell phone and wopn't hold a charge for more than a few hours. That factor has kept me from just purchasing a used or refurbished player. WOuld buying a new one from best buy or somethign with an extended warranty cover battery life? Does anyone know?
Battery lasts about 500 charges, heard of 1000 in some instances.  Also, make sure to let yor iPod completely die at least once a month.  Prolongs the life of your battery.  Also, do not EVER under ANY circumstances get a Best Buy warranty for an iPod.  I don't have time nor energy to type about the horror stories associated with that.  
 
 Cop straight from Apple, along with an Apple Care warranty for $49.  You can get a 20% discount on the warranty if you're a student or work for the gubment (federal/local/state - don't matter).  Or just lie about either
 one.

beetsnotbeats

  • Member
  • Posts: 1181
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #10 on: October 24, 2007, 10:40:00 am »
AAC sounds better and has smaller files than MP3 at the same bit rate. Contrary to popular wisdom, Apple does not own AAC--the letters stand for Advanced Audio Codec. AAC was developed by the same consortium that developed MP3; AAC is sometimes called MP4 although they normally have .M4A as its file extention.
 
 The resolution you choose to use will depend on a few things. First, of course, how it sounds to you. However, you should consider under what conditions you will be listening. Casual listening and noisy environments don't require high resolution. Also consider how much music you want to carry and the capacity of your player. A typical CD at full WAV resolution takes about half a gig so an 8GB player could hold 16 CDs while the highest capacity iPod could hold more than 300. Using FLAC can double those capacities while using AAC or MP3 can potentially get you up to ten times as many CDs on your player.
 
 As for which player, it's really all about funtionality and iPod wins that race by miles.
 
 A major problem that you'll encounter is with classical music. The problem isn't the players, it's the available compression codecs and the systems of tagging. As you probably know, classical music identifies works differently from most other music. It values the composer over the performer; titles are usually descriptive of the form rather than a unique title. Current tagging systems handle classical music horribly because they were designed for popular music. Works that are continuous get chopped up by most ripping apps unless the tracks are "joined" (iTunes parlance). iTunes has a "gapless" feature to tag tracks of continuous music and allow them to be played without interuption but it's imperfect and just a stop-gap measure (sorry about the pun). What really needs to happen is for the compression codecs to include time indexing within an individual file, with separate tags for each index. This would make a compressed music file more like a CD. Again contrary to popular wisdom, CDs are not comprised of individual music files. The main music file is a continuous data stream; the track indexes are contained in a separate file on the disc which is loaded into the player when the disc is put in. Including time indexing in the header would barely increase the size of the file, probably 10kB at most.

bellenseb

  • Member
  • Posts: 1881
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #11 on: October 24, 2007, 11:30:00 am »
One big problem with classical music on the iPods is that the artist and album information is cut off at a certain number of characters and doesn't scroll on the Now Playing screen. This is an even bigger problem with the new generation which uses the split-screen/album art now playing screen, shrinking the allowable character length. Classical music tends to have long album names...

beetsnotbeats

  • Member
  • Posts: 1181
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #12 on: October 24, 2007, 11:36:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by bellenseb:
  One big problem with classical music on the iPods is that the artist and album information is cut off at a certain number of characters and doesn't scroll on the Now Playing screen. This is an even bigger problem with the new generation which uses the split-screen/album art now playing screen, shrinking the allowable character length. Classical music tends to have long album names...
Is the split-screen feature selectable, i.e. can it be turned off?

bellenseb

  • Member
  • Posts: 1881
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #13 on: October 24, 2007, 11:46:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by beetsnotbeats:
   
Quote
Originally posted by bellenseb:
  One big problem with classical music on the iPods is that the artist and album information is cut off at a certain number of characters and doesn't scroll on the Now Playing screen. This is an even bigger problem with the new generation which uses the split-screen/album art now playing screen, shrinking the allowable character length. Classical music tends to have long album names...
Is the split-screen feature selectable, i.e. can it be turned off? [/b]
No. It's forced on you.

amnesiac

  • Member
  • Posts: 1203
Re: Ipod or not 2pod
« Reply #14 on: October 24, 2007, 11:55:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by bellenseb:
   
Quote
Originally posted by beetsnotbeats:
  Is the split-screen feature selectable, i.e. can it be turned off?
No. It's forced on you. [/b]
I'm pretty sure you can turn it off in iTunes when your iPod is connected...