I'm looking for a new mp3 player to replace my Zune. I need something that is at least 16gb (more is preferable) and an expansion slot would be nice as well. The most important feature is that it must be able to play some lossless formats while maintaining a decent battery life. I'm not too open with the idea of an iPod but if they can play lossless better than other players I guess I would give one a go. All opinions are appreciated
Most mp3 players are about the same in audio out put. They are all HiFi. ipods will play apple lossless format. Recently, they have had quality issues. You might also entertain stooping to high quality mp3s. You can save lots of space without sacrificing hearable audio quality. MP3s remove the high pitched tones because they take up most of the space in music and can't be heard by humans. Dogs could hear the difference. 20,000 hz tones require 4,000 times the space of a 20 hz tone. By 25 humans can't hear above 18,000 hz. If they listen to very loud music they may have lost that ability by 20 or even earlier. The reason constant bit rate mp3s do not go higher than 320 is they have a high end of 20,000 hz. Humans have the same equipment we have 2 arms and legs. We see what we call visable light. Claiming you can hear above 20,000 hz is like claiming you can see through walls with your X-ray vision. I have never found a person who claimed they could tell the difference between 320 and lossless be able to send me two sound bytes and say doesn't the horns sound 'tinny' in the mp3 vs the lossless.
To add to what was already said. If your Zune does not sound good replace your ear buds with ones that have good responce. They come with inferior ones. Most poor quality sound coming from mp3 devices either come from the ear plugs or inferior mp3s. I have heard junk lossless. The problem is the person than was doing the ripping did not know what they were doing. Maybe the CD was burned and the source was 128, not 1200. I have seen and heard lossless recording of the radio. The moron assumed they needed 1200 BR to faithfully capture a 70 BR audio. It is those people that think they are experts not because they are very knollagable after thoroughly researching the topic but because the like to think they are. That is why they can tell the difference between 320 mp3s and the source when scientifically they can't. They like to believe they are superhumans so they can hang with their other superhumabn friends and not feel deminished. I will admit I rip at an over kill, to a VBR that equates to 320 BR quality and not 190 which is my hearing limit. I visit an audiophile forum just the other day. I was researching the Helix encoder. A VERY interesting statement was made. It is known to produce artifacts above 16KHz. Although they could see the artifacts with tools none of the audiophiles could hear them. They concluded none of the audiophiles in their group could hear above 16 KHz. Apparently most store ripped CDs and captured vinyl as lossless for a referance but play mp3s. The reason to use Helix over Lame is although LAME can produce a defect free extreme quality VRB or CBR to even a young (under 20 yrs) ear, Helix is 20 times faster if you have a dual core processor and is still transparent to the audiophile.
eh i have already since replaced my zune with an iaudio 7 to play flac files and love it. And as for earphones/headphones i already had high quality buds, some sure ear buds and some bose on ear triport headphones
Glad to hear it. It is your money. What ever makes you happy. I do admire your conviction. There is some very light data that suggests you might actually benifit from ultrasonic tones. That is what even extream quality lossy leaves out. That would go against my beliefs, meaning I could be wrong. However, most listening devices do not reproduce ultrasonic tones since they are ultrasonic. I do not see the sense of 10x increase in file size to faithfully reproduce ultrasonic tones, especially if your 'speakers' to not reproduce those tones. Maybe I am just too cheap. How do you like the bose on ear triport headphones? I am too cheap to experiment with something that costly. I use devices that cost 10% of yours. I am confident that you do your homework. That is way more than most do in this forum. I believe sealed in the ear devices had a better chance of reproducing sub sonic tones with the tiny wattage than out of the ear. Do they boost the power? I do respect Bose and expect a good showing from them. I do not like that I could not find any range spec on them. The complaints that they may produce too much base suggests a good range. Extream base is the hardest to reproduce. I could care less about the high end. I am convinced I can't heard or sense them. How does the iaudio 7 compare with the Zune? I concider the Zune superior hardware.
