What will replace ipod for quality portable music. ?

[Anastasius]

The BBC was one of the first organisations in the world (if not THE first) to use PCM internally http://www.bbceng.info/Install/comms...changeover.htm

and here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound-in-Syncs

BBC Research Department were instrumental in developing much of what we take for granted today.

On the subject of the thread, can we have a reality check? We are talking about music on the go, aren't we? Listening on tiny things that fit either in or over the ear? I defy anyone to tell the difference between most high quality MP3 and upwards recordings regardless of codec/algorithm/whatever? I really cannot comprehend how anyone can claim to tell the difference between, say, lossless (ie taking up huge storage space) and high bit rate MP3 or other compressed formats. Listening in the car makes any difference even more pointless. Road, engine, tyre and traffic noise masks any fine detail.

Choosing a portable device comes down to storage and how do you access whatever you have stored there. No-one has addressed the second part.

[Richard Barrett]

I really cannot comprehend how anyone can claim to tell the difference between, say, lossless (ie taking up huge storage space) and high bit rate MP3 or other compressed formats.

It's pretty easy actually. Even "on the go", but very obviously indeed when not. I did try a direct comparison between an iPod playing AAC and the aforementioned DX50 playing FLAC, using the same headphones, and the difference is remarkable, a lot greater than I was expecting, in terms of detail and spatial imaging in particular, adding to a considerably more involving sonic experience. Storage space is hardly a problem these days and will become less so as time goes on.

[Dave2002]

It's pretty easy actually. Even "on the go", but very obviously indeed when not. I did try a direct comparison between an iPod playing AAC and the aforementioned DX50 playing FLAC, using the same headphones, and the difference is remarkable, a lot greater than I was expecting, in terms of detail and spatial imaging in particular, adding to a considerably more involving sonic experience. Storage space is hardly a problem these days and will become less so as time goes on.

That's an interesting response. I think some people may find it less obvious.

When lossy encoding started to become common, I listened to a set of excerpts which someone had created on a web page, mostly of mp3 codings, and it became very easy to notice the kinds of artifacts which arise due to that particular encoding. Since then other coding schemes have come along (e.g aac) and they don't have the same kind of signature, though they've almost certainly got characteristics of their own. With higher bit rate encoding I think it is the case that some of us, not listening on the highest quality equipment, may find it hard to distinguish between lossy and lossless encoded material.

Also some of the differences might be what are often described as "subtle". This might mean that any form of assessment might be imprecise and unrepeatable. Despite that though, a while back I was listening to a jazz CD, and I was struck very quickly at how much better it sounded (even though the recordings are moderately old) than streaming and compressed material - which no doubt also included radio - that I had been listening to. I wasn't really able to "put my finger on" why this recording sounded so good, but it just leapt out that day that it sounded better.

I think the spatial imaging can be much better with lossless compression (or no compression) compared with lossy formats. Radio 3 has not yet provided this level of quality, and presumably "market forces" will dictate that it never does - "there's no call for it", "99.9% of listeners are happy with the service level provided", "we can do it, but for the same cost we can put out another 10 channels" etc.

Of particular relevance to this thread though, as long as there is sufficient storage space available (there usually is, as RB has pointed out) - then it makes sense to use a lossless format for portable devices, as the quality should be better, and there's always the chance that someone else will appreciate it, even if the owner does not.

[MrGongGong]

Whether one hears these differences is very much (in my experience) dependent on the frequency components of the material.
Lots of compressed audio sounds, to me, as if it has been recorded in a washing machine!
Cymbal sounds in particular are prone to this (obviously really)

[Richard Barrett]

With higher bit rate encoding I think it is the case that some of us, not listening on the highest quality equipment, may find it hard to distinguish between lossy and lossless encoded material.

I agree. But what Anastasius said was "I really cannot comprehend how anyone can claim to tell the difference" (my emphasis). The quality of the equipment is certainly important... anyone who's worked in a recording or broadcast or electronic music studio will know the kind of difference it can make, even if (like me) they can't afford to be an esoteric hifi nerd when they're at home. But I'm not talking here about that sort of level - the digital audio player I've been enthusing about was cheaper than the iPod it's superseding.

[Dave2002]

I agree. But what Anastasius said was "I really cannot comprehend how anyone can claim to tell the difference" (my emphasis). The quality of the equipment is certainly important... anyone who's worked in a recording or broadcast or electronic music studio will know the kind of difference it can make, even if (like me) they can't afford to be an esoteric hifi nerd when they're at home. But I'm not talking here about that sort of level - the digital audio player I've been enthusing about was cheaper than the iPod it's superseding.

I do have to say that on receiving the Krivine Beethoven CD set today I initially thought I'd listen to the mp3 versions kindly provided by amazon. After 10 minutes I couldn't stand it any more and switched to the CD player - fed to the same DAC. Still not perfect, but without the fairly tell tale artefacts from mp3 encoding.

When I have made my own mp3 recordings thay have on occasions been acceptably good - or perhaps I was in a forgiving mood when I listened to them - but I always encoded them using the highest possible quality settings. Perhaps the commercial mp3s are not done to the same standard.

The same perhaps also applies to aac encoding. As with mp3 I had thought it possible to get acceptable quality, and indeed my view has been that gnerally aac sounds better than mp3 at comparable bit rates, but CD quality or better is definitely to be aimed at. As mentioned earlier, storage limitations should no longer be a dominant limiting factor.

[Richard Barrett]

my view has been that gnerally aac sounds better than mp3 at comparable bit rates

I would definitely agree with that.

[Beef Oven!]

No. I just slotted it in, and when you connect the unit to the computer via USB, both the DX50 and the card appear as external drives (this is MacOS, I don't know what they do in Windoze). Something I'm wondering about is: once I have a few filled-up cards how am I going to work out which is which without inserting them? They're too small to write on...

Looking forward to comparing notes once yours arrives.

Ok, as promised Richard, here are my views.

The FiiO X3 2nd generation arrived while I was on my spring holiday, so I had to wait until I returned to get my hands on it.

Details here





Great build quality, all metal, no plastic. Feels reassuringly hefty. The UI is fine, perhaps not quite as good as the iPod it replaces, but the sound quality is a huge step up. Like you, I don't want to listen to the iPod again!

It has a gain option so it drives my AEG 702 headphones to acceptable volume levels and on low gain is perfect for IE phones (which as you point out, is what these DAPS are designed for).

It can also operate as a stand alone DAC, but I've not used it that way yet.

I'm using a 64g Evo card at the moment and I'm going to use a 32g cards to load Aus Licht, Der Ring and other longer works.

Again, like you, I don't know what to do about labelling and storing extra SD cards.

If you come up with anything, please let me know, cheers!

[Dave2002]

I'm using a 64g Evo card at the moment and I'm going to use a 32g cards to load Aus Licht, Der Ring and other longer works.

Again, like you, I don't know what to do about labelling and storing extra SD cards.

If you come up with anything, please let me know, cheers!

From the specs it looks as though this uses Micro SD cards, which are pretty small. Is it possible to stick even a very small label on, or would that prevent the card from going into the device?

You could use some form of multi-colour code, plus a look up table I guess. e.g use 4 colours - red, green, blue, yellow and 4 painted dots at the end of the card, to give 4^4 possibilitities, which is 256 cards. That'd give you up to 8 Terabytes if you use 32 Gbyte cards.

[Beef Oven!]

From the specs it looks as though this uses Micro SD cards, which are pretty small. Is it possible to stick even a very small label on, or would that prevent the card from going into thd device?

You could use some form of multi-colour code, plus a look up table I guess. e.g use 4 colours - red, green, blue, yellow and 4 painted dots at the end of the card, to give 4^4 possibilitities, which is 256 cards. That'd give you up to 8 Terabytes if you use 32 Gbyte cards.

Thanks for your thoughts on this.

You can't really label the cards, as you say they are pretty small and there's the risk that they'll come of inside the device.

I think that I'll end up only using about 4 cards, so I'll just have to commit to memory what sort of stuff is on each!

[Dave2002]

You can't really label the cards, as you say they are pretty small and there's the risk that they'll come of inside the device.

I think that I'll end up only using about 4 cards, so I'll just have to commit to memory what sort of stuff is on each!

I suspected that labelling might be difficult. Paint blobs or nail varnish might work - so only 4 is not too problematic. If they're not all the same make or type, then won't there be some form of identification on each, which will distinguish them? Colour perhaps? Otherwise, if you are rigorous (unlike me) in storing them you could put them into slightly larger containers and make sure that each card always goes back in the same identifiable location. A box with foam and slots, perhaps?

[Beef Oven!]

I suspected that labelling might be difficult. Paint blobs or nail varnish might work - so only 4 is not too problematic. If they're not all the same make or type, then won't there be some form of identification on each, which will distinguish them? Colour perhaps? Otherwise, if you are rigorous (unlike me) in storing them you could put them into slightly larger containers and make sure that each card always goes back in the same identifiable location. A box with foam and slots, perhaps?

So far, one is 64g and the other 32g, so I'm doing it by size. I'll work out what to do when I know the size, brand, colour etc of the next one when I get it!

[Bryn]

There is no real problem numbering the backs of micro-SDHC cards with a silver coloured fine point Sharpie pen. I use just 2 digits but 3 can be fitted easily enough. As to sticky labels, some micro-SCHC cards with such labels already affixed (usually with a bar code on them).

[Richard Barrett]

There is no real problem numbering the backs of micro-SDHC cards with a silver coloured fine point Sharpie pen. I use just 2 digits but 3 can be fitted easily enough. As to sticky labels, some micro-SCHC cards with such labels already affixed (usually with a bar code on them).

My solution is to keep them in the adaptor that's used to slot them into a laptop. This is quite big enough to stick a label on and, additionally, might reduce the risk of losing the microscopic things.

[Beef Oven!]

There is no real problem numbering the backs of micro-SDHC cards with a silver coloured fine point Sharpie pen. I use just 2 digits but 3 can be fitted easily enough. As to sticky labels, some micro-SCHC cards with such labels already affixed (usually with a bar code on them).

My solution is to keep them in the adaptor that's used to slot them into a laptop. This is quite big enough to stick a label on, or mark with a CD pen.