Recommended "MP3" player for prog use?

Jay Klmnop wrote: Thanks for all the advice. I think I'll wait till we get back to Canada and see what's out there; I might get a cell phone with a player built in. To me, records and digital are the best ways to go--a turntable at home and a music file (MP3) player for on the road. For me, a removeable battery, some kind of card memory system, power to run ear-covering full-size headphones and at least 512meg memory are my main criteria. I think a cell-phone might have all these.

Well be sure to check that the Cell phone can tackle "regular" headphones...most these days use special ones...

One of the best Cell phones with mp3 function i would have to say is Sony Ericsson W800i or the cheaper model W550i

[/QUOTE]

Well be sure to check that the Cell phone can tackle "regular" headphones...most these days use special ones...

[/QUOTE]

Actually, my phones have adapters for both small sizes of plugs (standard, mini, and cell phone tiny ones).

Last month I bought a 256mb mpio (korean) mp3 player and I'm very happy with it. ONe of the really nice things about prog is that you can listen to the same stuff much longer so I find 256 k takes me about a month to get sick of the music on it...easy to change too. I put the phone cable through the lanyard ring on the player and looped it around my neck and attached it to itself again with some shrink wrap and the wires are the right length and I don't need a lanyard--makes it a bit lighter too. (sounds like self-strangulation)

Just my two cents worth on the quality of sound debate: I might have not too developed ears hi-fi wise but it seems that some people are more into equipment than music. If you locked me in a room for a year with nothing but a 20-year old cheapo mono cassette player and a few prog cassettes, I sure wouldn't leave it alone saying it didn't sound good enough.

It's great to push the envelope but for me (just for me) the point of diminishing returns--or indeed even noticing any returns--seems to be at about 192mbps or so. There's nothing like live though. I've never heard any prog live...so deprived.

 

Thanks for all the advice everyone.

Prog is great.

Jay

ha^ i take it you dont like mp3/mp3 players

 

i have an Ipod, it keeps me satisifed, i have a lot of good prog on it so im good.

oliverstoned wrote: I prefer real CD or better, analog. The convenience is compensated by the poor quality.

*imagines travelling by bus/subway/train with a huge hifi system, record player and cabinets balanced on the backpack*

oliverstoned wrote: A Discman is better than a MP3 player... A little more big, i admit!

It IS better, CD quality audio will always be superior to any mp3 format. But 192kbps mp3/WMA is not as bad as you suggest IMO. If you made a poll, I bet that the vast majority would say that the difference in quality is negligible, especially in a subway/train situation with non-hifi headphones. Honestly, you don't want to walk around with hifi headphones ... 

oliverstoned wrote: I prefer real CD or better, analog. The convenience is compensated by the poor quality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite

oliverstoned wrote: I'm not opposed to technological progress, but to technological regression... MP3 is the WORST sound format ever created, so it means a regression, as CD was already a regression compared to vynil. Remember how marketers said CD was absolutely perfect, and now they admit that the performances are not that good and that 24 bits will solve that (which is not true).

Here you go again, oliver:

http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf

^ have it your way, oliver. You trust your ears, I trust mine.

"Maybe you're also opposed to facts."

The fact is that there are less infos in MP3 than in the CD, which has less info than in the analog original signal. Here are simple but eloquent facts.

On another hand, the "Blue ray disc" -the format which will replace DVD- will be better than the DVD, thanks to his high storage capacity (so more infos), superior to DVD.
I think that such a clever scientist like you should understand that.

"But I believe that CD quality is absolutely sufficient for most audio sources"

This sentence is not correct as CD is a source itself.
You probably mean: "for most audio systems".
If you still consider a computer as an audio system, so yes, CD is highly sufficient for that.

"and the little advantage that 24 bit bring is only minor"

We agree on that. For one time you don't trust the theory and measures

"The biggest advantage of post-CD digital storage formats is that they offer multi-channel audio (surround sound) in decent quality."

?!

IMO, the only good thing with CD (not MP3) is its convenience, it easy availability and the fact that some albums are reissued with great bonus tracks never released at the time. (i.e Deram Caravan remasters).




Edited by oliverstoned

oliverstoned wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: oliverstoned wrote: A Discman is better than a MP3 player... A little more big, i admit! It IS better, CD quality audio will always be superior to any mp3 format. But 192kbps mp3/WMA is not as bad as you suggest IMO. If you made a poll, I bet that the vast majority would say that the difference in quality is negligible, especially in a subway/train situation with non-hifi headphones. Honestly, you don't want to walk around with hifi headphones ... You're right. But if you can stand this one...it's fantastic (with a no-MP3 source )

Yeah ... the girls love guys who are wearing these gargantuous headphones on their way to work. Groovy!