Some News (or Rumor) About R10

[jackal]

Originally Posted by overgaardcom

I love the way Apple does it. They keep it tight, then announce a revolution and one can buy it right after the announcement.

errrrrrrrrrrr

you mean, they announce something thats way behind the times, and then its available 6 months later


iphone wasn't even 3g and it took longer than 6 months to come to the UK

and as for the ipod, well I had a 20Gig Hango jukebox about 2 whole years before the 6 gb ipod made its debut and guess what, the Hango still beats any ipod ever made into oblivion when it comes to easy UI and sound quality

if you really knoe your stuff then I'm afraid apple is many things but revolutionary isn't one of them !

[stunsworth]

Originally Posted by jackal

and as for the ipod, well I had a 20Gig Hango jukebox about 2 whole years before the 6 gb ipod made its debut and guess what, the Hango still beats any ipod ever made into oblivion when it comes to easy UI and sound quality

Can you still buy the Hango? I confess that I'd never heard of the device. There's a link here, that seems to indicate a very rudimentary interface. Perhaps it's improved in later releases...

Personal Jukebox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[jackal]

yes it was very rudimentary but don't be fooled by badges, white surfaces, shiny bits and all that type of stuff. The PJB was zero bullsh1t and delivered where it counted.

it was made in tiny quantities on a tiny budget and at the time, the largest regular mp3 player you could get was somthing like 256 mb ! So its hardly suprising that it looked pretty homemade.

but it did what it was supposed to very very well. Namely, incredible sound quality that has yet to be beaten in my opinion (and the opinion of many others). Because it wasn't mass produced for maximum profit, great care was taken over the design of the audio quality. It had a very natural, open, non-digital or analogue-ish sound and was very loud when required. Anyone who has owned other devices like rio, iaudio etc.. will know just how bad the ipod is on sound quality and how for example overclipped the top end is on them and the general muddyness etc.. They can't even match up to the outgoing Archos models which are themselves far short of the PJB.

Also, the interface worked extremely well and getting to any track immediately was very very easy. It also featured true gapless recording (which I understand the ipod and nearly every other player out there today still cannot perform) so for DJ mixed albums, classical albums or pieces of music where you don't have a silence between the tracks you did NOT get a gap yet the album would still be split into individual tracks.

Anyway, things have moved on a bit now and we all have the luxury of video as well but it was truly ahead of its time back in 99/2001. I remember walking around with mine at work and people just couldn't believe it when I told them what it was and that it was 20gb. Even mp3 players were pretty novel at the time let alone one so vast.

[marknorton]

I doubt that Apple are overly concerned about sound quality any more than they are concerned about product durability. For the great majority of users, the sound quality is "good enough" and the functionality is a big step forwards from the old tape and CD walkmans.

Besides, as soon as you start using MP3, sound quality takes a back seat anyway.

[jackal]

Originally Posted by marknorton

I doubt that Apple are overly concerned about sound quality any more than they are concerned about product durability. For the great majority of users, the sound quality is "good enough" and the functionality is a big step forwards from the old tape and CD walkmans.

Besides, as soon as you start using MP3, sound quality takes a back seat anyway.

yes obviously, no one is disputing that, the mediocrity are just that, average and mediocre and popularity is always a very poor indication of how good something is

I pointed all this out to demonstrate that apple are NOT revolutionary, not to try and make apple cry

[stunsworth]

Originally Posted by marknorton

Besides, as soon as you start using MP3, sound quality takes a back seat anyway.

That's very true. But of course the bit rate has an influence on the sound quality too. How Apple can get away with selling 128 kbs tracks on iTunes is beyond me. I rip my CDs at 256 kbs and I have to say they sound reasonable on my iPod. Mind you, that's after ditching the rather poor supplied headphones for a pair of Sennheisner 'ear bud' type of headphones. My only regret is that when I started to rip the CDs I didn't chose a lossless format. Few tracks on the iPod, but I'd feel better streaming them in house from a server.

But as you say it's not about sound quality, it's about portability. The fact that I can have a device with several hundred albums on it that's the size of a pack of cards is amazing.

[jackal]

Originally Posted by marknorton

Besides, as soon as you start using MP3, sound quality takes a back seat anyway.

thats an easy comment to make if you don't own anything that sounds any good. But why should it take a back seat ? if that were the case then we'd all be running aroud with 16kps encoded files and saving hugely on storage space. Even if its on a lower level than say Vinyl, there are still widely varying degrees of quality within the format.

if you heard a good player and realised what's possible with a pair of say HD-25 1's then maybe you'd probably your tune

it sounds better therefore its way more enjoyable, therefore it is better
sorry, ipods sounds lifeless and obscured

[stunsworth]

I think Mark knows what constitutes good sound given his background is designing audio equipment.

Mp3 is a lossless format - just like Jpeg, and it's attraction is the ability to compress an original CD to something a lot smaller. As ever it's about compromise. Small file size versus sound quality. With the current fad of compressing music at the recording/mastering stage a low bit rate is probably adequate, but if you listen to music with wide dynamics and frequency extremes - particularly high frequencies - then the limitation of the lossless MP3 format become apparent.

I fear we've gone rather off topic.

[masjah]

"...MP3 is a lossless format ...".

Steve, don't you mean "lossy"? (Sorry to perpetuate the "off-track" diversion!)

[stunsworth]

Originally Posted by masjah

Steve, don't you mean "lossy"? (Sorry to perpetuate the "off-track" diversion!)

I did indeed, apologies. I blame it on the Tallis SACD I was listening to at the time, which to the best of my knowledge _is_ a lossless format <grin>.

[masjah]

Originally Posted by stunsworth

I did indeed, apologies. I blame it on the Tallis SACD I was listening to at the time, which to the best of my knowledge _is_ a lossless format <grin>.

Now that IS a decent excuse! (I once sang in "Spem in Alium" - wonderful!)

[marknorton]

I think the iPod delivers reasonable sound quality for the price and if you couple it with one of the better docking amp and speakers, it gives much better quality than the traditional ghetto-blaster.

Sure, finely engineered components give better sound quality but I gave up designing audio equipment because there's no money to be made from it and I didn't have/don't have "Golden Ears". I just could not tell the difference between one make of polypropylene capacitor and another.

Now, I'm quite happy to have all my music - thousands of CDs - server based using iTunes, Apple Lossless feeding an iPod and a number of wireless SqueezeBoxes, one of which goes through a decent DAC (Meridian G91) and sounds pretty good to my ears. My new "fave" of the moment, Alison Balsom and her magical trumpet sound wonderful, though I have been banned by a higher power from buying one to learn to play...

[PS Sorry about perpetuating the OT-ness, but we have done the R10 to death. As Andy said before the M8 was launched, it's going to a long hot summer if we go on like this!]

[stunsworth]

Originally Posted by masjah

Now that IS a decent excuse! (I once sang in "Spem in Alium" - wonderful!)

Hmmm, that was the piece I was listening to - though not with you singing I'm afraid John.

[stunsworth]

Originally Posted by marknorton

Now, I'm quite happy to have all my music - thousands of CDs - server based using iTunes, Apple Lossless feeding an iPod and a number of wireless SqueezeBoxes, one of which goes through a decent DAC (Meridian G91) and sounds pretty good to my ears. My new "fave" of the moment, Alison Balsom and her magical trumpet sound wonderful, though I have been banned by a higher power from buying one to learn to play

I have to say I've been considering re-ripping my CDs using lossless compression and buying one of the same companies Transporters - Transporter Wireless Network Music Player: The wireless digital music player audiophiles have been waiting for. - mainly because it can support up to 96/24. The only thing putting me off is the time it would take to rip the CDs for a second time.

At least you didn't decide to play the drums!

[masjah]

Steve

Just as well really!

Mark

"I didn't have/don't have "Golden Ears". I just could not tell the difference between one make of polypropylene capacitor and another."

Couldn't agree more. Emperor's New Clothes in my opinion. As the late and much loved Peter Walker of QUAD once said (I paraphrase as I can't remember his exact words):

"Any sound differences which can be shown really to exist by a carefully controlled, statistically significant double-blind trial can also be identified by appropriate measurement".

[jackal]

Originally Posted by marknorton

I think the iPod delivers reasonable sound quality for the price

yeah, its ok and admittedly the line out is reputedly a lot better than the headphone socket

but sound quality from other manufactuerers is most definitely better... none of this matters much of course especially within the relevant marketplace; the only reason I pointed this out was to take a stand against the popularist idea that apple bring out 'revolutionary' products

in point of fact, the latest Archos players (true video+audio solution playing wmv, divx, Xvidm mpeg and anything you can throw at it) have also gone backwards in sound quality. No doubt the effects of mass production and cost cutting. I reverted back to an older AV500 which still has a very good sound when partnered with some good phones.

[jackal]

Originally Posted by masjah

Peter Walker of QUAD

crikey.. there's a name form the past !


many many years ago I used to have to sell Quad systems... Hardest thing i've ever had to do in my entire life

[stunsworth]

The 'revolutionary' aspect of the iPod IMHO was tying to to iTunes and the Apple store. Revolutionary for Apple's finances at least <grin>

[stunsworth]

Originally P