80GB+ FLAC player?
Feb 23, 2008 at 11:26 PM Post #17 of 53

wanderman

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Posts
1,643
Likes
13
Quote:

Originally Posted by Febs /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Rumors no more. Major battery life improvements were implemented about 2 weeks ago. I benchmarked my iPod 5G at over 15 hours (playing MP3s) during the testing process for these improvements.

As for Pieman's comment that Rockbox is a "battery pig" on the iriver H140, this is just flat-out wrong. Rockbox exceeds the original firmware's battery life on the H100 series, and has for several years.



and the h300 series but not at the start of the project because of lcd issues.
 
Feb 28, 2008 at 2:53 PM Post #18 of 53

duff138

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 15, 2004
Posts
260
Likes
1
I was looking for a FLAC player too. My wife bought me a 160gig Ipod for my birthday.
I ripped a massive amount of FLAC to mp3, but found it only filled about 50 gig! I went back and used dbpoweramp and convert the FLAC to ALAC. I had an extra external drive on my computer, so I just had it directed to the empty hard drive. I let it convert all day. I got home opened up Itunes and dragged the new folder full of ALAC to my ipod.
I figured this makes more sense than trying to find a FLAC player. The 160gig Ipod has more storage, so it works out much better.
 
Feb 28, 2008 at 6:26 PM Post #19 of 53

Zanth

SHAman who knew of Head-Fi ten years prior to its existence
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Posts
9,570
Likes
40
Quote:

Originally Posted by duff138 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I was looking for a FLAC player too. My wife bought me a 160gig Ipod for my birthday.
I ripped a massive amount of FLAC to mp3, but found it only filled about 50 gig! I went back and used dbpoweramp and convert the FLAC to ALAC. I had an extra external drive on my computer, so I just had it directed to the empty hard drive. I let it convert all day. I got home opened up Itunes and dragged the new folder full of ALAC to my ipod.
I figured this makes more sense than trying to find a FLAC player. The 160gig Ipod has more storage, so it works out much better.



This works very well but the problem I have encountered is that sometimes the taggs from the FLAC files don't get carried over to the ALAC files. If I did a grand batch process I'd end up with a good amount of unknowns at worst but more than likely just a whole whack of oddly named files with new artist/album metadata.

Two reasons I am all over FLAC:

1) EAC's securing ripping and converting to FLAC. Though I suppose I could just ripp to .wav and then convert to ALAC via iTunes or dbpoweramp, but I like the all in one action.

2) FLAC is open source, meaning it will never be a locked down format, there will always be proper converters. Also, it means any hardware can use the format if the company chooses, unlike ALAC.

I have the space to have an ALAC library beside my FLAC library, I just don't like having to double up because of portable listening.

I'm very very close to just buying a 1 TB drive, hooking that up in an external enclosure, using Cog or iTunes with Xiph and playing FLAC that way, outputting to a DAC rather than having a massive DAP.
 
Feb 29, 2008 at 4:16 AM Post #20 of 53

lexnasa

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Posts
219
Likes
11
I agree with all the comments on Rockbox, but don't understand why everyone wants to go lossless for portable use, when the latest AOTUV Ogg encoder at Q7 is perceptually transparent 99% of the time, even on a high quality desktop based system.

I challenge anyone to correctly ABX AOTUV Ogg Q7 on a portable set-up.

Therefore, lossless is a waste of HD space, and a waste of battery life.

If storage and battery life are no longer a concern at some point in the future, then there'll be no need to transcode, and just for ease of use lossy codecs will be dead, but right now, for me, it doesn't make sense, and seems to be more about a general prejudice towards lossy codecs without actually having done any blind testing.
 
Feb 29, 2008 at 4:33 AM Post #21 of 53

Zanth

SHAman who knew of Head-Fi ten years prior to its existence
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Posts
9,570
Likes
40
1) iPods do not support Ogg
2) Ogg = lossy, no matter how you spin it, a high quality setup is going to demonstrate this. High quality IEM's even more so with their excellent isolation and hyper resolution
3) some of us don't want multiple copies of our libraries. FLAC, as a very future proof format, permits one to have a perfect copy of their CD and know that the future will always provide for the possibility to convert said format into whatever the format du jour is. Ogg is lossy, it might sound great, but it cuts bits, that means it is not archival worthy and is not worth the time for many of us. With space no longer a major concern (one of your two main points) the only problem would be battery life. I doubt anyone listening for 24 hours straight, so for most, charging at night should not be an issue. FLAC + current units + current battery life = at least a normal day's worth of listening, even with Rockbox which eats battery life.

Some of us are just not interested in lossy. It can't ever be as good. Heck digital is still trying to compete with analogue. No need to castrate it further.

It seems you yourself are prejudiced over those that prefer lossless. Some of us can actually hear the difference. Many swear by .mp3s Lame V0 encoded or 320 cbr, or aac 320 etc... each and every time, on a good setup the problems are apparent (at least on much of the music I listen to, it is a given that some forms of music will be hit harder than others).
 
Feb 29, 2008 at 5:21 AM Post #22 of 53

lexnasa

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Posts
219
Likes
11
1. Older iPods up to 5.5G do support Ogg via Rockbox.

2. Of course, in absolute terms, lossy can never be as good, some data is always lost. But if you can't hear the difference, then for the purpose of listening it IS as good.

3. I am not prejudiced against lossless. I use FLAC for my collection on my PC.

I can ABX MP3s very easily, also AAC. However I cannot ABX AOTUV Ogg at Q7.

All I am saying is don't dismiss all lossy codecs unless you've tested them. For me the only one I would use is AOTUV Ogg.

Have you listened to AOTUV Oggs at Q7? If so I welcome a discussion, if not this will be my last post on this thread!

My recommended compile for the encoder is here:

Ogg Vorbis ‚‘¬‰»ƒvƒƒWƒFƒNƒg
 
Feb 29, 2008 at 5:34 AM Post #23 of 53

Zanth

SHAman who knew of Head-Fi ten years prior to its existence
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Posts
9,570
Likes
40
Yes I have listened to it. It sounds just fine. I'm not disputing this. On my portable rig, while at work or school, I would be more than content with this format. In fact, I am very content with LAME V0 mp3s. The point for me anyway, is that given the sizes of DAPs (and ideally larger ones in the future) I shouldn't have to worry about size anymore. I should only have to consider what I have, in terms of, each DAP out there should play all formats without question if they are open as well, hook us up with a digital out. Because my collection is FLAC at the moment (and a good amount in ALAC because of forced conversion) I just don't feel the need to convert to something else.

With the new Wadia dock, the emphasis with something like the Classic with 160 GB of storage is lossless. Let's get that nice lossless file out there and to a DAC of choice. The handheld unit can become THE unit for anyone. On the go one has their entire collection, at home one can hook it up to a sweet dock with bitperfect digital extraction and off to the main rig.

Rockbox I used for my 4G iPod but it has since left me. I'm planning on purchasing some type of Dap in the coming months and would have loved a large capacity FLAC DAP with digital output. If Rockbox is availalbe for the Classic I'll throw it on.
 
Feb 29, 2008 at 5:50 AM Post #24 of 53

lexnasa

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Posts
219
Likes
11
Yes I agree, lossy codecs will be irrelevant very soon for portable audio, unless everyone moves to wireless headphones, then we need to start worrying about A2DP!

BTW, don't expect the iPod Classic to be supported any time soon by Rockbox. The firmware is encrypted, we can't work out how to decrypt it (or re-encrypt it) and we can't even find where it lives currently in memory or on the HD, so not many developers are participating to work on it alas.

For high capacity, the Classic & ALAC may be the way to go. Maybe ask Vinnie at Red Wine Audio if he can iMod it for you? I haven't heard the Wadia dock, but it's huge and not portable. Another alternative might be the Pacemaker, which has a digital out and supports FLAC, but this is a pretty expensive solution if you're not planning to DJ with it!
 
Feb 29, 2008 at 3:35 PM Post #25 of 53

LDMES

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Posts
311
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by lexnasa /img/forum/go_quote.gif
For high capacity, the Classic & ALAC may be the way to go. Maybe ask Vinnie at Red Wine Audio if he can iMod it for you? I haven't heard the Wadia dock, but it's huge and not portable. Another alternative might be the Pacemaker, which has a digital out and supports FLAC, but this is a pretty expensive solution if you're not planning to DJ with it!


Vinnie has already stated he won't mod the classic, as there is a different DAC and that with the architecture of the Classic, it isn't very feasible/worth it.
Though you can buy a 5.5G Ipod and get a bigger hard drive for it. There is already a 120GB hard drive for it and a 160GB is supposedly on the way.
 
Feb 29, 2008 at 4:08 PM Post #26 of 53

JimSmiley

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Posts
122
Likes
0
You can put a 120GB drive in a 5.5g?
Who does that?...very tempting!!
 
Feb 29, 2008 at 5:10 PM Post #27 of 53

manaox2

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Posts
2,754
Likes
17
Quote:

Originally Posted by JimSmiley /img/forum/go_quote.gif
You can put a 120GB drive in a 5.5g?
Who does that?...very tempting!!



A couple of people with iMods I've seen. Its not so tempting on the 120 when I see the price. However, I hope Samsung will release the 160gb soon now that Apple isn't going to pick it up. Its out of development, they are just hoping to get in with a big name portable DAP maker that competes IMO.
 
Feb 29, 2008 at 8:34 PM Post #28 of 53

Hayduke

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Posts
1,125
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by LDMES /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Vinnie has already stated he won't mod the classic, as there is a different DAC and that with the architecture of the Classic, it isn't very feasible/worth it.
Though you can buy a 5.5G Ipod and get a bigger hard drive for it. There is already a 120GB hard drive for it and a 160GB is supposedly on the way.



only 5.5G or 5G too? Are they really that different?
 
Feb 29, 2008 at 9:22 PM Post #29 of 53

Juli

New Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Posts
48
Likes
10
I have the same problem now, I want a DAP with 80gb, FLAC and Rockbox.
5.5g iMod would be perfect but it's damn expensive. I could get a refurbished iPod for 190$, but the Mod costs 250$. Is the Mod really that great, that it costs more than the actual iPod?

And how much of an improvment can I expect, right now I'm using a ZVM.
The improvments would be Rockbox, FLAC, gapless playback and the 80gb of space. But how much better would the soundquality be?
EDIT: How much of an improvment would I notice if I would only buy a normal 5.5g iPod?

Thanks in advance,

Juli
 
Feb 29, 2008 at 9:40 PM Post #30 of 53

LDMES

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Posts
311
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by Juli /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I have the same problem now, I want a DAP with 80gb, FLAC and Rockbox.
5.5g iMod would be perfect but it's damn expensive. I could get a refurbished iPod for 190$, but the Mod costs 250$. Is the Mod really that great, that it costs more than the actual iPod?



The iMod costs more than a standard iPod because Vinnie has to take the iPod and modify it to become an iMod. For the quality of work he does and the customer service he provides the cost he charges for the iMod is fair IMHO.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top