A question:will you buy hi-md or hd3?
Dec 17, 2004 at 11:29 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 8

aloha

New Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 4, 2004
Posts
2
Likes
0
I cant make my mind,so I need some advice from everybody.
Really thank you if you can help me.
wink.gif
 
Dec 17, 2004 at 12:52 PM Post #4 of 8
Better to trust mp3 then atract. All your songs as of I know are re encoded to atrac when putting your songs to the hi-md. That means if you have some
mp3s . they will be re encoded to atrac- with the hd3 you have more freedom in your format on the player-

None of those players are that great. They dont play flac or other Lossless Audio Codecs.

M3 has support for some Lossless Audio Codecs
iPod has Lossless Audio Codec (Apple's own Lossless Audio Codec)
Rio Karma supports Lossless Audio Codec if I recall correctly and gapless
And some more probably that I missed
 
Dec 17, 2004 at 1:32 PM Post #6 of 8
Quote:

Originally Posted by aloha
I want know which one is better to listen music,more important ,I hope I can get a high quality,not like ipod.I doubt can i trust mp3 in sound quality??


If you haven't spent much time comparing different bit rates for MP3's, it sounds like now is the perfect time. Pick a couple of songs, and encode them into MP3's at five or six different bit rates, and then compare them to the original WAV file. I've done this, and settled on 192 for most songs on my iPod, if I need higher fidelity, I'll use a PCDP and listen to the original CD.

-Keith
 
Dec 17, 2004 at 2:16 PM Post #7 of 8
I'd love to hear why you think hi-md or hd3 will offer superior quality to the iPod?
Since it's not about formats/codec support (as others have said), and at least by the numbers, the iPod has a more powerful headphone out (course you can use the line out), do you have more faith in the Sony's DAC, etc.?

Linking here with a bit of hesitation, here's an old Audiophile review (3G, prior to ALAC and a few others things outdated).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top