[kanonathena]

I thought rockbox only gives you more eq options, does it actually improve sq?

 

[sid1712]

I dont think so. I didnt notice any difference whatsoever running a rockbox'd Fuze at flat EQ settings

 

[DJGeorgeT]

[size=10pt]Here are few differences:[/size]
[size=10pt]RB: sounds compressed[/size]
[size=10pt]OF: sounds free, I can hear each instrument apart from the others[/size]
[size=10pt]RB: sounds one dimensional[/size]
[size=10pt]OF: sounds three dimensional, there is depth to each instrument, instrument decay is noticeable[/size]
[size=10pt]RB: mids are slightly recessed[/size]
[size=10pt]OF: mids are slightly forward[/size]
[size=10pt]RB: highs are grainy[/size]
[size=10pt]OF: highs spark[/size]
[size=10pt]RB: bass is more prominent[/size]
[size=10pt]OF: bass is slightly recessed in comparison[/size]
Quote:

I dont think so. I didnt notice any difference whatsoever running a rockbox'd Fuze at flat EQ settings

 

[shigzeo]

Interestingly, I agree with DJ George (a first?). Before I traded my Clip V2, the only reason I kept using it was because of RB, but RB, no matter how many iterations it went through, remained grainer, hissier, and more full of snap crack and pop artefacts than OF. The problem of course, is that without gapless and AAC, I found the Clip pretty useless. It is much better than the Fuze and I am sure the '+' version adds utility (added storage), but not enough to make me stay. 
 

 

[DJGeorgeT]

Yes, I forgot the pops, the hiss and floor noise and the many artifacts that RB introduces. This is not audiophile sound!
 
The fuze with the OF is a great DAP though. It sounds great! Yes, the firmware is not feature packed as RB, but it is a keeper.
 
George 
 
Quote:

Interestingly, I agree with DJ George (a first?). Before I traded my Clip V2, the only reason I kept using it was because of RB, but RB, no matter how many iterations it went through, remained grainer, hissier, and more full of snap crack and pop artefacts than OF. The problem of course, is that without gapless and AAC, I found the Clip pretty useless. It is much better than the Fuze and I am sure the '+' version adds utility (added storage), but not enough to make me stay. 
 

 

[shigzeo]

The fuze hisses too much for me and has a grainy midrange in either OF or RB. It does run RB much better, though. In fact, the only reason I used the Fuze V2 was because of RB. Nowadays, however, I stay away from it (sent it away).

 

[DJGeorgeT]

You mean RB runs better in the fuze than in the Clip...
 
RB in the clip and fuze sounds lousy
 
I am back to OF in both players. I can live without gapless or EQ.
 
George
 
Quote:

The fuze hisses too much for me and has a grainy midrange in either OF or RB. It does run RB much better, though. In fact, the only reason I used the Fuze V2 was because of RB. Nowadays, however, I stay away from it (sent it away).

 

[shigzeo]

My V2 was perfect with both OF and RB in terms of performance - neither was better nor worse, but then again, I've not updated the thing since June. That nipple and the lack of volume buttons really nerved me. But the Fuze was just not for me.
 
I am enjoying to a certain extent the Hippo Gumstick now - small, reasonable build quality and pretty good sound. Low hiss, no grain, and flex-free construction make it good for on the go. But again, no gapless playback. After paying 50$ for a 4GB Fuze over a year ago, a 99$ 4GB player that needs a magnifiying lens to operate is a bugger. At least it doesn't rely on boy scout nipples though.
 
I'd love for chinese manufacturers to step up to their sometimes impressive SQ with good, well thought-out interfaces. SQ is good, but if I have to weigh in 95% SQ of another player that has great navigation and a few music listening amenities, I'll never choose the clunker.

 

[DJGeorgeT]

You should probably stick with mainstream, easy to use products.
 
I have no problems with clunkiness. I care about sound quality more than anything else.
 
My fuze is V1 and there is remarkable difference between the sound quality of OF and RB with all FX and EQ off. RB being worse.
 
George

 

[shigzeo]

I find that most mainstream products also have problems. You see, I came from the MD world only about 3 years ago. They were chunky, metal and bristled with buttons of all sorts. When, in the middle of the worst iPod bashing, I discovered that MD was too hard to keep up when on the road, I bought into Cowon and Meizu - one mainstream and one decidedly not. The Meizu had a more pleasing sound, but it hissed. The Cowon operated better (sort of), but lacked so many things that a cheap, run of the mill MD/CD player had. 
 
The argument that SQ is ethereal and personal in nature is silly - these devices HAVE to measured by some metric, otherwise they the 'SQ' moniker remains the analog of 'I like cheese because it tastes greasy'. Grease detractors will disagree. So too will the masses who prefer another sound.
 
So while saying that I would PREFER a mainstream device might be true on one hand (I'd love a device that brought the same level of commitment of actual music playback as a CD/MD device), I know I won't find it outside of a jumble of hoops. iPod currently is the only line that allows me to hear my music as it is recorded. Rockbox is another, but it has to be played through ancient players with loads of hiss, bad roll off, poor stereo image, or that are impossible still to find.
 
The Fuze is one of the most mainstream players on the market and came out a couple of years after Sansa did their whole 'iSheep' thing where they made fun of Apple for designing clicky wheels, proprietary connectors, fiddly nipples, and having a group of sheep buyers. At the same time, the OF Fuze doesn't have a good EQ (albeit a bit better than the stock Apple one), lacks gapless playback, hisses, 's got loads of grain in the midrange, bristled with proprietary cabling and poor USB charging and sports a fiddly nipple.
 
My trust of the mainstream is at an all time low now. On the one hand, the Fuze plays low Ω earphones pretty well, but it sacrifices image width and raises hiss. On the other, it is fiddly. In the mainstream, there really is only one company that caters to the music lover (and one could argue that the music lover is audiophile). That is Apple. But they do everything with skeleton severity - no EQ, no effects, pure performance with very little added sound signature. I understand why people hate them, but at the same time, I laugh at the assumption they sound bad.
 
I'd love the Gumstick to have a workable GUI and gapless playback and AAC. Sony have everything but hiss and gapless nailed. But they're Sony - they'll never fix those issues. Microsoft are completely proprietary. Cowon have style, but no substance (very average headphone performance). iRiver have left the building. Chinese players are pushing the boundary for actual sound enhancements at a circuit level, but they do it without the insurance of good build quality and ease of use. 
 
Fighting to listen to music isn't something a music lover should have to do. In the 'old days', music lovers just popped in a CD, tape, DAT, DCC, MD, record, and 'hit' a play button or switched a knob of sorts. Today, to get the same level of interaction between music and person is much much harder and is a process that degrades the enjoyment of music. I don't get it - why in a world where we have every technical advance are amateurs allowed to ford ahead with consumer's money and complaints towed in sky high?
 

 

[DJGeorgeT]

can the gumstick stand shoulder to shoulder with the s:flo 2 in terms of sound quality? I am thinking of getting a gumstick.

 

[shigzeo]

I've not given it a very good comparo yet. Today was the first time I loaded it with my music. I am borrowing it (maybe indefinitely). I'm not sure if you've read my thoughts on the S:Flo 2. They are 80% positive (in sound) and mostly negative otherwise. 
 
I've not yet compared hiss, bass, treble, mids, actual performance, or anything else. All I can say is that the Gumstick impresses a lot more for its intended market. That said, it must have been designed by a blind mouse because the 'enter' button (for track changing, entering, and even play/pause) changes at will. Again, I'd expect nothing better.
 
But the Gumstick is good. I've demoed the Roocoo-A or however you say it and was unequivocally unimpressed. There are certain things that 'SQ' can smooth over, but if SQ only rears its head when you use a very specific headphone, it is too far fetched. Here are my thoughts on the Rocoo-A.
 
I'll do an official review of the Gumstick, but it'll lack anything but utility and sound as I've nothing like package with me.

 

[sadata]

That's funny, I found the exact opposite to be true

 
Quote:

[size=10pt]Here are few differences:[/size]
[size=10pt]RB: sounds compressed[/size]
[size=10pt]OF: sounds free, I can hear each instrument apart from the others[/size]
[size=10pt]RB: sounds one dimensional[/size]
[size=10pt]OF: sounds three dimensional, there is depth to each instrument, instrument decay is noticeable[/size]
[size=10pt]RB: mids are slightly recessed[/size]
[size=10pt]OF: mids are slightly forward[/size]
[size=10pt]RB: highs are grainy[/size]
[size=10pt]OF: highs spark[/size]
[size=10pt]RB: bass is more prominent[/size]
[size=10pt]OF: bass is slightly recessed in comparison[/size]

 

 

[DJGeorgeT]

umm, I think you got confused and thought at one point RB was the OF and OF was RB.
 
Quote:

That's funny, I found the exact opposite to be true

 

 

 

[absoluNewbie]

for my own knowledge, what is OF?i understand RB is rockbox?