[darkangel9685]

I've been looking at a few DAP's to get, as my HD-1 is regretabbly showing signs of age.

So far, its a tie between:
Sony NW-HD5
Zune
Zen Vision M

I like having a dock for the player, which the Zune and ZVM both have. The Hd-5, however, does not

BUT, the HD-5 will play my ATRAC files from my HD-1, saving me time of re-ripping/converting all of my music. (ATRAC can easily be converted to WAV btw, just time consuming, as i have a lot of stored music)

Also, the ZVM and HD-5 both both a lineout connection for my amp, while the Zune doesn't (yet)

So, what does everyone think. HD-5, Zune, or ZVM?

 

[Omari149]

Zune all the way. Because it hasn't failed me once, and I had it since february 2007.

 

[Ricardo Dawkins]

Do you care about videos, pictures, accesories or something else besides ATRAC support and SQ ?

What ZV:M version ? (for me this is the best option - dock + lineout - )
Remember Zune is max. 30GB and only lossy codecs supports (as now)

 

[dissembled]

I've previously owned the HD5. Have the ZVM now. Sis has the Zune.

SQ: Zune - airy; full sound
Zen: bassy; has prat, good impact
HD5: if you like warm/colored sound. (definately not neutral.)

Top picks for each category:

Video: Zen (better, brigher, more colorful screen; more codec support)

Navigation: Zen + HD5 (enables sorting through first letter of artist name/album/song)

Battery life: HD5 (192 KPBS files = 2 days of constant usage; 320KPBS/highest ATRAC enoding = half a day of constant use (8-12 hrs)

Build quality: Zune (ZVM - scratch prone w/o BSE/ HD5 - directional buttons cracks (though has NO direct effect on usability)

 

[judas391]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissembled /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've previously owned the HD5. Have the ZVM now. Sis has the Zune. SQ: Zune - airy; full sound Zen: bassy; has prat, good impact HD5: if you like warm/colored sound. (definately not neutral.) Top picks for each category: Video: Zen (better, brigher, more colorful screen; more codec support) Navigation: Zen + HD5 (enables sorting through first letter of artist name/album/song) Battery life: HD5 (192 KPBS files = 2 days of constant usage; 320KPBS/highest ATRAC enoding = half a day of constant use (8-12 hrs) Build quality: Zune (ZVM - scratch prone w/o BSE/ HD5 - directional buttons cracks (though has NO direct effect on usability)

dead on comparison, especially about the zune's fuller sound. haven't tried the hd5 yet.
if it were up to me, I'd stick with the zune because of it's form/sq. a zune with good battery life wouldn't go amiss either

 

[dissembled]

Forgot to mention, that out of all those 3, only the HD5 has a replaceable battery.

 

[darkangel9685]

I'd get the HD-5 in a flash, except that they are sooo friggin hard to find anywhere

Right now it looks like its the ZVM + LOD for me

 

[rockin_amigo14]

If I were you, I'd start re-ripping your music. There's no sense in keeping your music in ATRAC. I think I saw somewhere that even Sony is going to ditch ATRAC and just stick to the normal codecs. However, I don't remember where I saw that, so take that with a grain of salt.

The Zune has much better headphone-out sound than the ZVM. I never tested the ZVM dock or line-out. The ZVM sounded decent, but nothing more than above average. That said, the ZVM is a more well-rounded player. Great video codec support, better audio codec support, beautiful screen, FM radio recording and voice recording, navigation is better, comes in a 60gb flavor (though the Zune can be modded), and doesn't require clunky software.

However, the holiday season will be upon us in a few months, so I'd suggest waiting to see what the companies show off.

 

[Quaddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkangel9685 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've been looking at a few DAP's to get, as my HD-1 is regretabbly showing signs of age. So far, its a tie between: Sony NW-HD5 Zune Zen Vision M So, what does everyone think. HD-5, Zune, or ZVM?

well i think its inevitable for me to say go with the HD5, heh!

- that is, if you are only after a music player, none of this hi tech video malarkey!! - for that i have a separate cheap and cheerful flash player. but i always think if you are into your sounds, buy something designed to solely play tunes. not a jack of all trades.

you probably know this, but the HD5 does have a 'dock' - sort of, on ebay there are plenty of docks in the accessories section when searching for an hd5 - they are literally a stand (cradle) with the power and data cable supplied, like synch-n-charge, a basic dock in other words, have a look.

 

[DrBenway]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockin_amigo14 /img/forum/go_quote.gif If I were you, I'd start re-ripping your music. There's no sense in keeping your music in ATRAC. I think I saw somewhere that even Sony is going to ditch ATRAC and just stick to the normal codecs. However, I don't remember where I saw that, so take that with a grain of salt.

I agree that ATRAC is rapidly becoming a fossil, but you are much better off re-ripping than transcoding. It's true, darkangel9685, that you can easily convert ATRAC to WAV, and this will not involve any SQ hit other than that caused by the original compression to ATRAC. In other words, you should end up with a WAV file that sounds identical to the ATRAC file you started out with.

The problem is, WAVs are BIG. Not a problem if you have tons of disc space and don't mind the longer transfer times and larger space requirements. But if you do re-compress the WAV files you converted from ATRAC, you are going to take an SQ hit, unless you use FLAC or some other lossless compression codec.

All I'm saying is that you are better off going back to your original CDs and re-ripping them to WAV, lossless, or the lossy codec of your choice than transcoding ATRAC to another lossy format.

Forgive me if this is old news to you!

 

[darkangel9685]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrBenway /img/forum/go_quote.gif I agree that ATRAC is rapidly becoming a fossil, but you are much better off re-ripping than transcoding. It's true, darkangel9685, that you can easily convert ATRAC to WAV, and this will not involve any SQ hit other than that caused by the original compression to ATRAC. In other words, you should end up with a WAV file that sounds identical to the ATRAC file you started out with. The problem is, WAVs are BIG. Not a problem if you have tons of disc space and don't mind the longer transfer times and larger space requirements. But if you do re-compress the WAV files you converted from ATRAC, you are going to take an SQ hit, unless you use FLAC or some other lossless compression codec. All I'm saying is that you are better off going back to your original CDs and re-ripping them to WAV, lossless, or the lossy codec of your choice than transcoding ATRAC to another lossy format. Forgive me if this is old news to you!

your forgiven!

WAV is comparable in size to AAL (Atrac ADvanced Lossless) which is what I rip my music in

 

[PrototypeX2]

Honestly, you will be happy with any of the choice from the 3.
They all sound quite similar; warm sound signature, fairly large soundstage...etc
Try looking at reviews and check prices and see which one fits you the most.

And +1 on re-ripping

 

[DrBenway]

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkangel9685 /img/forum/go_quote.gif your forgiven! WAV is comparable in size to AAL (Atrac ADvanced Lossless) which is what I rip my music in

Well, I guess I could have saved myself (and everyone else on this thread) an embarrassing digression if I had asked what ATRAC bit-rate you use. Since you're using AAL, obviously you'll get back all your bits when you re-inflate to WAV.

In the imortal words of the late, great Emily Litella:

Never Mind!

 

[darkangel9685]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrBenway /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, I guess I could have saved myself (and everyone else on this thread) an embarrassing digression if I had asked what ATRAC bit-rate you use. Since you're using AAL, obviously you'll get back all your bits when you re-inflate to WAV. In the imortal words of the late, great Emily Litella: Never Mind!

for the record:

AAL @ 352 kbps/sec (CD's)
ATRAC @ 192 kbps/sec (MP3's)

 

[DrBenway]

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkangel9685 /img/forum/go_quote.gif for the record: AAL @ 352 kbps/sec

Isn't that the part of the rip that transfers to portables? I was under the impression that AAL creates two rips -- one lossless, for the PC only (no Sony devices currently support playback of the lossless component of the rip) and one lossy for transfer to Minidisc. At least that's what I've read on the Minidisc Community Forum at Minidisc.org...