[Dreamnine]

It's one player I just haven't got bored with - I love it every time I use it. The touch interface is so slick and easy to use - there is more real estate there than on a typical player with buttons, ie a Clip+.
 
I love the Clip+ too - there is a lot more going on there with Rockbox and it holds more music, but the nano is the donkey's gonads as far as I am concerned for a seamless audio experience... Now, a Cowon E2 with a colour touchscreen - that's something I'd like to see.

 

[swbf2cheater]

If my entire library were not in flac, I would seriously consider selling something or trading something for one
 
I'm running out of space as it is with 24gb, I dont like having to make sacrifices just because apple refuses to listen to anyone lol

 

[Dreamnine]

You could convert your flac to apple lossless (I guess?) if you have to have lossless files.
 
Fortunately nearly all my files are mp3 vbr.

 

[swbf2cheater]

well it doesnt seem worth it to convert 150GB of flac media to Apple Lossless.   I use an 8gb fuze with a 16gb micro sd, and thats nowhere near enough for me.  So, i wouldnt be at all happy with downgrading to a 16gb nano 6g just for the touch factor, and lose battery life, high ouput and the fuzes eq setup, micro sd support, and spending a few days converting 150gb+ of media into itunes and then having to buy another hard drive just to handle the mirrored collection that was flac, but now is Apple Lossless.  
 
:\
 
apple doesnt support audiophiles so audiophiles shouldnt support apple.

 

[Dreamnine]

Fair enough...iTunes is frickin' horrible, I'm someone who likes drag & drop and having to use iTunes is like having teeth pulled without getting a shot.
 
Luckily I don't swap out my music much and I use a wall-wart to charge.

 

[shigzeo]

You know, you could just use iTunes to 'drag and drop' into your iPod. I never sync, I always clear songs I don't want and then drag albums I want. I've met a number of people who think it is faster/better to drag and drop from finder/explorer, but they always take forever to do the same operation that an application like iTunes can do. There is a search bar at the top to find that one song, you can expand it to find the album. you can sort, skip, selectively copy/paste - everything from one window in a fraction of the time it would take you to do it manually via drag and drop.
 
It's not the enemy if you know how to use it.
 
@Cheater - what is an audiophile that Apple should support her? If FLAC is the only dusty companion to define an audiophile, then Apple don't support audiophiles. But I think you have to look at what they have done and are continuing doing. No 'audiophile' player has improved upon and improved upon sound to the point where there isn't a player on the market that hisses less, or that fully supports industry standards, great resolution with ALL headphones, supports gapless playback. 
 
If by audiophile you mean pretentious snobs who really care very little about the playback quality of their music; i.e. they could care less if their music has gaps that their CD's never had, they trill endlessly about FLAC and open-source codecs, they don't mind if players hiss, or roll off low or high frequencies, then again, Apple don't support them.
 
And, I am glad that I am not an audiophile by any of the definitions I've listed. The companies that do support these audiophiles often charge a lot for pretty substandard sound quality, but because they market their stuff to audiophiles, they can charge premiums, dish out poor hardware/customer support, can layer on the hiss, peel away the resolution - and so on. As long as you market yourself for audiophiles, you are a golden-eared company, but if you just market yourself as a do-it-all player, there is no way in Hell that you can sound good.
 
Am I reading this correctly?

 

[Dreamnine]

I didn't look too closely at ITunes - just did a manual sync and I found it a pain - I'm too used to folders, which it seems unwilling to deal with so I only use it very rarely.

 

[shigzeo]

However you arrange folders iTunes can emulate perfectly. Boot it up and if your folders on your disk (your ideal) are arranged by album, then voila! press the album tab and everything is arranged that way. Ditto for artist, for rating, for year, for song title, and about 30 other criteria. The only thing you are seeing differently is that one is in a piece of software and the other looks like folders on a sheet of white paper. One day, you will stop stacking pieces of paper on random spots on your desk, clean up your room, vacuum your car, and find that there are organisers, car detail shops, and proper nooks for everything. 
 
organising by albums is slower and allows waaaaaay less freedom for the end user because you cannot easily set up track listings, play lists, specific play cycles, or anything other than album organisation. 
 
In terms of physical organisation, iTunes organises things by artist on the HD. But you don't need to go the old, slow way and pluck through your 150 albums by hand. You can sort however you want within iTunes because at the end of the day, there is no such thing as real organisation on a computer. You are using a method that only works because your brain is tricked into thinking that there eally are folders on your computer, that they contain albums. It is all arbitrary logic, that is all. 
 
Use an application and you'll find out that true freedom isn't being locked in your room becuase you can't envision a key, it is turning the door knob and walking out. 

 

[smial1966]

This may be somewhat out of kilter with the theme of this thread but bear with me. 
 
Having owned a 6th generation 8GB nano for a while now I'm pleased with it's diminutive size, intuitive menu, robust construction and decent sound quality. What infuriates me is that you can't turn the blooming thing off. Pressing the on/off button ostensibly shuts down the nano, but It's permanently in standby mode and will only switch itself off after 36 hours of inactivity. What this means is that leaving the nano e.g. overnight (by default in standby mode) depletes the battery. I've frequently left the nano overnight with a 50% full battery to find it displaying 25% or less the next morning. Lest you think that this is operator error, there are numerous complaints about this nano `quirk' online and I hope that Apple will rectify it with a firmware update.
 
Incidentally, the nano partners extremely well with an RSA The Shadow, LOD and IEM's. Recording in WAV or lossless this combination sounds wonderfully musical, transparent and engaging.
 
At the risk of being pilloried I actually like using iTunes.

     

 

[Dreamnine]

You can turn it off if you go into the service menu...otherwise it behaves like a Sony and is instant-on or it shuts down after 36 hours. The battery in mine doesn't seem to deplete overnight.

 

[smial1966]

Hi,
 
Thanks for the info. Please explain in stages EXACTLY how you turn your nano off as I can't find this facility on mine.
 
Cheers.

 

[righteousball]

Quote:

Hi, im going to debunk some myths about this
 
the nano6g has a 105mah output battery, the Sansa fuze has a 550mah output. I could name half a dozen brand name mp3 players that "blow the nano 6g out of the water".  Its soundstage is not spacious, its output is literally 1/4 that of the fuze. 

 
That's just the SIZE of the battery. While some might adjust the output for lower power draw, battery size in itself doesn't necessarily mean it's got 1/4 the output AT ALL. If you're an engineer, you can just as easily connect a 550mAh battery onto the nano's internals, or an 105mAh battery onto the Fuse's guts, that would just extend or shrink the battery life accordingly. Apple just happens to decide it's going to use a smaller battery.
 
Please stop trying to debunk anything until you learn where the output of an MP3 player comes from. Plus in the late 90s, I have heard a string of Panasonic cassette players with ever-diminishing output (4+4mW --> 2.5+2.5 --> 1.7+1.7), and I can very clearly remember the negative effects of actually lessening output. Let me tell you, the 6g nano does NOT significantly suffer from that vis-a-vis the ipod touch.

 

[swbf2cheater]

Quote:

 
That's just the SIZE of the battery. While some might adjust the output for lower power draw, battery size in itself doesn't necessarily mean it's got 1/4 the output AT ALL. If you're an engineer, you can just as easily connect a 550mAh battery onto the nano's internals, or an 105mAh battery onto the Fuse's guts, that would just extend or shrink the battery life accordingly. Apple just happens to decide it's going to use a smaller battery.
 
Please stop trying to debunk anything until you learn where the output of an MP3 player comes from. Plus in the late 90s, I have heard a string of Panasonic cassette players with ever-diminishing output (4+4mW --> 2.5+2.5 --> 1.7+1.7), and I can very clearly remember the negative effects of actually lessening output. Let me tell you, the 6g nano does NOT significantly suffer from that vis-a-vis the ipod touch.

Please take the time to read before you post.  Nobody was talking about volume or how the battery power rating either increases volume output or has anything to do with driving headphones more efficiently or with more power, because that is what I feel like you believed I was speaking of.  But if you had read back just a few posts you wouldn't have become so confused.  Basically what you have just implied,due to not reading past posts that fueled future posts on the next page is that a 105mah battery found in the nano 6g is better than a 500mah battery found in the fuze.  However, if you did not misunderstand me, and you actually feel your argument had even the slightest bit of relevance towards what I was speaking of, well I am not really sure what to say to that. So, while my experience with mp3 player batteries is very limited, I do know that the fuze battery, and most batteries of similar power are all much larger than the nano 6g.  There could be 550mah batteries out there smaller than the Nano 6g, but I've never seen one.  So, I am trying very hard to understand what the heck your motivation for posting your reply was.  
 
It's kind of like me saying you need to learn what engines do when everyone else was talking about tires on a car.   Was the bolded section in my post below what confused you?  If so then I am sorry, I was just trying to list some things about the nano6 I am not fond of, and saying it has a spacious sound stage is just untrue.   But again, I can see that it might be possible for you to have misunderstood me.  
 
Edit:  The word "Output" applies to both the batteries electrical output as well as when someone is talking about volume or driving ability.  
 
Quote:

Hi, im going to debunk some myths about this
 
the nano6g has a 105mah output battery, the Sansa fuze has a 550mah output. I could name half a dozen brand name mp3 players that "blow the nano 6g out of the water".  Its soundstage is not spacious, its output is literally 1/4 that of the fuze. 
 
Having said that, I've always wanted a small tiny little touch just like it, however...its apple.  I'll avoid it like the plague.  It's very weak and if you are using 16 ohm earbuds, you might get an astounding 10 hours of battery life when NOT USING apple lossless.  With it, more like 6 hours.  The nano6g looks awesome, great concept idea, terrible performance.  

 

[shigzeo]

So, I take it you've used the nano 6G then, cheater. That is why you know about its battery life, its output 'power' and its soundstage. Thank you for being forthwith for the many in this thread like me who have no idea about it. We can learn so much from you - since you obviously use the nano and own it - I mean, otherwise, what would motivate you to rail on it so badly, because that would be incredible.

 

[swbf2cheater]

Quote:

So, I take it you've used the nano 6G then, cheater. That is why you know about its battery life, its output 'power' and its soundstage. Thank you for being forthwith for the many in this thread like me who have no idea about it. We can learn so much from you - since you obviously use the nano and own it - I mean, otherwise, what would motivate you to rail on it so badly, because that would be incredible.

Please read my posts, and it might be wise to take a few seconds to read 1 page backward.

 
Quote:

Yep.  Side by side comparison with the sansa fuze.

Quote:

I really want one, so dont get me wrong lol.  
 

Quote:

You know, you could just use iTunes to 'drag and drop' into your iPod. I never sync, I always clear songs I don't want and then drag albums I want. I've met a number of people who think it is faster/better to drag and drop from finder/explorer, but they always take forever to do the same operation that an application like iTunes can do. There is a search bar at the top to find that one song, you can expand it to find the album. you can sort, skip, selectively copy/paste - everything from one window in a fraction of the time it would take you to do it manually via drag and drop.
 
It's not the enemy if you know how to use it.
 
@Cheater - what is an audiophile that Apple should support her? If FLAC is the only dusty companion to define an audiophile, then Apple don't support audiophiles. But I think you have to look at what they have done and are continuing doing. No 'audiophile' player has improved upon and improved upon sound to the point where there isn't a player on the market that hisses less, or that fully supports industry standards, great resolution with ALL headphones, supports gapless playback. 
 
If by audiophile you mean pretentious snobs who really care very little about the playback quality of their music; i.e. they could care less if their music has gaps that their CD's never had, they trill endlessly about FLAC and open-source codecs, they don't mind if players hiss, or roll off low or high frequencies, then again, Apple don't support them.
 
And, I am glad that I am not an audiophile by any of the definitions I've listed. The companies that do support these audiophiles often charge a lot for pretty substandard sound quality, but because they market their stuff to audiophiles, they can charge premiums, dish out poor hardware/customer support, can layer on the hiss, peel away the resolution - and so on. As long as you market yourself for audiophiles, you are a golden-eared company, but if you just market yourself as a do-it-all player, there is no way in Hell that you can sound good.
 
Am I reading this correctly?

 
Safe to say you are not.  
 
Edit: Also, calling people snobs doesn't help.  If Apple Ipods had a battery as good as the Fuze, had a higher output in terms of the ability to drive decent headphones,didnt force you to pay $150 for 6-8 hours of Apple Lossless music with flat eq and very low ohm headphones, didnt force you to convert your entire library to their codecs and possibly needing a new hard drive just to store it all, I might consider them audiophile grade mp3 players.  Having said that, I still want a 6g...as i stated on a post on the previous page that you neglected to read.