[pineapples10]

iriver just posted some new IRiver2/RioVolt2 pictures here: http://www.iriver.com/iriver2/iriver2_0.htm ENJOY!

p10

 

[Redwoood]

gorgeous...

But what does it sound like?

 

[eeyssjr]

Very smart. this looks wicked!

I want it. is it made by the same people that make the Rio MP3 players?

Edit: I just found all the info i think i need (?) at riovolt.com.

 

[neil]

Looks like something from an anime cartoon. Sweet...

 

[coolvij]

Well, my MD is kewler....so......there.

 

[FrostyMMB]

I really wanna know if it sounds good. I've got the money to buy a SL-CT570, but this is very tempting.

eeyssjr, yes. SonicBlue, who releases the Rio products, handles the US market of the iRiver, which is just renamed the RioVolt for us, of course.

coolvij...time to record full MD - 74 to 80 minutes, plus naming tracks, etc.
time to record MP3 CD - under 15 minutes (for most burners)
I'd prefer an MP3 CD over an MD cause it's much more convenient. I'd love an MD for recording live with a mic, but otherwise MP3 CD is my choice. MP3 can sound good as CD audio at 320kpbs, and even then you can fit a few hours on one CD.

 

[coolvij]

Actually, FrostyMMB - have you actually compared the two (MD and MP3?) head to head? I have....and I currently have an MD. Why?

Well, geez, this could take a LONG time... but instead - i'm gonna show you a post i made on headwize - as soon as the forums come back up...

We're all entitled to our opinions. And convenience is something that MP3 has that MD doesn't. For now.

Soon, Net MD will come out, and, you'll be able record onto MDs at faster-then-realtime speeds.

Also - your comparison wasn't really fair. Let's say it takes 80 min. to record 74 min. (including titles, etc.). MP3 would take 15 min. to burn, and maybe 15 (MINIMUM!) to RIP. Don't forget that part...

Don't mean to be a smart-@$$, but MD is just a better sounding system.....

 

[Vertigo-1]

Well coolvij, I remember us both agreeing that Net MD pretty much flushed itself down the toilet by announcing that it'd also employ a copy protection scheme. Speed I believe is always going to be in the realm of MP3 players, not unless they make a MD drive for the computer and keep it at that, with no more copy protection crap. I still prefer MD players period though myself, there's just no beating their battery life and size to sound quality ratio.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

MP3 can sound good as CD audio at 320kpbs

Um, no

Only if you don't have equipment good enough to reveal the differences. Same with MD -- if you have good enough equipment, you can hear the difference. But I personally feel that MD standard play is closer to CD than MP3 at 320.

 

[Tides]

I knew MacDEF be here as soon as I read that comment about MD and Mp3@320 LOL

I cant believe it took MacDEF almost 17 hours to jump in here..
You ought to be ashame of yourself MacDEF lol~!

I like both MD and MP3, it all depends on what situation I am in and where I am going with it. There are times I perfer my mzr900, there are also times I wish I have a mp3 cd based player.

On a side note, I ordered the RioVolt for my friend's Bday gift. It should be here before Thursday. IF the player kicks ass like everyone says, THe chance is high I buy myself one.

The thought of burning a CD full of mp3@320 under 5 mins with my Plextor 12x burner is QUITE appealing! ( where it takes a half ~ whole day to do same number of songs/tracks with my mzr900)

Tides

 

[coolvij]

vertigo: That's true - I was just pointing out that it is going to be possible quite soon to record at high speeds without a deck...

 

[pineapples10]

to be honest...no one has heard it yet as it isnt out yet. It should be released any day now in Korea. It is expected to be released in the US within a month or two from its release in Korea. If it sounds anything like the original RioVolt, it should be great. Althouhg some complained of the original being too quiet, that is all fixed now as the internal amp has doubled, from 7mw, to 12mw (or something like that)

 

[sapphiremodena]

I'm excited!!!

 

[FrostyMMB]

It's my guess that someone with a stance against MP3 might not keep up with the latest improvements in encoding. There's a chance that I'm wrong on that one, but sure, you can always find a POS encoder, rip a track and encode at 320 and find huge flaws in the encoding. However, MP3 encoding algorithms are constantly being updated. Just looking at sonic charts comparing the original source with a number of encodings using different encoders with different algorithms and such you can see that newly updated encoders have made advances in coming closer and closer to the original. No, you can't base a lot on looking at charts, but you can listen and hear the difference.

Anyways, in my defense, when I said good as, I mispoke and you all jumped on it thinking that I meant/thought that there was no difference. I know this. Of course there is a difference, and I know that it can be heard with good equipment. It's compressed audio, with magnitudes of data thrown out, and I'm not so stupid as to think that it has a chance of sounding the exact same. However, I haven't invested multiple hundreds or thousands of dollars on equipment so that I can hear every single little difference, nor will I fret about those subtleties. When it comes down to it, the difference that I will hear isn't enough for me to through down my hands in disgust. And, in the end (since the beginning?), MP3 is a format of convenience, not top-notch audiophile sound.

Yes, I have compared MD with MP3; my brother has one. Yes, MD sounds good, and I never debated that. coolvij, my issue was not on the sound quality, so that defense was unnecessary. I can still fit many hours of MP3 audio onto a single CD. With the computers of today, you can rip and encode in a few minutes, and today's burners can burn a full CD in under five minutes. That's just for the amount of music you'll fit onto an MD, which could be done in under ten minutes, in which case you still have a lot of room for more on the CD.

Personally, I'm not willing to wait for an MD to record when I can simply just make my own every day non-compressed audio CD, so for me, it's a waste to invest in MD. For now MD is stuck with extremely slow recording times that make it a hindrance to those who are impatient, like I am. I'd rather not wait for those faster than real time speeds to finally arrive in a decently priced portable unit.

If I'm using MP3 compressed audio, I can fit four more times the amount of audio onto a single CD for a slight quality hit. Plus, for me, it's well worth it to pack a ton of music onto a few CDs than to carry a foot high stack of MDs. Saves space and money and having to swap discs. For this convenience, the change in sound quality is a non-issue. If others didn't feel this way as well, then why is the RioVolt/iRiver 2 receiving any attention on this forum?

MD is good for some things and MP3 is good for others. I have absolutely no need for an MD player. If MD is your media/format of choice, it's your format of choice. If your MD player is 'kewler' then I'm glad you're happy with it. If it sounds better then I'm glad that you don't mind waiting for the slow record speeds. That stuff isn't my thing. MP3 CD players aren't advertised for sound; they're advertised for playing lots of audio burned onto one CD. Should I assume that MP3 has no place in a forum such as this because its goal isn't audiophile sound quality?

 

[coolvij]

Hey, whoa, FrostyMMB - I didn't mean to come off as a smart-@$$ - i said that earlier.

I was just trying to say that MD has potential to be convenient - maybe not AS convenient as MP3, but better than the current setup. And then there's decks, and other things, which let you record at 4x (+?) speed.

But you don't care, because, as you said, you're impatient.

That's fine with me - stick with MP3. There is NOTHING wrong with it - and it DOES have a place on this forum.

And I agree, there was no need for my gratuititous MP3 bashing last sentence in my first post in this thread. Sorry....