[Yasmin_Khan]

Hi all

It's my birthday and I have accidently got 2 different players in one go!
There is no way I am going to manage 2 players in one go. It's silly.

Sometimes I think it's a simple decision and then again sometimes I think
it's difficult. They're both wonderful to look at in different ways, the Ipod
with it's minimalism and the iriver with its retro look with wicked wizard
extras.

But lets face it.. its about sound quality.. which sounds better?
With or without EQ?

Im not going to bother with Ogg vorbis as most of my collection will be mp3
or wav. My highest priority is sound quality and mp3 playback.

What would you do?

I can't test them both else I will not be able to send it back to the supplier
for a refund.

Cheers, Yasmin

 

[Inuyasha]

Whos that cute girl on your avatar?

 

[Yasmin_Khan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inuyasha Whos that cute girl on your avatar?

its me, but concentrate on the cuties in the photo ive posted up
and contribute to the poll if you wish.

cheers,
Yasmin

 

[Squibbles]

iPod for excellent natural sound.
iRiver for more of a processed sound.

I voted iPod.

 

[Megaman]

iRiver for the whole shebang.

 

[Megaman]

Plus it's 20GB vs 40GB... seems pretty obvious.

 

[deltawalkerl]

iRiver if you have free time to manage your collection, create playlists, read instruction manuals, consult online forums for solutions, experiment with different 3rd party software, and rename some of the songs in your collection.

iPod if you don't.

 

[Yasmin_Khan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squibbles iPod for excellent natural sound. iRiver for more of a processed sound. I voted iPod.

Hiya Squib

That's actually quite an excellent way of putting it.
I was faced with the same decision when purchasing my homecinema amp.
Most of the < £1k amp are "coloured" in that they dont have a clean sound.
It sounds some how processed esp when trying to enjoy its stereo capabilities
and DVD-A etc. It nice to hear things in its original purity.

Thanks for your contribution.

 

[AuroraProject]

Going for sound quality?= ipod

Going for features?= iriver

 

[Jahn]

return the iriver and buy a sik din/imp line out for your ipod, then a portable headphone amp...you can't go wrong! I hope your ears can't tell the difference between apple lossless and 192AAC tho, since otherwise 20gig might make you run out of space.

 

[Megaman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by deltawalkerl iRiver if you have free time to manage your collection, create playlists, read instruction manuals, consult online forums for solutions, experiment with different 3rd party software, and rename some of the songs in your collection. iPod if you don't.

Sorry to be rude, but that's just a load of crap.
I seriously doubt that you'r talking from a personal experience.

 

[pank2002]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Megaman Sorry to be rude, but that's just a load of crap. I seriously doubt that you'r talking from a personal experience.

Now is it really?

iRiver if you have free time to manage your collection
you have to order it in artist\album\ structures as there's a limit for how long filenames can be if one wants to use the dB. On the other hand tag needs to be tighty if one use the iPod -- mostly done by sodtwear when you rip anyway.

create playlists,
If one wants to listen to the music in another way than the file structure this is true

read instruction manuals, consult online forums for solutions,
So true with iRiver products. If you want to know all the features you gotta read manual or visits forum whereas the iPod "works" out of the box. I mean it says read manual carfully before use on the manual and for a cd player it's 46 pages!

experiment with different 3rd party software, and rename some of the songs in your collection.
you have to this 'cause you don't wanna manually edit all of your folders to desired structure (ie arist\album\.) J River Media Center is good for this.
you could also just drag 'n' drop with explorer but that'd suck for most people compared to the syncing feature of the iPod

I vote iPod. 20 gigs are plenty of space, trust me.

 

[Oddball]

Since the who-voted-what is open, I feel the need to slightly justify myself.

I think that both are excellent players, but from personal experience, I've found the iPod to be really nice. It's interesting how divergent the two DAPs seem to be...but if you plan on expanding your portable system, just remember that the iHP is the one that has a digital out while the iPod is reputed to have the better line out (using some sort of connector or dock of course). Besides, with the iPod, those wav files can very easily be compressed into Apple Lossless.

 

[NeilPeart]

While the iHP-140 is certainly a good player with more features than the iPod, I still prefer the more intuitive UI (IMO, of course) of the iPod and I prefer its more natural sound (again, IMO). Both players sound very good but I think the iHP-140 appeals to more tech-savvy consumers while the iPod caters to a broader range of music enthusiasts that may not be as technically inclined. I love my iRiver iMP-550 MP3/CDP, but I’ll take the 4G iPod over any other player on the market. I like how I can give my Luddite-like girlfriend an iPod Mini and she can be enjoying the tunes within minutes while the iHP-140 would certainly require a steeper learning curve. Aside from the UI and sound quality is the appearance, and in this regard there is nothing on the market that can touch the iPod – the newer models simply look better with every revision and while that variable matters far less to me than the SQ and UI, it indeed is an important criteria for many in the market for a portable music device (including my beloved). Of course, external appearance, like sound quality is a subjective decision, so I can see how many people might find the darker, alternative look of the iHP-140 more to their liking.

 

[vranswer]

Keep the Iriver. Send the iPod to me. I'll take care of the rest

.