[Geoff]

It always amuses me when the next greatest memory technology is invented and
the technology 'journalists' say that now we will be able to store 10
billion songs on our 'ipods'.

Why don't they say that we can now store one billion songs, and they won't
have to sound like crap ?!!

geoff

[Carey Carlan]

"geoff" wrote in
:

It always amuses me when the next greatest memory technology is
invented and the technology 'journalists' say that now we will be able
to store 10 billion songs on our 'ipods'.

Why don't they say that we can now store one billion songs, and they
won't have to sound like crap ?!!

How about the few hundred songs I really like and they sound spectacular!

[Eeyore]

geoff wrote:

It always amuses me when the next greatest memory technology is invented and
the technology 'journalists' say that now we will be able to store 10
billion songs on our 'ipods'.

Unfortunately it would take significantly longer than one's lifetime to listen
to them all even once.

Graham

[Romeo Rondeau[_4_]]

Soundhaspriority wrote:
"geoff" wrote in message
...
It always amuses me when the next greatest memory technology is invented
and the technology 'journalists' say that now we will be able to store 10
billion songs on our 'ipods'.

Why don't they say that we can now store one billion songs, and they
won't have to sound like crap ?!!

geoff
German has a word, "zeitgeist", which has come to mean "the spirit of the
times." Today's zeitgeist goes against quality. We would have to hope for a
renaissance of quality.

Bob Morein



You don't buy an iPod for quality, you buy it for convenience. If you
want quality buy something that was designed for it.

[Geoff]

Romeo Rondeau wrote:

You don't buy an iPod for quality, you buy it for convenience. If you
want quality buy something that was designed for it.

But everything with an 'i' is quality.....

geoff

[Michael Black[_2_]]

On Mon, 5 May 2008, Romeo Rondeau wrote:

Soundhaspriority wrote:
"geoff" wrote in message
...
It always amuses me when the next greatest memory technology is invented
and the technology 'journalists' say that now we will be able to store 10
billion songs on our 'ipods'.

Why don't they say that we can now store one billion songs, and they
won't have to sound like crap ?!!

geoff
German has a word, "zeitgeist", which has come to mean "the spirit of the
times." Today's zeitgeist goes against quality. We would have to hope for
a renaissance of quality.

Bob Morein


You don't buy an iPod for quality, you buy it for convenience. If you want
quality buy something that was designed for it.

Now this is amusing. It's hard to tell whether you are using "iPod" in a
generic way or not.

People buy iPods for the name. They buy mp3 players, the iPod being one
of many types of mp3 players, for convenience.

"Quality" when referring to mp3 players is about durability. One might
even bring in lifespan for a given price, since I get the impression
that iPods don't have that long a lifespan yet you are paying a premium
for that name. A $30 mp3 player doesn't have to have much durability,
since the cost of replacement is small, yet they likely have as
much durability and lifespan as an iPod.

Michael

[Romeo Rondeau[_4_]]

Michael Black wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2008, Romeo Rondeau wrote:

Soundhaspriority wrote:
"geoff" wrote in message
...
It always amuses me when the next greatest memory technology is
invented and the technology 'journalists' say that now we will be
able to store 10 billion songs on our 'ipods'.

Why don't they say that we can now store one billion songs, and
they won't have to sound like crap ?!!

geoff
German has a word, "zeitgeist", which has come to mean "the spirit of
the times." Today's zeitgeist goes against quality. We would have to
hope for a renaissance of quality.

Bob Morein

You don't buy an iPod for quality, you buy it for convenience. If you
want quality buy something that was designed for it.

Now this is amusing. It's hard to tell whether you are using "iPod" in a
generic way or not.

People buy iPods for the name. They buy mp3 players, the iPod being one
of many types of mp3 players, for convenience.

"Quality" when referring to mp3 players is about durability.

Says who? We were talking about sound quality. Thanks for playing, though.

[Romeo Rondeau[_4_]]

geoff wrote:
Romeo Rondeau wrote:
You don't buy an iPod for quality, you buy it for convenience. If you
want quality buy something that was designed for it.

But everything with an 'i' is quality.....

geoff

I'm not sure where you get this from, even tongue in cheek, NO ONE has
ever said that having an "i" is quality :-) Even the "pod" part is
really stupid since they are all square. I have an iPod video (5g 30g),
someone gave it to me... it actually doesn't sound bad at all, depending
on what I put into it. I beats the hell out of a cassette player, is way
smaller than a CD player and hold a hell of a lot more music. It only
has a 30 gig harddrive. I mostly keep classic rock and pop in it, along
with whatever videos I'm into at the moment (watched all the Fawlty
Towers recently on it as a matter of fact... I'm a sucker for those old
british comedies they used to show on PBS) It's quite listenable and
watchable, but it all depends on what you put in it. It still plays PCM
if you want better than mp3 sound quality, but that kind of defeats the
purpose of having all of the songs you own in a convenient playback
device. And that is the purpose of the iPod, so let's not assign a new
purpose for the device and then complain when it falls short. It is what
it is. Now, back to my iPod to watch "Open All Hours" :-)

[Geoff]

Romeo Rondeau wrote:
geoff wrote:
Romeo Rondeau wrote:
You don't buy an iPod for quality, you buy it for convenience. If
you want quality buy something that was designed for it.

But everything with an 'i' is quality.....

geoff

I'm not sure where you get this from, even tongue in cheek, NO ONE has
ever said that having an "i" is quality :-) Even the "pod" part is
really stupid since they are all square. I have an iPod video (5g
30g), someone gave it to me... it actually doesn't sound bad at all,
depending on what I put into it. I beats the hell out of a cassette
player, is way smaller than a CD player and hold a hell of a lot more
music. It only has a 30 gig harddrive. I mostly keep classic rock and
pop in it, along with whatever videos I'm into at the moment (watched
all the Fawlty Towers recently on it as a matter of fact... I'm a
sucker for those old british comedies they used to show on PBS) It's
quite listenable and watchable, but it all depends on what you put in
it. It still plays PCM if you want better than mp3 sound quality, but
that kind of defeats the purpose of having all of the songs you own
in a convenient playback device. And that is the purpose of the iPod,
so let's not assign a new purpose for the device and then complain
when it falls short. It is what it is. Now, back to my iPod to watch
"Open All Hours" :-)

[Geoff]

Romeo Rondeau wrote:
geoff wrote:
Romeo Rondeau wrote:
You don't buy an iPod for quality, you buy it for convenience. If
you want quality buy something that was designed for it.

But everything with an 'i' is quality.....

geoff

I'm not sure where you get this from, even tongue in cheek, NO ONE has
ever said that having an "i" is quality :-)

Apple sort of imply that anything other than Apple is 'lower' quality, so
it's a relative thing.

. And that is the purpose of the iPod,
so let's not assign a new purpose for the device and then complain
when it falls short. It is what it is. Now, back to my iPod to watch
"Open All Hours" :-)

We get a sat channel called UKTV here - repeats of classic Brit comedies,
and more recent classics like Green Wing. But haven't seen Aud Wiedersen Pet
for a while....

geoff

[Mr.T]

"geoff" wrote in message
...

Apple sort of imply that anything other than Apple is 'lower' quality,

Of course they do, so does every other manufacturer. It's called marketing.

MrT.

[Don Pearce]

Eeyore wrote:

geoff wrote:

It always amuses me when the next greatest memory technology is invented and
the technology 'journalists' say that now we will be able to store 10
billion songs on our 'ipods'.

Unfortunately it would take significantly longer than one's lifetime to listen
to them all even once.

Graham



At three minutes a song that is 57,000 years. That's almost as long as
Wagner's "Der Ring des Niebelungen".

d

[Paul Stamler]

"Green Xenon [Radium]" wrote in message
...

*Songs that were originally-recorded in stereo need to be converted to
mono via the above 14 steps because different sounds are recorded
differently in the L and R channels. The audio that is originally panned
to the center is significantly louder than the audio whose phase is
different in the left & right channels. This is why I reduce the
loudness of non-inverted stereo audio file by 77.5% [before converting
it to mono].

Wha-a?

Peace,
Paul

[Paul Stamler]

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...

It always amuses me when the next greatest memory technology is invented
and
the technology 'journalists' say that now we will be able to store 10
billion songs on our 'ipods'.

Unfortunately it would take significantly longer than one's lifetime to
listen
to them all even once.

Only if you insist on listening to them one at a time. I believe we had a
thread about that recently.

Peace,
Paul

[Federico]

Unfortunately it would take significantly longer than one's lifetime to
listen
to them all even once.

Only if you insist on listening to them one at a time. I believe we had a
thread about that recently.

:-)
F.

[Richard Corfield[_3_]]

On 2008-05-06, Romeo Rondeau wrote:

People buy iPods for the name. They buy mp3 players, the iPod being one
of many types of mp3 players, for convenience.

"Quality" when referring to mp3 players is about durability.

Says who? We were talking about sound quality. Thanks for playing, though.

Ease of use too. The user interface on the ipods an that touch wheel
thing, at least on the originals, was very nice to use. The whole
experience of the player is not just how it sounds but also how pleasant
for fiddly it is to get it to play the right selection of those 1
billion songs you want it to play.

Size comes into it, battery life, and for many people I expect looks and
fashion.

That said, I have an iAudio which is bulky, can be fiddly to use, but
sounds good enough and runs on a normal AAA cell which can be easily
replaced. (I use rechargeable ones). It also has tuner and line in which
are two features I value. It wasn't too expensive.

- Richard

--
_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ Richard dot Corfield at gmail dot com
_/ _/ _/ _/
_/_/ _/ _/ Time is a one way street,
_/ _/ _/_/ _/_/_/ except in the Twilight Zone

[Arny Krueger]

"Romeo Rondeau" wrote in message
t

You don't buy an iPod for quality, you buy it for
convenience.

What you get with at least the larger iPods is an audio playback device
whose electrical output is about as clean as a CD player, but that has a
low source impedance designed for driving headphones. If you load it with
uncompressed audio files, it is the functional equivalent of a high quality
portable CD player.

If you want quality buy something that was designed for it.

IOW, an iPod or high quality competitive product.

Several of us enjoyed the use of the Nomad Jukebox 3, which was a logical
predecessor of either the iPod or the Microtrack.

At this point I don't think that the professional utility and perhaps even
the professional stature of the Microtrack and competitive products are in
doubt by many.

Technically, the larger iPods are just Microtracks without the extensive
facilities for location recording, but with a more user-friendly file
system.

[Mr.T]

"don pearce" wrote in message
news:z8qdnfyPpaFHn73VnZ2dnUVZ8vSdnZ2d@plusnet...
It always amuses me when the next greatest memory technology is
invented and
the technology 'journalists' say that now we will be able to store 10
billion songs on our 'ipods'.

Unfortunately it would take significantly longer than one's lifetime to
listen
to them all even once.

At three minutes a song that is 57,000 years.

Which even at 128kb/s is approx 30,000,000 gigabytes.
I think ipod hard drives are a little short of that at the moment :-)

MrT.

[Arny Krueger]

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news
"Romeo Rondeau" wrote in message
t

You don't buy an iPod for quality, you buy it for
convenience.

What you get with at least the larger iPods is an audio
playback device whose electrical output is about as
clean as a CD player, but that has a low source
impedance designed for driving headphones. If you load
it with uncompressed audio files, it is the functional
equivalent of a high quality portable CD player.
If you want quality buy something that was designed for
it.

IOW, an iPod or high quality competitive product.

Several of us enjoyed the use of the Nomad Jukebox 3,
which was a logical predecessor of either the iPod or
the Microtrack. At this point I don't think that the professional
utility and perhaps even the professional stature of the
Microtrack and competitive products are in doubt by many.

Technically, the larger iPods are just Microtracks
without the extensive facilities for location recording,
but with a more user-friendly file system.

The zeitgeist manifests not in the hardware platform,
which is decent, but in the mastering and the
compression.

So then this isn't about iPods or storage media, its about mastering.

The hardware is equivalent or better than a
typical CD Walkman of the 90's, but the sound is not.

Given that the hardware can be loaded with what have you, then your
statement makes no sense.

Are you decrying customer preferences or hardware?

But the zeitgeist also manifests in the market share of flash
player music, which occured with the changing role of
music in our society.

Do tell, what is "flash player music", and how does it differ from the
finest digital recordings ever made?

In the past, music was marketed as a performance.

Silly me, I thought it was marketed as something that you wanted to listen
to.

High fidelity was a privilege equivalent
to a good seat in the hall.

Silly me, I always preferred the good seat in the good hall.

That is now quite secondary.

Speak for yourself!

Music is now principally a pacifier, an auxilary
brainwave.

For some people, probably.

I would guess that most audio professionals
hear music fewer hours of the day than the typical flash
player addict, but we listen more intently.

Your point?

[Richard Crowley]

"Soundhaspriority" wrote ...
"Arny Krueger" wrote ...
....
Silly me, I thought it was marketed as something that you wanted to
listen to.

Silly me, I thought it was marketed as something that you wanted to listen
to.
......
Silly me, I always preferred the good seat in the good hall.
Silly me, I always preferred the good seat in the good hall.
.....
Speak for yourself!

Speak for yourself!
.....
For some people, probably.

For the majority.
.....
Your point?

Your point?

CHILDREN!
Don't make me stop this car!

[Richard Crowley]

"Green Xenon [Radium]" wrote ...
Huh?

May we quote you?