Iriver vs. Ipod vs. the rest

[keeleysam]

iPod roxorz mah boxorz

 

[sniperruff]

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: sniperruff
the ipod is built pretty well and won't physically fall apart... the same can't be said for some creative and rio players (even if they are cheaper).

You actually believe this FUD?

but it's true. the ipod just feel more solid, but rio's players don't feel quite sturdy. creative have yet to come up with a reasonable 20gig mp3 player but its flash-based players aren't that rugged either.

oh well HD-based mp3 players are never meant to be thrown around anyway =)

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: railer
the iRiver photo 40 gig was $400

Text

quite obviously, a moron

Cut him some slack man, you've done the same thing before.

 

[Last Rezort]

Originally posted by: sniperruff

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: sniperruff
the ipod is built pretty well and won't physically fall apart... the same can't be said for some creative and rio players (even if they are cheaper).

You actually believe this FUD?

but it's true. the ipod just feel more solid, but rio's players don't feel quite sturdy. creative have yet to come up with a reasonable 20gig mp3 player but its flash-based players aren't that rugged either.

oh well HD-based mp3 players are never meant to be thrown around anyway =)

Yeah, you know the ipod can take a few falls.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: jonnyGURU

Originally posted by: Mo0o
... too bad i alreayd voted for iriver

And then there's the initial cost of the iPod. Sure it's 20GB, but I don't plan on carrying ALL of my MP3's with me at all times. I can fit six entire albums at 192Kbps in 1MB. That's good enough and at half the price, makes for a decent value.

(bold) um how were you able to achieve this? What kind of codec are you using?

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: sniperruff

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: sniperruff
the ipod is built pretty well and won't physically fall apart... the same can't be said for some creative and rio players (even if they are cheaper).

You actually believe this FUD?

but it's true. the ipod just feel more solid, but rio's players don't feel quite sturdy. creative have yet to come up with a reasonable 20gig mp3 player but its flash-based players aren't that rugged either.

oh well HD-based mp3 players are never meant to be thrown around anyway =)

Oh, it feels more solid! Of course Ok, I say it doesn't. There, we're even. Got anything else?

 

[Last Rezort]

The only thing it has is an fm tuner, though a much worse navigation system.

The winner is Ipod

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: jonnyGURU

Originally posted by: Mo0o
... too bad i alreayd voted for iriver

And then there's the initial cost of the iPod. Sure it's 20GB, but I don't plan on carrying ALL of my MP3's with me at all times. I can fit six entire albums at 192Kbps in 1MB. That's good enough and at half the price, makes for a decent value.

(bold) um how were you able to achieve this? What kind of codec are you using?

I'd like to know as well

 

[sniperruff]

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: sniperruff

Originally posted by: Gurck

Originally posted by: sniperruff
the ipod is built pretty well and won't physically fall apart... the same can't be said for some creative and rio players (even if they are cheaper).

You actually believe this FUD?

but it's true. the ipod just feel more solid, but rio's players don't feel quite sturdy. creative have yet to come up with a reasonable 20gig mp3 player but its flash-based players aren't that rugged either.

oh well HD-based mp3 players are never meant to be thrown around anyway =)

Oh, it feels more solid! Of course Ok, I say it doesn't. There, we're even. Got anything else?

ummm the ipod has a shiny side so you can use that as a mirror?

but yeah i was seriously about the quality comment. i don't know about the zen micro, but i wouldn't trust a rio player.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: scorpmatt

Originally posted by: Pabster
Gotta go with the iPod.

Once you use it you'll never want any "other" player.

LOL!!!! oh man, thanks I needed that laugh tonight!

oh wait..... you are being serious aren't you?

:thumbsup:
It's not his fault hes a moron...

 

[mrSHEiK124]

Originally posted by: mwmorph
look at this
Text

OK, AFAIK, Apple used the 4G/U2 design (and may have built up on it) to make the internals of either the 2G Mini or the Shuffle, not sure which but I know its one of them, I'm not sure which component(s) it was, but I think it might have been the DAC or the amp, anyways, if the 4G and 2G Mini or Shuffle are built the same, and apparantly did very well in the tests on said link, then, why do they suck so much in terms of SQ?
Also, for all of those praising the iPod's build quality, please, STFU before you embarass yourselves, the build quality on the 4th Gen/U2/Photo iPods, SUCKS, the headphone jack on my 2nd died from a <1 foot fall, granted, Creative and Rio have horrible history of products having sh!tty build quality, but I've never heard anything about iRivers of this sort. And anyone thats touting things like FM radio, line-in recording, videos, blah blah, I bought my iPod, to listen to music, that is on it. A friend of mine has an iRiver, and we were lucky to pick up a station that was 20 miles away with this thing. I never listen to the radio, I don't need it, and these integrated radios usually have horrible reception. Line-in recording? Wouldnt' that generally destroy your SQ argument? I mean, what would you use line-in recording from, I'm sure if you wanted to record a song in a studio you'd have the proper equipment and wouldn't use your MP3 player for it. That only leaves things like other MP3 players, TVs, etc to record from, thanks but no thanks, I'll rip anything if I need it.
Anyways, go ahead and try to convince others to buy (or not to buy) whatever product it is that you love (or hate), but goddamn, if someone's already bought something, don't pester them, to each his fvcking own.

 

[Last Rezort]

Originally posted by: Last Rezort

Originally posted by: aux
iriver for the sound quality, that's all I care about

Another myth.
As a sound engineer i know a little about sound, and the only thing that makes a diffrence is how you encode the sound when recording it. Sorry, your wrong.

EDIT: Btw, unless you have an ear for it, and around 90% of humans dont, Beyond 126bit encoding is not needed. THough yes there will be a cleaner sound above that, you then must take into account that it takes a good ammount more memory to store.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: Last Rezort

Originally posted by: aux
iriver for the sound quality, that's all I care about

Another myth.
As a sound engineer i know a little about sound, and the only thing that makes a diffrence is how you encode the sound when recording it. Sorry, your wrong.

EDIT: Btw, unless you have an ear for it, and around 90% of humans dont, Beyond 126bit encoding is not needed. THough yes there will be a cleaner sound above that, you then must take into account that it takes a good ammount more memory to store.

Your so full of sh!t that I can see it all over this post.. You clearly are not a sound engineer and if you are, you probably are a poor one at that. Your clearly not an audiophile, I can tell you for a fact there is an absolute difference between 128Kb/s encoding and 320. Wanna know how? Try to hook up your computer to a REAL sound system (not your sh!tty bose...), play the 128Kb/s MP3 on it and turn up the volume+bass (bass at reasonable levels so it doesn't obviously distort the sound). Then do the same with a 320Kb/s mp3 and tell me you can't tell the difference.

 

[aux]

Originally posted by: Last Rezort

Originally posted by: aux
iriver for the sound quality, that's all I care about

Another myth.
As a sound engineer i know a little about sound, and the only thing that makes a diffrence is how you encode the sound when recording it. Sorry, your wrong.

EDIT: Btw, unless you have an ear for it, and around 90% of humans dont, Beyond 126bit encoding is not needed. THough yes there will be a cleaner sound above that, you then must take into account that it takes a good ammount more memory to store.

You are right, the encoding is important but I did compare the same mp3's played on on iriver h120 and 3rd generation ipod. All these were encoded in 192 mbps vbr, just for the purpose of the test (otherwise I use higher bitrate). Apple's format may be better than mp3, but I don't have files in that format. Yes, I know that there are newer versions of these players and things may or may not have changed.

I am definitely among the rest of the population

Edit: I am not an Apple hater, I do have a powerbook.

 

[railer]

iaudio? Now we're talking about that? What happened to the iriver. Am i supposed to have some irrational hatred of that, or am I supposed to like it? If the iaudio is small...then that is good. No such thing as too small...for me. It has to have a 1 year warranty too. Creative's is 90 days...which is a joke. So if the iaudio was small, diidn't clutter up my desk and did what I wanted...of course I'd buy it. I don't get all emotional about mp3 players as some do.... .

 

[Last Rezort]

Hmmmmmmmm.
read the whole post, i said it gets cleaner, but thats about it.
Its called virtual sound at that point, and no I listen to my Ipod on These.
Yes i use diffrent headphones at work, but for pleasure thats what i use.
I encode at 126 because its smaller, and IMO, Not Needed.
BTW, i dont listen to my ipod at home. my computer is set up directly to the sound system.
I know what you mean, but as a portable audio device, most headphones dont even register the change.

 

[Last Rezort]

Thats what i thought!
What now B!tches?

 

[SmoochyTX]

I love my Creative Zen Micro. :music:

 

[mrSHEiK124]

Originally posted by: Last Rezort
Hmmmmmmmm.
read the whole post, i said it gets cleaner, but thats about it.
Its called virtual sound at that point, and no I listen to my Ipod on These.
Yes i use diffrent headphones at work, but for pleasure thats what i use.
I encode at 126 because its smaller, and IMO, Not Needed.
BTW, i dont listen to my ipod at home. my computer is set up directly to the sound system.
I know what you mean, but as a portable audio device, most headphones dont even register the change.

A fvcking dumbass, you are, young padawan

 

[Philippine Mango]

bump

 

[imported_Phil]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Last Rezort

Originally posted by: aux
iriver for the sound quality, that's all I care about

Another myth.
As a sound engineer i know a little about sound, and the only thing that makes a diffrence is how you encode the sound when recording it. Sorry, your wrong.

EDIT: Btw, unless you have an ear for it, and around 90% of humans dont, Beyond 126bit encoding is not needed. THough yes there will be a cleaner sound above that, you then must take into account that it takes a good ammount more memory to store.

Your so full of sh!t that I can see it all over this post.. You clearly are not a sound engineer and if you are, you probably are a poor one at that. Your clearly not an audiophile, I can tell you for a fact there is an absolute difference between 128Kb/s encoding and 320. Wanna know how? Try to hook up your computer to a REAL sound system (not your sh!tty bose...), play the 128Kb/s MP3 on it and turn up the volume+bass (bass at reasonable levels so it doesn't obviously distort the sound). Then do the same with a 320Kb/s mp3 and tell me you can't tell the difference.

I never thought I'd see the day when I'd admit this, and Lord strike me down if it happens again, but I agree with the Mango.

:shocked:

 

[Ornery]

WTF is Samsung? Seems like the best bang for the buck to me.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: Ornery
WTF is Samsung? Seems like the best bang for the buck to me.

nope, I've heard of problems with their quality (fails fairly quickly)

 

[Ornery]

I'm not seeing any links or proof, and my wife owns one that works nicely. Nicer than my son's MuVo.

Text

 

[alkemyst]

I don't own either, but I know a lot that do...

Ipod is like taking a puppy to the park.

Others is like taking a frizbee.

If you are looking for a music player they both seem great.

If you are looking for a fashion statement ipod wins.