| Topic: |
Sociology > Depression |
| User: |
"Louise Mallard" |
| Date: |
04 Oct 2005 04:51:45 PM |
| Object: |
I Need a Good MP3 player... |
....any suggestions?
It doesn't have to hold ten-thousand songs or land the space shuttle.
.
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
05 Oct 2005 12:07:47 AM |
|
|
"Louise Mallard" <louise.mallard@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4au5k116413p4nohaj6dl5t9p6mnuckndt@4ax.com...
...any suggestions?
It doesn't have to hold ten-thousand songs or land the space shuttle.
I've given a couple of ipod shuffles as gifts, they're good because itunes
is pretty easy for people to comprehend, they like the design and it really
is easy to use. They get the hang of it right out of the box, no tiny
screen to try to read, no menus to go through... The 512 model is pretty
decent for most anybody who can make it back to their computer every couple
of days to change out the music if they want to. The 1gig model goes to 11.
I want an ipod nano though I'm waiting for the "scratched" screen issue to
get sorted out. Apple recalled some of them, but a lot of people have
complained about scratches. I think a lot of them have never owned a black
car. But we'll see where the dust settles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "gravity" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
05 Oct 2005 12:29:36 AM |
|
|
i would like an mp3 player. i could get one with a hard drive. or a
portable CD player than can do mp3 format. or an MP3 player that outputs FM
to my car stereo.
but i haven't bought one yet.
i'd like one that i can use while walking, and play through the car stereo.
i already have one of those 1/8 phone plug to cassette adapters.
i also need to buy a DVD player that can plug into my basement-located 5"
TV.
m.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
05 Oct 2005 09:51:02 AM |
|
|
"gravity" <gravity@example.net> wrote in message
news:434364bd$0$70883$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
i would like an mp3 player. i could get one with a hard drive. or a
portable CD player than can do mp3 format. or an MP3 player that outputs
FM to my car stereo.
but i haven't bought one yet.
i'd like one that i can use while walking, and play through the car
stereo. i already have one of those 1/8 phone plug to cassette adapters.
i also need to buy a DVD player that can plug into my basement-located 5"
TV.
m.
An mp3 car stereo deck is the way to go, I have one sitting in my closet
because wiring it into one of my cars is going to be a large project.
Fumbling with adapters and such is a real hassle.
I have a 4.5" black and white TV too, a long time ago, in an electronics
store far far away, I found a co-ax to 1/8 mini jack plug. Let's me pipe the
finest of entertainment into that tiny TV.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "gravity" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
05 Oct 2005 12:31:00 AM |
|
|
recently i've been ripping everything (or part of everything) to lossless
WMA. uncompressed audio is about 1440 kpbs. the codec reduces this to 1000
kbps.
i might look into the lossless codec named FLAC.
or 320 kbps MP3 might do it.
m.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
05 Oct 2005 09:48:11 AM |
|
|
"gravity" <gravity@example.net> wrote in message
news:43436511$0$51556$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
recently i've been ripping everything (or part of everything) to lossless
WMA. uncompressed audio is about 1440 kpbs. the codec reduces this to
1000 kbps.
i might look into the lossless codec named FLAC.
or 320 kbps MP3 might do it.
m.
The audio nuts ***** themselves over FLAC. Personally I don't think the huge
amount of space used by lossless compression is worth it unless you've also
got perfect pitch and are 10 years old so you can actually hear the full
spectrum.
I encode mp3s using VBR, the quality setting for compression depends on the
music.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
06 Oct 2005 08:11:51 AM |
|
|
On 2005-10-05, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"gravity" <gravity@example.net> wrote in message
news:43436511$0$51556$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
recently i've been ripping everything (or part of everything) to lossless
WMA. uncompressed audio is about 1440 kpbs. the codec reduces this to
1000 kbps.
i might look into the lossless codec named FLAC.
or 320 kbps MP3 might do it.
m.
The audio nuts ***** themselves over FLAC. Personally I don't think the huge
amount of space used by lossless compression is worth it unless you've also
got perfect pitch and are 10 years old so you can actually hear the full
spectrum.
I encode mp3s using VBR, the quality setting for compression depends on the
music.
How many portable audio players can play FLAC anyway? It's hard enough to
find one that can manage Ogg.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
07 Oct 2005 10:33:16 AM |
|
|
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:ndkf13-lde.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-05, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"gravity" <gravity@example.net> wrote in message
news:43436511$0$51556$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
recently i've been ripping everything (or part of everything) to
lossless
WMA. uncompressed audio is about 1440 kpbs. the codec reduces this to
1000 kbps.
i might look into the lossless codec named FLAC.
or 320 kbps MP3 might do it.
m.
The audio nuts ***** themselves over FLAC. Personally I don't think the
huge
amount of space used by lossless compression is worth it unless you've
also
got perfect pitch and are 10 years old so you can actually hear the full
spectrum.
I encode mp3s using VBR, the quality setting for compression depends on
the
music.
How many portable audio players can play FLAC anyway? It's hard enough to
find one that can manage Ogg.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
How many portable players would it make sense to put FLAC files on? The 60GB
iPod?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
07 Oct 2005 01:00:13 PM |
|
|
On 2005-10-07, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:ndkf13-lde.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-05, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"gravity" <gravity@example.net> wrote in message
news:43436511$0$51556$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
recently i've been ripping everything (or part of everything) to
lossless
WMA. uncompressed audio is about 1440 kpbs. the codec reduces this to
1000 kbps.
i might look into the lossless codec named FLAC.
or 320 kbps MP3 might do it.
m.
The audio nuts ***** themselves over FLAC. Personally I don't think the
huge
amount of space used by lossless compression is worth it unless you've
also
got perfect pitch and are 10 years old so you can actually hear the full
spectrum.
I encode mp3s using VBR, the quality setting for compression depends on
the
music.
How many portable audio players can play FLAC anyway? It's hard enough to
find one that can manage Ogg.
How many portable players would it make sense to put FLAC files on? The 60GB
iPod?
If it's truly a 'lossless' compression then obviously a large amount of
storage space would be required; that could explain the lack of portable
players that use the format.
Of course, a lot would depend on how much of the analogue information was
digitised in the first place - that stage alone loses a huge amount of
information, no matter how it's done, so a 'lossless' format is a bit of a
contradiction anyway.
If you're after the ultimate in fidelity then nothing can beat a good big
fast open-reel analogue tape deck ... but they aren't portable, which I
think is what the original question was about ;)) (CDs can come quite
close to open-reel tape - better, as far as supressing noise is concerned -
although they often don't).
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
07 Oct 2005 04:03:29 PM |
|
|
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:dmpi13-7bk.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-07, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:ndkf13-lde.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-05, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"gravity" <gravity@example.net> wrote in message
news:43436511$0$51556$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
recently i've been ripping everything (or part of everything) to
lossless
WMA. uncompressed audio is about 1440 kpbs. the codec reduces this
to
1000 kbps.
i might look into the lossless codec named FLAC.
or 320 kbps MP3 might do it.
m.
The audio nuts ***** themselves over FLAC. Personally I don't think the
huge
amount of space used by lossless compression is worth it unless you've
also
got perfect pitch and are 10 years old so you can actually hear the
full
spectrum.
I encode mp3s using VBR, the quality setting for compression depends on
the
music.
How many portable audio players can play FLAC anyway? It's hard enough
to
find one that can manage Ogg.
How many portable players would it make sense to put FLAC files on? The
60GB
iPod?
If it's truly a 'lossless' compression then obviously a large amount of
storage space would be required; that could explain the lack of portable
players that use the format.
Of course, a lot would depend on how much of the analogue information was
digitised in the first place - that stage alone loses a huge amount of
information, no matter how it's done, so a 'lossless' format is a bit of a
contradiction anyway.
If you're after the ultimate in fidelity then nothing can beat a good big
fast open-reel analogue tape deck ... but they aren't portable, which I
think is what the original question was about ;)) (CDs can come quite
close to open-reel tape - better, as far as supressing noise is
concerned -
although they often don't).
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
From what I recall (an article that floated through me head long ago) FLAC
is around 35-40%, so your 650MB album is going to end up at about 260MB
opposed to mp3 which is in comparison to mp3 at 128 which I just looked up
and it seems it can hit around 11:1.
I can see why the audio nuts would prefer it for swapping online, but that's
a miserable 4 albums on a 1GB, now fairly affordable, flash based mp3
player.
And I grin just when I imagine the $12,000 platinum mains cable crowd
wandering around the city listening to their lossless audio while the street
vendors are screaming, the pan-handlers bugging for change and the ambulance
screaming by. LOL
Now, here's what you do, buy a backpack and fill it with sealed lead acid
batteries, get a power inverter and drag your open reel tape deck around
with you. I don't imagine the whole rig could be more than 100lbs or so. :)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
08 Oct 2005 06:52:21 AM |
|
|
On 2005-10-07, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:dmpi13-7bk.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-07, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
snip
Of course, a lot would depend on how much of the analogue information was
digitised in the first place - that stage alone loses a huge amount of
information, no matter how it's done, so a 'lossless' format is a bit of a
contradiction anyway.
If you're after the ultimate in fidelity then nothing can beat a good big
fast open-reel analogue tape deck ... but they aren't portable, which I
think is what the original question was about ;)) (CDs can come quite
close to open-reel tape - better, as far as supressing noise is
concerned -
although they often don't).
From what I recall (an article that floated through me head long ago) FLAC
is around 35-40%, so your 650MB album is going to end up at about 260MB
opposed to mp3 which is in comparison to mp3 at 128 which I just looked up
and it seems it can hit around 11:1.
I can see why the audio nuts would prefer it for swapping online, but that's
a miserable 4 albums on a 1GB, now fairly affordable, flash based mp3
player.
And I grin just when I imagine the $12,000 platinum mains cable crowd
wandering around the city listening to their lossless audio while the street
vendors are screaming, the pan-handlers bugging for change and the ambulance
screaming by. LOL
Now, here's what you do, buy a backpack and fill it with sealed lead acid
batteries, get a power inverter and drag your open reel tape deck around
with you. I don't imagine the whole rig could be more than 100lbs or so. :)
Portable CD players are remarkably cheap, and include software to buffer
the re-play so as to overcome the tracking problems caused by movement of
the device. They remain the most practical way of having 'HiFi' sound on
the move. Of course, the sound-proof auditorium and array of loud-speakers
are still a problem; headphones are a poor substitute.
Live music is the best way of getting 'real sound'; one's own personal
marching-band doesn't even need batteries, just tea and sandwiches and beer
and wine ...
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
08 Oct 2005 08:22:42 AM |
|
|
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:lgok13-g8f.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-07, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:dmpi13-7bk.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-07, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
snip
Of course, a lot would depend on how much of the analogue information
was
digitised in the first place - that stage alone loses a huge amount of
information, no matter how it's done, so a 'lossless' format is a bit of
a
contradiction anyway.
If you're after the ultimate in fidelity then nothing can beat a good
big
fast open-reel analogue tape deck ... but they aren't portable, which I
think is what the original question was about ;)) (CDs can come quite
close to open-reel tape - better, as far as supressing noise is
concerned -
although they often don't).
From what I recall (an article that floated through me head long ago)
FLAC
is around 35-40%, so your 650MB album is going to end up at about 260MB
opposed to mp3 which is in comparison to mp3 at 128 which I just looked
up
and it seems it can hit around 11:1.
I can see why the audio nuts would prefer it for swapping online, but
that's
a miserable 4 albums on a 1GB, now fairly affordable, flash based mp3
player.
And I grin just when I imagine the $12,000 platinum mains cable crowd
wandering around the city listening to their lossless audio while the
street
vendors are screaming, the pan-handlers bugging for change and the
ambulance
screaming by. LOL
Now, here's what you do, buy a backpack and fill it with sealed lead acid
batteries, get a power inverter and drag your open reel tape deck around
with you. I don't imagine the whole rig could be more than 100lbs or so.
:)
Portable CD players are remarkably cheap, and include software to buffer
the re-play so as to overcome the tracking problems caused by movement of
the device. They remain the most practical way of having 'HiFi' sound on
the move. Of course, the sound-proof auditorium and array of
loud-speakers
are still a problem; headphones are a poor substitute.
Live music is the best way of getting 'real sound'; one's own personal
marching-band doesn't even need batteries, just tea and sandwiches and
beer
and wine ...
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
I like to listen to the same section of a track, so my band would follow me
around playing the cannon part of the 1812 overture (real cannon of course,
this is the BEST way to listen to this work) repeatedly.
I had an mp3 playing discman for a while, I've lost it though. It was a nice
way to accomplish my portable mp3 goals at the time and definitely, the
shock protection has gotten so good that you really have a hard time getting
them to skip. I remember the first version of the Discman. Batteries lasted
an album if you were lucky and "portable" meant you could go somewhere and
set it on a very solid table.
I have a pair of rather regular headphones and a pair of very nice
Sennheiser HD 555s. They're great for home listening - but the greatest
feature is during the winter they're very effective ear muffs. I might look
kind of goofy but my ears stay warm. I picked them up on ebay (during one of
those stupid manic spending sprees) for $130.
http://www.headphone.com/guide/by-manufacturer/sennheiser/sennheiser-hd-555.php
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
08 Oct 2005 10:14:08 AM |
|
|
On 2005-10-08, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
snip
Portable CD players are remarkably cheap, and include software to buffer
the re-play so as to overcome the tracking problems caused by movement of
the device. They remain the most practical way of having 'HiFi' sound on
the move. Of course, the sound-proof auditorium and array of
loud-speakers
are still a problem; headphones are a poor substitute.
Live music is the best way of getting 'real sound'; one's own personal
marching-band doesn't even need batteries, just tea and sandwiches and
beer
and wine ...
I like to listen to the same section of a track, so my band would follow me
around playing the cannon part of the 1812 overture (real cannon of course,
this is the BEST way to listen to this work) repeatedly.
Tricky on an undergound train in the rush-hour. In my country the firearms
restrictions might rule out real weapons.
I had an mp3 playing discman for a while, I've lost it though. It was a nice
way to accomplish my portable mp3 goals at the time and definitely, the
shock protection has gotten so good that you really have a hard time getting
them to skip. I remember the first version of the Discman. Batteries lasted
an album if you were lucky and "portable" meant you could go somewhere and
set it on a very solid table.
I have an early Sony Discman :)) Two-inch wide webbing shoulder-strap included.
Cost a small fortune too.
I have a pair of rather regular headphones and a pair of very nice
Sennheiser HD 555s. They're great for home listening - but the greatest
feature is during the winter they're very effective ear muffs. I might look
kind of goofy but my ears stay warm. I picked them up on ebay (during one of
those stupid manic spending sprees) for $130.
http://www.headphone.com/guide/by-manufacturer/sennheiser/sennheiser-hd-555.php
I like my Senheisser 'open' headphones for use at home; had them for almost
30 years. They are showing their age though, so I now use a pair of Sony
MDR-V200 with which I am very happy
<http://audioholics.audioreview.com/cat/headphones-home-audio/headphones/sony/PRD_118126_2750crx.aspx>.
For going out and about, I use Philips SBC HN050 like these
<http://www.ciao.co.uk/Philips_SBCHN050__Review_5479081>. They also act as
ear-warmers, and don't conflict with my taste in hats :))
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
08 Oct 2005 10:17:14 AM |
|
|
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:0b4l13-06j.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-08, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
snip
Portable CD players are remarkably cheap, and include software to buffer
the re-play so as to overcome the tracking problems caused by movement
of
the device. They remain the most practical way of having 'HiFi' sound
on
the move. Of course, the sound-proof auditorium and array of
loud-speakers
are still a problem; headphones are a poor substitute.
Live music is the best way of getting 'real sound'; one's own personal
marching-band doesn't even need batteries, just tea and sandwiches and
beer
and wine ...
I like to listen to the same section of a track, so my band would follow
me
around playing the cannon part of the 1812 overture (real cannon of
course,
this is the BEST way to listen to this work) repeatedly.
Tricky on an undergound train in the rush-hour. In my country the
firearms
restrictions might rule out real weapons.
I had an mp3 playing discman for a while, I've lost it though. It was a
nice
way to accomplish my portable mp3 goals at the time and definitely, the
shock protection has gotten so good that you really have a hard time
getting
them to skip. I remember the first version of the Discman. Batteries
lasted
an album if you were lucky and "portable" meant you could go somewhere
and
set it on a very solid table.
I have an early Sony Discman :)) Two-inch wide webbing shoulder-strap
included.
Cost a small fortune too.
I have a pair of rather regular headphones and a pair of very nice
Sennheiser HD 555s. They're great for home listening - but the greatest
feature is during the winter they're very effective ear muffs. I might
look
kind of goofy but my ears stay warm. I picked them up on ebay (during one
of
those stupid manic spending sprees) for $130.
http://www.headphone.com/guide/by-manufacturer/sennheiser/sennheiser-hd-555.php
I like my Senheisser 'open' headphones for use at home; had them for
almost
30 years. They are showing their age though, so I now use a pair of Sony
MDR-V200 with which I am very happy
<http://audioholics.audioreview.com/cat/headphones-home-audio/headphones/sony/PRD_118126_2750crx.aspx>.
For going out and about, I use Philips SBC HN050 like these
<http://www.ciao.co.uk/Philips_SBCHN050__Review_5479081>. They also act
as
ear-warmers, and don't conflict with my taste in hats :))
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
You send me not 1 but 2! links with no pictures. What kind of useful
information is this?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
08 Oct 2005 02:05:19 PM |
|
|
On 2005-10-08, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:0b4l13-06j.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
snip
I like my Senheisser 'open' headphones for use at home; had them for
almost
30 years. They are showing their age though, so I now use a pair of Sony
MDR-V200 with which I am very happy
<http://audioholics.audioreview.com/cat/headphones-home-audio/headphones/sony/PRD_118126_2750crx.aspx>.
For going out and about, I use Philips SBC HN050 like these
<http://www.ciao.co.uk/Philips_SBCHN050__Review_5479081>. They also act
as ear-warmers, and don't conflict with my taste in hats :))
You send me not 1 but 2! links with no pictures. What kind of useful
information is this?
I listen to my headphones, not look at them :))
I usually have "images" switched off in my browser, to speed things up over
my dial-up, so that's my excuse for not thinking of it.
SBC HN050 <http://image.abcaz.co.uk/productimages/215/2592727.jpg>
MDR-V200 <http://fr.audiofanzine.com/img/produits/thumb2/1/8/18610.jpg>
(Thanks to Google Images).
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
08 Oct 2005 09:25:11 PM |
|
|
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:fshl13-t3n.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-08, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:0b4l13-06j.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
snip
I like my Senheisser 'open' headphones for use at home; had them for
almost
30 years. They are showing their age though, so I now use a pair of
Sony
MDR-V200 with which I am very happy
<http://audioholics.audioreview.com/cat/headphones-home-audio/headphones/sony/PRD_118126_2750crx.aspx>.
For going out and about, I use Philips SBC HN050 like these
<http://www.ciao.co.uk/Philips_SBCHN050__Review_5479081>. They also act
as ear-warmers, and don't conflict with my taste in hats :))
You send me not 1 but 2! links with no pictures. What kind of useful
information is this?
I listen to my headphones, not look at them :))
I usually have "images" switched off in my browser, to speed things up
over
my dial-up, so that's my excuse for not thinking of it.
SBC HN050 <http://image.abcaz.co.uk/productimages/215/2592727.jpg>
MDR-V200 <http://fr.audiofanzine.com/img/produits/thumb2/1/8/18610.jpg>
(Thanks to Google Images).
I like the folding action on the sony model but I've tried the kind that go
around the back of the head and they just cause me headaches. I'm thinking
these for portability, cheap and fairly well received for quality. $17.95
http://www.headphone.com/guide/by-budget/under-40/sennheiser-mx-450.php
These are another option I've considered if I want to go with something
that's going to give me bass that earbuds never could. Plus they come with
their own little case to stash them in when I fold them away. I seen several
reviews of this model and a couple of the higher end models that Sennheiser
released at the same time and it was pretty much agreed that they got it
right with the cheaper headphones. $49.99
http://www.headphone.com/guide/by-budget/40-80/sennheiser-px-100.php
I doubt I'll get permission to spend $50 on headphones though after having
bought the nano. I know the apple supplied headphones are awful and
uncomfortable (and least the ones that come with the shuffle) from when I
got a shuffle for my lady on her birthday. So I know they'll have to be
replaced if they're the same awful ear terrorizers.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
09 Oct 2005 07:34:29 AM |
|
|
On 2005-10-09, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
snip
I like the folding action on the sony model but I've tried the kind that go
around the back of the head and they just cause me headaches. I'm thinking
these for portability, cheap and fairly well received for quality. $17.95
http://www.headphone.com/guide/by-budget/under-40/sennheiser-mx-450.php
I hate in-ear phones; they hurt, they sound terrible, they keep falling
out, and they're unhygienic. The hook-over type (like head-phones but with
no band, and shaped to hang from the top of the outer ear, where spectacle
side-arms go) are much better. Without the stability of a band or some
other 'clamp', though, you easily get a resonance when the whole ear-piece
vibrates instead of only the diaphragm, and the low frequencies can be very
weak.
The simultaneous translation in the UN is piped to that sort (but mono, one
ear only).
These are another option I've considered if I want to go with something
that's going to give me bass that earbuds never could. Plus they come with
their own little case to stash them in when I fold them away. I seen several
reviews of this model and a couple of the higher end models that Sennheiser
released at the same time and it was pretty much agreed that they got it
right with the cheaper headphones. $49.99
http://www.headphone.com/guide/by-budget/40-80/sennheiser-px-100.php
Very nice :)) They look better engineered than my Sony folders, and they
fold to a much neater package. It's hard to go seriously wrong with
Sennheiser.
I doubt I'll get permission to spend $50 on headphones though after having
bought the nano. I know the apple supplied headphones are awful and
uncomfortable (and least the ones that come with the shuffle) from when I
got a shuffle for my lady on her birthday. So I know they'll have to be
replaced if they're the same awful ear terrorizers.
Unless there is some special feature of the iPod that you want badly, I'd
suggest getting a less hyped (and possibly better made {although [1]} as well
as cheaper) Digital Audio Player and a good set of 'phones. Ears care
little for fashion (and other brands aren't restricted to Mac or Windows).
[1] <http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/nano.ars/3> - lots of
pictures, terrible over dial-up ;))
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
09 Oct 2005 12:52:38 PM |
|
|
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:lbfn13-0un.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-09, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
snip
I like the folding action on the sony model but I've tried the kind that
go
around the back of the head and they just cause me headaches. I'm
thinking
these for portability, cheap and fairly well received for quality. $17.95
http://www.headphone.com/guide/by-budget/under-40/sennheiser-mx-450.php
I hate in-ear phones; they hurt, they sound terrible, they keep falling
out, and they're unhygienic. The hook-over type (like head-phones but
with
no band, and shaped to hang from the top of the outer ear, where spectacle
side-arms go) are much better. Without the stability of a band or some
other 'clamp', though, you easily get a resonance when the whole ear-piece
vibrates instead of only the diaphragm, and the low frequencies can be
very
weak.
I'm not a generally a fan of them but a comfortable pair does well by me and
they're good for requiring much less to drive them, extending my battery
life (marginally at best I would imagine).
The size is the appealing part.
The simultaneous translation in the UN is piped to that sort (but mono,
one
ear only).
These are another option I've considered if I want to go with something
that's going to give me bass that earbuds never could. Plus they come
with
their own little case to stash them in when I fold them away. I seen
several
reviews of this model and a couple of the higher end models that
Sennheiser
released at the same time and it was pretty much agreed that they got it
right with the cheaper headphones. $49.99
http://www.headphone.com/guide/by-budget/40-80/sennheiser-px-100.php
Very nice :)) They look better engineered than my Sony folders, and they
fold to a much neater package. It's hard to go seriously wrong with
Sennheiser.
Yea, they drew me in. I especially like how many reviews of them said the
px100 beat all the other models they put out at the same time. Maybe they've
crippled the goodness of them now, but it's still the right price and
sennheiser hasn't disappointed me yet.
I doubt I'll get permission to spend $50 on headphones though after
having
bought the nano. I know the apple supplied headphones are awful and
uncomfortable (and least the ones that come with the shuffle) from when I
got a shuffle for my lady on her birthday. So I know they'll have to be
replaced if they're the same awful ear terrorizers.
Unless there is some special feature of the iPod that you want badly, I'd
suggest getting a less hyped (and possibly better made {although [1]} as
well
as cheaper) Digital Audio Player and a good set of 'phones. Ears care
little for fashion (and other brands aren't restricted to Mac or Windows).
[1] <http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/nano.ars/3> - lots of
pictures, terrible over dial-up ;))
I got the nano because I can get it for a decent price with apple's
educational discount.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "gravity" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
08 Oct 2005 09:43:53 PM |
|
|
i have a pair of Sony MDR-V600 from the 90's. they are about $130 list
price, but i think Amazon has them for $90. they are ok, but nothing to
write home about.
i've tried a few Sennheiser at the audio stores, and the 580 are pretty
good. they make both closed and open varieties of headphones.
the Grado are ok. but uncomfortable.
i believe cost no object, i'd get Sennheiser or electrostatic headphones.
m.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
08 Oct 2005 10:00:25 PM |
|
|
"gravity" <gravity@example.net> wrote in message
news:434883e9$0$65292$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
i have a pair of Sony MDR-V600 from the 90's. they are about $130 list
price, but i think Amazon has them for $90. they are ok, but nothing to
write home about.
i've tried a few Sennheiser at the audio stores, and the 580 are pretty
good. they make both closed and open varieties of headphones.
the Grado are ok. but uncomfortable.
i believe cost no object, i'd get Sennheiser or electrostatic headphones.
m.
I've never found a pair of Grado headphones that have been comfortable. Some
of them seem pretty good at first, but any sort of extended wear and I'm
out, screw these cans.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Unknown parts@unknown" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
08 Oct 2005 09:54:24 PM |
|
|
"gravity" <gravity@example.net> wrote in news:434883e9$0$65292$892e7fe2
@authen.white.readfreenews.net:
i believe cost no object, i'd get Sennheiser or electrostatic headphones.
m.
Can't go wrong with Sennheisers.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Harding" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
14 Oct 2005 12:56:32 AM |
|
|
In message <0b4l13-06j.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
On 2005-10-08, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
I like to listen to the same section of a track, so my band would follow me
around playing the cannon part of the 1812 overture (real cannon of course,
this is the BEST way to listen to this work) repeatedly.
Tricky on an undergound train in the rush-hour. In my country the firearms
restrictions might rule out real weapons.
They use a real cannon to start races at Cowes, and a field gun to mark
curfew (I think) in Edinburgh. A couple of cannon in the Albert Hall
might test the acoustics, but I reckon it would be legal, unless London
has a bye-law.
--
The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
14 Oct 2005 02:54:03 PM |
|
|
On 2005-10-14, Alan Harding <Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In message <0b4l13-06j.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
On 2005-10-08, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
I like to listen to the same section of a track, so my band would follow me
around playing the cannon part of the 1812 overture (real cannon of course,
this is the BEST way to listen to this work) repeatedly.
Tricky on an undergound train in the rush-hour. In my country the firearms
restrictions might rule out real weapons.
They use a real cannon to start races at Cowes, and a field gun to mark
curfew (I think) in Edinburgh. A couple of cannon in the Albert Hall
might test the acoustics, but I reckon it would be legal, unless London
has a bye-law.
The daily gun I know of in Edinburgh is fired at one PM, from the castle -
by the army. In London the army fire canon quite often, mostly from the
embankment by the Tower or in Hyde Park or Horse Guards. I think it's
meant to keep the Royals on their toes.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Harding" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
29 Oct 2005 02:45:21 AM |
|
|
In message <rve523-8oc.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
On 2005-10-14, Alan Harding <Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In message <0b4l13-06j.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
On 2005-10-08, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
I like to listen to the same section of a track, so my band would follow me
around playing the cannon part of the 1812 overture (real cannon of course,
this is the BEST way to listen to this work) repeatedly.
Tricky on an undergound train in the rush-hour. In my country the firearms
restrictions might rule out real weapons.
They use a real cannon to start races at Cowes, and a field gun to mark
curfew (I think) in Edinburgh. A couple of cannon in the Albert Hall
might test the acoustics, but I reckon it would be legal, unless London
has a bye-law.
The daily gun I know of in Edinburgh is fired at one PM, from the castle -
by the army. In London the army fire canon quite often, mostly from the
embankment by the Tower or in Hyde Park or Horse Guards. I think it's
meant to keep the Royals on their toes.
They be kept on their toes more if they fired the cannons at Buck Ho.
--
The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
29 Oct 2005 12:54:51 PM |
|
|
On 2005-10-29, Alan Harding <Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In message <rve523-8oc.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
On 2005-10-14, Alan Harding <Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In message <0b4l13-06j.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
On 2005-10-08, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
I like to listen to the same section of a track, so my band would follow me
around playing the cannon part of the 1812 overture (real cannon of course,
this is the BEST way to listen to this work) repeatedly.
Tricky on an undergound train in the rush-hour. In my country the firearms
restrictions might rule out real weapons.
They use a real cannon to start races at Cowes, and a field gun to mark
curfew (I think) in Edinburgh. A couple of cannon in the Albert Hall
might test the acoustics, but I reckon it would be legal, unless London
has a bye-law.
The daily gun I know of in Edinburgh is fired at one PM, from the castle -
by the army. In London the army fire canon quite often, mostly from the
embankment by the Tower or in Hyde Park or Horse Guards. I think it's
meant to keep the Royals on their toes.
They be kept on their toes more if they fired the cannons at Buck Ho.
They aren't there very often. But field guns can be aimed very quickly.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
29 Oct 2005 01:34:48 PM |
|
|
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:bkpc33-c5h.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-29, Alan Harding <Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In message <rve523-8oc.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
On 2005-10-14, Alan Harding <Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In message <0b4l13-06j.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
On 2005-10-08, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
I like to listen to the same section of a track, so my band would
follow me
around playing the cannon part of the 1812 overture (real cannon of
course,
this is the BEST way to listen to this work) repeatedly.
Tricky on an undergound train in the rush-hour. In my country the
firearms
restrictions might rule out real weapons.
They use a real cannon to start races at Cowes, and a field gun to mark
curfew (I think) in Edinburgh. A couple of cannon in the Albert Hall
might test the acoustics, but I reckon it would be legal, unless London
has a bye-law.
The daily gun I know of in Edinburgh is fired at one PM, from the
castle -
by the army. In London the army fire canon quite often, mostly from the
embankment by the Tower or in Hyde Park or Horse Guards. I think it's
meant to keep the Royals on their toes.
They be kept on their toes more if they fired the cannons at Buck Ho.
They aren't there very often. But field guns can be aimed very quickly.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
Some of those guys were good too, practiced and fast. I saw a show on PBS
where they were firing some of that old artillery and it was way more
accurate than I ever imagined. They hit bullseye on every target using a gun
that was ancient.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
29 Oct 2005 03:03:40 PM |
|
|
On 2005-10-29, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:bkpc33-c5h.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-29, Alan Harding <Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In message <rve523-8oc.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
On 2005-10-14, Alan Harding <Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In message <0b4l13-06j.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
On 2005-10-08, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
I like to listen to the same section of a track, so my band would
follow me
around playing the cannon part of the 1812 overture (real cannon of
course,
this is the BEST way to listen to this work) repeatedly.
Tricky on an undergound train in the rush-hour. In my country the
firearms
restrictions might rule out real weapons.
They use a real cannon to start races at Cowes, and a field gun to mark
curfew (I think) in Edinburgh. A couple of cannon in the Albert Hall
might test the acoustics, but I reckon it would be legal, unless London
has a bye-law.
The daily gun I know of in Edinburgh is fired at one PM, from the
castle -
by the army. In London the army fire canon quite often, mostly from the
embankment by the Tower or in Hyde Park or Horse Guards. I think it's
meant to keep the Royals on their toes.
They be kept on their toes more if they fired the cannons at Buck Ho.
They aren't there very often. But field guns can be aimed very quickly.
Some of those guys were good too, practiced and fast. I saw a show on PBS
where they were firing some of that old artillery and it was way more
accurate than I ever imagined. They hit bullseye on every target using a gun
that was ancient.
There used to be 'field-gun contests' between Royal Marine units, on an
annual knock-out tournament basis. I think I heard somewhere that they
have been discontinued as 'too dangerous' or something. The contest was to
dismantle the gun, limber, ammo box, wheels, etc, into bits small enough to
be man-handled through an obstacle course and re-assembled. The first team
to get a (blank) round off, won. Exciting spectator sport.
It surprises me that the Napoleonic era naval gunners were able to hit the
enemy ship at all from any distance, given that they were firing from a
ship moving up and down and pitching and rolling.
One theory as to the loss of Henry VIII's flagship "Mary Rose" is that her
recently-increased fire-power caused such a recoil from the first broadside
that her lower gun-ports were rolled below water while still open. Rather
embarassing, in full view of the King from the shore while attempting to
repel a French invasion (quite apart from the huge loss of life and the
great peril to the realm).
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Bestuchev" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
30 Oct 2005 12:57:54 PM |
|
|
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:s51d33-frj.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-29, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:bkpc33-c5h.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
On 2005-10-29, Alan Harding <Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In message <rve523-8oc.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
On 2005-10-14, Alan Harding <Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In message <0b4l13-06j.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
On 2005-10-08, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
I like to listen to the same section of a track, so my band would
follow me
around playing the cannon part of the 1812 overture (real cannon of
course,
this is the BEST way to listen to this work) repeatedly.
Tricky on an undergound train in the rush-hour. In my country the
firearms
restrictions might rule out real weapons.
They use a real cannon to start races at Cowes, and a field gun to
mark
curfew (I think) in Edinburgh. A couple of cannon in the Albert Hall
might test the acoustics, but I reckon it would be legal, unless
London
has a bye-law.
The daily gun I know of in Edinburgh is fired at one PM, from the
castle -
by the army. In London the army fire canon quite often, mostly from
the
embankment by the Tower or in Hyde Park or Horse Guards. I think it's
meant to keep the Royals on their toes.
They be kept on their toes more if they fired the cannons at Buck Ho.
They aren't there very often. But field guns can be aimed very quickly.
Some of those guys were good too, practiced and fast. I saw a show on PBS
where they were firing some of that old artillery and it was way more
accurate than I ever imagined. They hit bullseye on every target using a
gun
that was ancient.
There used to be 'field-gun contests' between Royal Marine units, on an
annual knock-out tournament basis. I think I heard somewhere that they
have been discontinued as 'too dangerous' or something. The contest was
to
dismantle the gun, limber, ammo box, wheels, etc, into bits small enough
to
be man-handled through an obstacle course and re-assembled. The first
team
to get a (blank) round off, won. Exciting spectator sport.
It surprises me that the Napoleonic era naval gunners were able to hit the
enemy ship at all from any distance, given that they were firing from a
ship moving up and down and pitching and rolling.
One theory as to the loss of Henry VIII's flagship "Mary Rose" is that her
recently-increased fire-power caused such a recoil from the first
broadside
that her lower gun-ports were rolled below water while still open. Rather
embarassing, in full view of the King from the shore while attempting to
repel a French invasion (quite apart from the huge loss of life and the
great peril to the realm).
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
That's just the guy kind of thing to do. Upgrade it with more and more power
until the recoil sinks your boat.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
30 Oct 2005 02:17:55 PM |
|
|
On 2005-10-30, Franz Bestuchev <franz.bestuchev@gmail.com> wrote:
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:s51d33-frj.ln1@ID-107770.user.individual.net...
snip
One theory as to the loss of Henry VIII's flagship "Mary Rose" is that her
recently-increased fire-power caused such a recoil from the first
broadside
that her lower gun-ports were rolled below water while still open. Rather
embarassing, in full view of the King from the shore while attempting to
repel a French invasion (quite apart from the huge loss of life and the
great peril to the realm).
That's just the guy kind of thing to do. Upgrade it with more and more power
until the recoil sinks your boat.
Very true!
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gravity" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
29 Oct 2005 01:28:16 PM |
|
|
i hope you were joking about firing a cannon in an indoor hall. ever
calculated the dB from this? sure cannon works great for outdoor
performance of 1812.
i have several versions of 1812. it's not a terribly great piece, i
understand Tchaikovsky just cranked it out quickly to please the powers at
be. i have a Telarc version with real cannon.
i love bass. i have a couple of CDs with 8 hertz organ pedals and 20 hz
drums. i'd love to get a subharmonic synthesizer so my 20 hz trance sounds
become 10 hz.
Gravity
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gravity" |
|
| Title: Re: I Need a Good MP3 player... |
29 Oct 2005 01:32:11 PM |
|
|
"Gravity" <gravity1@m-net.arbornet.org> wrote in message
news:4363bf41$0$40098$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
i hope you were joking about firing a cannon in an indoor hall. ever
calculated the dB from this? sure cannon works great for outdoor
performance of 1812.
i have several versions of 1812. it's not a terribly great piece, i
understand Tchaikovsky just cranked it out quickly to please the powers at
be. i have a Telarc version with real cannon.
i love bass. i have a couple of CDs with 8 hertz organ pedals and 20 hz
drums. i'd love to get a subharmonic synthesizer so my 20 hz trance
sounds become 10 hz.
of course then i'd have to buy a $1000 subwoofer. this would ***** off my
landlord. i'm better off with Sennheiser headphones.
Gravity
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|