DS Forums

 
 

MP3 Players


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-06-2004, 10:29
Ocean Pacific
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London
Posts: 498

Is there any difference is sound quality between a cheap £30 MP3 player and a more expensive one?
Ocean Pacific is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 07-06-2004, 11:26
paulbrock
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Wapping, London
Posts: 16,222
think a lot of the cost is dependent on the memory size. don't know about the quality. 30 quid?
Cheapest on amazon is around 50 quid for 128MB (4 albums' worth?).
paulbrock is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 11:42
Ocean Pacific
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London
Posts: 498
Originally Posted by paulbrock
think a lot of the cost is dependent on the memory size. don't know about the quality. 30 quid?
Cheapest on amazon is around 50 quid for 128MB (4 albums' worth?).
Dixons have one for £30
Ocean Pacific is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 11:57
paulbrock
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Wapping, London
Posts: 16,222
Ah yes, got it:
SYNN SYNN 64Mb MP3 PLAYER

Not an 'obvious' make, the main reason it's cheap is that it's 64 MB = 20 songs = 2 albums? What real advantage does this give you over e.g. CD player?

Been discussed before here I think, I'm not a fan of the "spend 300 quid so you can carry ALL your albums with you" concept, I think 4-12 albums' worth is about right, for cost v size. I use a 128 MB which is OK for me at lower sampling rates.

Found a newgroup posting of someone that bought the Synn 64MB and he's happy.
Can't find a "Synn" website though, so would be suspect.

A relatively cheap, low memory option would be mobiles that have built in MP3 players. You can expand the memory fairly easily too. SX1 is recommended, but Nokia also have several.
paulbrock is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 12:49
Ocean Pacific
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London
Posts: 498
Yes. I thought about the mobile option. I got a new Nokia 6600 over a nicer Samsung as it had an mp3 player. What they don't tell you is that you need a bluetooth connection to download, new headphones as standard ones won't fit, and it's in mono.
Ocean Pacific is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 12:58
paulbrock
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Wapping, London
Posts: 16,222
Originally Posted by Ocean Pacific
Yes. I thought about the mobile option. I got a new Nokia 6600 over a nicer Samsung as it had an mp3 player. What they don't tell you is that you need a bluetooth connection to download, new headphones as standard ones won't fit, and it's in mono.
Hence the recommended, rare but beautiful SX1. Comes with data cable to download, stereo headphones included, and MP3 is in stereo.
paulbrock is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2004, 21:21
monkeysoup
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 550
As far as audio quality though, consider the bitrate - it might be worth doing a few trials to see what's acceptable. Personally, I find I need 192kbps minimum for mp3s, which works out at about 80MB an hour. Best to think in terms of the total duration, not a fairly meaningless count of the number of songs...
monkeysoup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2004, 00:03
nevada
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,936
Originally Posted by Ocean Pacific
Is there any difference is sound quality between a cheap £30 MP3 player and a more expensive one?
It is generally written in hi-fi mags that the likes of the mini-mp3players can't compete with the larger ones for capacity OR sound quality. However I haven't had the chance to test this myself.
nevada is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 16:49.