Slashdot Mirror
Latest Crop of MP3 Players
Anonymous Coward writes "A couple of interesting new MP3 portables were announced this week. The first one is Bantam's BA1000 that has near-identical size and weight dimensions to the iPod, but offers a number of features the older Apple doesn't like the ability to record from an internal FM radio. Choosing to offer the player in only 2GB and 5GB capacities, it looks like it is shooting to be the first sub $200 portable utilizing Toshiba's petite 1.8" drives. The other player announced was Samsung's Yepp YP-55, which claims to be the first Surround Sound MP3 flash portable. Using SRS Labs' surround sound simulator, the unit comes in 128MB and 258MB units. MP3newswire.net also offers an older, but nicely explained article on how this technology works using only two headphones to replace six speakers."
258 MB? That's new. I want one now.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/30315.html
...
it's about time the flash memory players got some extra storage, i'm not prepared to splash out on a neat mp3 player that can only hold one album at a decent bit rate. according to the article, they won't be getting to the UK for a while yet though
Fry: heh, Yakov Smirnoff said it
Leela: No he didn't.
Come on, geeez!!! :-)
On a more interesting note, Frontier Labs recently released their new MP3 player, the NEX IA. From the site:
Supports multiple formats (MP3 and WMATM) and emerging formats such as Ogg Vorbis through firmware upgrades.It's almost official then, go OGG! Can't wait!
zWhat would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
the RIAA is up in arms over the invention of a 2 terabyte mp3 player. Hail technology!
It is amazing how fast I filled up my own iPod with 5 Gigs of sound. Go for the player with the largest capacity one can afford. In this case size really matters.
Harpo Tunnel Syndrome--my wrist feels funny.
Yet another HDD unit. I went through three Creative Jukebox Zens before I gave up on them. The idea is awesome, but I'd want to hear some 'torture-test' stories (like, you know, using it while walking...) from some I-Pod owners before I shell out another $300 USD for something that's about as durable as a lightbulb.
Of course with colour screen cell phones taking off the prices should drop to the point that this will be a natural progression in the next generation of players. I'm backing that may be a showpiece at the next macworld.
__
Cheap Web Site Hosting
All I know is tha the Neuros upgrade will be out soon that will let me use it in GNU/Linux *and* be the first portable hardware player that can do Ogg Vorbis, and in the future, Ogg Speex and FLAC.
I've waited years for these features, and soon my wait will be over.
If there were another player with the same features out now, I'd buy that.
Oh, and the Neuros will also let you record from FM and has a low-range FM broadcast so you can use it in your car.
- Serge Wroclawski
Latest Crop of MP3 Players
Im gonna plant my Rio right now and see what I get!
There is no such thing as MP3s. I triple guarantee you, nobody is violating any copyrights on KaZaA, never! The RIAA are a gang of international criminals and mercenaries! They will be welcomed with DDoS attacks and shoes! The all of the lying RIAA infidels will be slaughtered, most of them!
Repeal the DMCA!
I'm in the market for MP3 and even though i can afford an iPod is simply refuse to based on principle. They are really overpriced. I have been waiting for a player that was in GIG or 2 range and if Bantam's 2 GIG drive is around the $120 price range I'll be the first to buy it.
-----
One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
but do they support unicode?
As far as using it just to play music 5 gigs would be enough(I use mine for other stuff so 5 gigs would be weak), but do I get to keep my 10hour battery? I am an 10gig iPod owner and the battery is the MOST important feature to me!!!
Can someone who knows why please post an explanation. I'm totally baffled by it all, I have to assume it's true because my surround sound speaker system sounds massively different to my old stereo systems, but I just don't understand the technology.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
LMFAO how are you going to get surround sound with headphones? I thought headphones are the best way to get the sound since after all we only have 2 ears on the side of our head and get the sound pumped right in while cancelling most outside noise out. This is also precisely the reason I won't move on to SACD or DVD-A because when I'm jogging outside, I could care less if my audio is 16/44 or 24/92, 4.1, 5.1, 6.1, 7.1, LOL!
Its also possible to make your own if you want support for any format.
If you just want MP3, well thats easy. There are lots of sites on the web, here is one.
For Ogg there is an entire decoder-on-a-chip thingy, see this project. Or you could probably just use a software version if you got some sort of RISC chip or whatnot (need to be fairly fast)
You could of course sacrifice some sound quality but I would get a vorbis decoding player. Vorbis sounds nice at 64kbps and at this bitrate it sounds like a LAME mp3 encoded at 128kbps. Just try it if you are septic:
http://www.xiph.org/ogg/vorbis/listen.html
"...a generation of kids has grown up thinking Trance is the shittiest music since country and western." - Paul van Dyk
Um, no. The article doesn't explain how to "replace six speakers" with two. It describes a WinAmp plugin for "virtual speaker placement", whatever that is.
Personally, I've found that all these "virtual" thingies are market-droid speak, snake oil at their very best. If your recording has two channels (assuming no multichannel encoding), a correctly configured stereo pair is the best option.
Real multichannel records may give you true 3D sound, if you have the decoder, amp, and speakers to do it. However, the linked article describes an "improvement" to a system that's ill-suited for high fidelity playback in the first place.
Why anybody would want to distort the sound even further from what it is after MP3/Ogg encoding, since you can get better results with a decent amp (budget models from NAD are very nice), and a pair of high quality speakers.
Check this out. The small Danish company that's designed it needs your input on which product to make next, so if you like the look of it, make sure you vote for it on the site.
The iPod has yet to be beaten in my opinion, when comparing features the iPod's firewire interface (slower in theory, but not real world tests than USB 2.0), Amazingly simple integration and hard drive DATA capability are excluded. Plus they have great quality and have an INSANE number of support products and now battery & hard drive replacement services on the cheap.
I would hold off on any MP# purchase to see if the newest iPods will be compatible with a new Apple Music service possibly later this month.
I fully expect the new iPods to surpass anything on the market with a twist (as the the current ones do) for another year upon introduction.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
the only price i could find for the new line of bantam players was the 5gb model for $329 (granted, the product is not for sale yet, so this is probably not set in stone), while a 5gb iPod will only cost you $300. If they introduced this new line of players to compete with the iPod, which was pretty obviously their intent, wouldnt they think that it is a good idea to price their products competitively? They add some new features, and promise some more in future models, but what makes this device a better buy than a similarly sized iPod, which has been proven to be a great product?
From a happy iPodder.
The moderators are using tactics I can only describe as ... crackfiendish and st00pid. All day long we post here and they mod us down there. But in the end they will comit suicide on the walls of slashdot. I tell you teh simple truth, which anyone can plainly see!
Humans (and other animals as well) use several different clues to localise spatial sound, let's have a look at them: Firstly, there's the time difference: signals that are off center arrive earlier at one ear and later at the other. We can't consciously perceive such minimal time intervals, but out brain is hardwired to perceive the difference between the two signals. Electronic circuits can fake this effect, as long as the listener doesn't move eir head. Secondly, the sound is filtered by the head and the auricles, again differently for each ear if the source is off center and differently for sounds that come from different directions in general. Electronic circuits (and also microphones mounted inside artificial heads) can approximate this effect, but each individual has a different head and different ears and would require a recording tailored to em specifically for this to work perfectly. There actually is equipment that tailors spatial sounds to one headphone wearing individual after having measured eir head's characteristics with little microphones places inside eir auditory canals, near the ear drums. This works rather well, but again can't compensate for movements of the head. If you want to use speakers instead of headphones, the situation is much, much worse. And thirdly, that head movement I mentioned twice above: humans actually do that on purpose and unconsciously twist and tilt their heads around a little when localising sounds, thus making use of the slight changes in the filtering that occurs because of the head and the auricles. So far, there's no technique that takes that into account.
As you can see, that expensive new hardware that Dolby is rolling out now, the Pro Logic II Virtual Speaker encoder, absolutely cannot produce the same effect as any ordinary 4.1, 5.1 or 6.1 setup. It may spice up a movie you watch on your TV, but you wouldn't even rely on that when you're playing Quake and want to hear enemies coming from behind. And that's expensive, high end stuff. A 'surround sound simulator' in a lowly MP3 player delivers even less. I haven't tried the one mentioned above, but I guess there's no way it could make music sound 'more immersive' or '3d-like'.
What's even worse, we're talking about music here. The best way to play music back is, without the slightest doubt, exactly the way it is intended to sound, the way it was recorded onto the CD or whatever medium. All those fancy DSP functions you find in all kinds of (mediocre) stereo equipment are nothing but useless features that exist for the sole purpose to have more features than the competition; it's pure dupery. You can alter sound by adding reverb or applying weird equalisation or whatnot, but arguing this alteration would be an improvement to each and every track is very, very stupid; don't fall for that.
but what do i know, i'm just a model.
Did you use the cut-up machine, or is the potemkin flame generator back online?
the ipod
the only one with a li-polymer battery. a better buffer for HDD players and a cool design.
everyone wants to be like the iPod and i wonder where they will be in a year. with the iPod you know you are going to get updates and not be left out to dry on it. the others will not sell like the iPod and don't have the pull that apple does to improve them. MP3 encoding on unit is cool, but how useful will that be? i have not recorded a FM radio stream since 1988.
i see more models and different brands as being a bad plan if you want to update them. they are all mostly upgradeable, but how many are going to get many updates, and how many are going to be overshadowed and ignored by a new model to compete with the new iPod a year down the road.
you end up stuck a $500 walkman that an antique with a battery life that makes it hardly a portable anymore and a salty taste in your mouth. i would stick to the iPod, as they are sexy, reliable and supported by a company that is pretty good for not leaving their hardware owners out to dry prematurely.
In other news iRiver released their newest flash based mp3 player, the iFP-300... The Craft[iRiver.com]. The player is flashable, and probably capable of Ogg Vorbis support (don't ask... Please... It's very strange). It comes in a sleek design too :)
------- I fumbled my registration and I now must suffer
Yeah, except your idea doesn't support recording FM radio.
Personally, though, I'm more interested in recording from the line-in. Now and then I take an expensive, week-long class with a lot of lecture time. I record onto minicassettes but those are a hassle, and I tend to lose them...I'd much rather record MP3s on a big hard drive, copy to my computer soon as I get back and everything's nicely cataloged and digital, ready for enhancement to make up for crappy recording conditions.
Philips is accepting applications for beta testers for their new mp3 jukebox. 50 units will be given free to beta testers. To qualify, all you need is to answer a survey, where you GET TO TELL THEM HOW IMPORTANT OGG SUPPORT IS TO YOU! So let's fill them up with Ogg Vorbis votes. Apply for the beta test now!
But all the flash memory types have such small amounts of memory. 128 or 256mb?
I rip all my CD's at 256kps, which means most albums are about 120mb.
Only being able to carry 1 or 2 albums is pitiful; I want more variety and selection.
Why not a gig of memory instead? Or even half a gig?
How long will it take until something like this comes out?
"I hate quotations. Tell me what you know." -Ralph Waldo Emerson
Panasonic also makes some compact FM. line in, recording headphones as well. To me, better to have one item that does something well and enhance it. Most Mp3 players that are all in one gizmos are just plain confusing.
Part of the iPod's attraction is simplicity, with it's processor and firmware + interface it could be a 1000 different things (even a gameboy/MAME player) - but it's beauty lies in ease of use and quality.
I agree that such a portable shouldn't be the primary storage device for a music collection. However, having my entire collection on hand at any time kicks ass. At the moment, my entire collection fits in 14 GB. For awhile to come, there will be portable players that can hold it. Of course, being able to afford such a handy player is another thing altogether. I would have a use for a 5 GB player even though it can't hold everything. The flash players seems like a waste of time and money to me. There is a convienience factor as well. Little players have to be filled up all the time. I'd rather only hook the player up to my desktop when I've made significant additions to my music collection. I'm thinking more in terms of syncing the player to the main archive rather picking out new tunes for it all the time.
If they aren't meant to hold the entire collection then they should be. Not for primary storage or even a backup, you're right about that. It is a matter of convienience. If I have to change out whats on it all the time, the player becomes a PITA. Bring on the big hard drives!
You bought from the Xtrememac site because of all the hot chicks (ignore the guy) they have on their pages :)
I CANNOT use this unless it has tabs!
The ears are at least 100 miles away. Our troops will destroy them.
Sincerely
Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf
Information Minister of Iraq
As devices get smaller, manufacturers have a tendency to start using smaller batteries. The unfortunate side effect of this is...
a. The batteries last no time at all.
b. The bud earphones can't be driven with enough current to get the volume you might want.
c. Switching on anything marked "turbo" bass will eat those batteries even faster.
d. Leaving the device off for a few weeks may actually drain the battery anyway if the device uses some kind of static memory storage.
I recently purchased a cheap ordinary AM/FM stereo portable from Emerson with 10 station memory (model HR2001). The device uses 2 AAA batteries. The max volume is poor, and when it is turned off for more than 2 weeks at a time, the batteries are totally drained from storing the stations in memory.
When I read about that yepp device I cringed. Who in their "right mind" would buy such a thing. I loath any portable device that uses less than 2 AA size cells. There's just not enought juice to run the circuitry and audio amplifier.
The conspiracy is that now the battery companies are owned by the portable manufacturers, so like the Lexmark printers and printer cartridges, you are getting suckered into a recurring cost business model.
And yes, the 3D "surround sound" audio from "bud" earphones is a joke, a marketing gimmick, the wool is being pulled over your eyes. It's just like the tube amplifier mobos, if a company can market to just the right segment of the population that can be sold to, they will. You are being used! Don't fall for it. Take some engineering and physics classes! Think for yourself! Don't let someone else think for you!!!
Just my 2 cents.
In short, there isn't any competition, and I'm wondering why. Did Apple have some exclusive agreement that says no one else can use the drives? If typical price/performance curve for the PC industry had followed, I should be able to buy an iPod 'clone' for $150 (half the price of the Mac version) by now. Unless something fishy is going on...
It's only 2GB or 5GB, and it'll cost a little less than $300? How about a Nomad Zen, which is just a little bigger than the iPod, but has 20GB, firewire/USB2.0, and runs only about $220.
So, this is the Nth time I read there's competition coming up for the iPod.
While it's nice to know the iPod is being used as a standard everything else is measured against, it still isn't really passed over by any other MP3 player out there. Despite the roaring headlines for the last 18 months.
That's pretty sad for the whole industry isn't it? Or does it say something about Apple being 2 years ahead of everybody else?
When Apple came out with the iPod I really couldn't see why they would enter an industry already carved out. Now I believe they can enter a whole lot more industries if they have their house in order.
You only have two ears. It is entirely possible to simulate full surround sound with nothing more than a pair of headphones and a properly mastered track.
The issue is whether or not a theater wishes to issue headphones to all its patrons. The problem becomes that two speakers cannot accurately reproduce the stereo field, and certainly not for many people listening at once. Same thing with a home theater... are you going to have all your family members don headphones? I think not.
Plus the fact that DVDs are usually mastered such that the 2-channel track is nothing more than plain stereo and is not designed to reproduce surround sound with headphones. The only way to get the surround sound feel as it was meant to be heard is to have a receiver and system capable of using the Dolby Digital or DTS track.
Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)
Underrated or interesting probably works (assuming you agree with those), insightful really doesn't seem relevent...
The placement of an FM Radio recorder on an MP3 player must be giving the music industry some kind of headache. While it is one thing to call some bootlegged Avril (or artist of choice...) mp3 illegal, if you recorded it and placed it on the player then it most certainly is not. And while it's impossible to tell if an mp3 on a player was ripped from a CD or downloaded, it seems like this radio recorder makes the issue even more complicated. Imagine, for example, having one of those babies in your living room and just continuously downloading all the music you hear and burning it to CD. I would assume that's perfectly legal (seeing as how taping the radio is), and can't be stopped. Hmm... free distribution of recorded-from-radio CD-Rs, anyone?
It wasn't me, it was the one-armed
Also good to note is that OGM (Ogg Media) is a container format like AVI, and it's somewhat better, especially if you use vorbis audio. It also allows you to add several different language tracks, different subtitles, and much more.
It pretty much lets you put a DVD in a single file.
HRTF, 'head relation transform function' is basically a set of filter coefs that relate to different degrees around and above your head. As it turns out the shape of your ear and head affects the frequency response when sound is coming from different angles in relation to your head.
There a several common data sets for these filter coefs, they range from a data taken using a two microphones sphere, to ones using a model of someones head.
My guess is that they are trying to add virtual speakers by spliting the signal (comb filter maybe?) then apply a filter that 'makes' it sound like its behind you.
Looks good on paper, kind of works with headphones, horrible for speakers.
visit PicPuter.com - microchip basic/assembler for linux, bsd, and windows. no stamps required.
ThinkSecret (www.thinksecret.com) is reporting that 15 and 30 GB iPods are on the way, with USB 2.0, a cradle, and redesigned controls. There will also probably be a software update to support Apple's music download service.
The BA1000 has dimensions that are almost identical to the iPod's. The unit comes in at a svelt 194 grams vs. the iPod's 185 grams. Dimensions of the unit are 106mm x 66mm x 31mm (4.0" x 2.6" x 1.2") vs. the iPod's 102 x 62 x 20 mm (4.0" x 2.4" x 0.78"). In both cases the iPod is still smaller, but marginally so.
31 mm thick vs 20 mm? That is a huge difference. Thickness makes all the difference in the world in being able to carry it in your pocket. The iPod is justtt small enough. (I consider Palm Vs/m500s just about perfectly sized). An extra 1.1 cm would make this thing uncomfortable to carry in your pocket.
Random is the New Order.
would be nice if BA1000 supported bluetooth (for for the headphones).
...buy anything where the memory capacity is not a power of 2 - my geekdar starts crying Alarm, ALARM!
The plugin mentioned in the article on 3D sound from 2 speakers is not at the website in the article. Big surprise there, as the article is from '99. Try http://www.wavearts.com instead. Oh, and it's no longer free. 14 day fully functional trial, or $9.95 USD to purchase
Last spring I chose between an MP3-player and a Minidisc player, and the choise fell on Sony MZ-N707 NetMD. It's absolutely wonderful. I transfer about 5 hours of music onto one disc, the transfer speed is definetly ok, never had a skip. All in all, I've got nothing bad to say about it, and people looking for descent portable music players should at least concider the NetMD players.
But assuming it's done well, and that your system isn't broken, it's nice to be able to record FM radio. This is especially an issue for me, because my weekly going-out-to-dinner group is the same night as the Grateful Dead Hour on KPFA, but there are other interesting radio shows that don't happen to be on at the times I want to listen. Usually when I'm driving, if I'm not on the cell phone, I'll be listening to Traffic/News Radio, or sometimes KPFA leftist radio, or NPR well-produced establishment radio.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
My 20g is full and even with another $100 I can't do shit. The number of mp3s you need always expands to fill hard drive capacity.
I've dropped the damn thing. On hard floors. From about 4 feet. It's fallen out of my backpack a couple of times, in its belt strap thingy which protects it from scratches a bit but probably doesn't cushion the impact much. It still works fine. This is a 20g model about 6 months old. (Note - I don't recommend dropping any hard drive, even one with a spin wheel and headphones).
I have an older version of the Yepp (The Yepp-NEU) and while the sound quality is good, my experience with it is generally not good. Only a few months after purchasing it, the battery cover came off, requiring jury-rigging with tape to get it to work. The spring inside is too strong and the rest of the material too fragile. Also, it originally required using Real Jukebox to load music on it, and this software just completely sucked at it, often hanging when copying or failing to recognize the player. Eventually Samsung released their own software, which is better as while it still hangs, it doesn't fail to recognize the player. My experience was negative enough that though I still use the player, I would never recommend a Samsung, or buy another myself.
The cake is a pie
yes but .. can you record from FM?
.. uh .. talk radio .. and record from upto 30 seconds before (thanks to buffering) you realized you want to record the particular .. uh .. talk radio dialogue.
I mean with the Archos, you can be listening to your favorite s^H
and what's the sound quality of those headphones?
If you're getting such shitty sound, might as well use a cassete deck or a $50 solid state mp3 player and encode everything at 32k/sec.
Why spend $400+ on an audio device if you're not trying to get good sound quality?
thinksecret, which is usually pretty reliable, has an article about upcoming ipods due at the end of the month. I would wait until then if I was currently in the market for an mp3 player.
Also, for those with ipods now, here's a link for buying a replacement battery for $49. Useful if your battery is starting to show some wear.
Your ears have different frequency response curves depending on where the sound is coming from. Add to that the phase differences and distortion the shape of the ear adds to sound, and you can fake a sound to make it sound like its coming from different places. This is the basis of the SRS audio system, and similar systems such as Roland Space Sound (RSS) and Bob Carver's old 1980s Sonic Holigraphy.
A friend bought an iPod and used it for months during his almost-daily training for the Boston Marathon. Then he ran the marathon with it. It simply went into his pocket- no waist pack or nothin', so it sure got bounced around a lot.
That good enough? :-)
Please help metamoderate.
I told them how USELESS and UNIMPORTANT ogg is to me and that WMF is really important. Besides only the linux loosers are worried about the ogg format.
(nt)
The cake is a pie
It is quite possible to record with two microphones, play back with two sound emitters, and get incredibly realistic 3D sound. You don't need any fancy electronics. All you need is to place the microphones in the same positions as a pair of human ears--that is, on either side of something that sonically resembles a human head.
There are various head-like objects used. Some use a flat sound-absorbent panel; some use an artificial head with microphones embedded where the ear canals would be. Personally, since I need to do stuff on the cheap, I use an actual human head, with the microphones worn like Walkman earbuds. You get incredible 3D sound, and best of all you don't need to remove the head from the body or carry it around in your hands. The only downside is you need to try and keep it still.
Stereo uses a couple of microphones positioned a few meters apart, usually in a line in front of the performers. Your stereo loudspeakers are thus ideally positioned the same way, to get an accurate representation of the original sound.
The problem is that most listening these days is on headphones, except in your car where stereo imaging is the least of your problems... but music is still recorded as if everyone's listening on loudspeakers. I don't really understand why this is, other than ignorance and inertia.
Sound recorded for loudspeakers but listened to on headphones doesn't sound quite right. Often the sound appears to be inside your head, and it can be quite fatiguing to listen to. Real enthusiasts get high-end headphone amps, which bleed part of the audio signal across to the other side of the headphones in a moderately complicated frequency-dependent way, to make it sound more natural.
Once it became practical to use a real-time DSP to process stereo audio to account for your ears not being two meters apart, it soon became possible to process four or six audio signals rather than two, and map quadrophonic or 5.1 surround sound into something resembling binaural as well. It's kind of a kludge, but it can be pretty effective. The best systems filter the signals supposed to be "behind" you, to simulate the absorbance of your ears and to introduce the appropriate phase difference to enhance the left-right position and widen the soundfield.
My DVD player does 5.1 to stereo using SRS Labs technology, and a good surround soundtrack can be nearly as good as a binaural recording if you listen on headphones, or are seated exactly equidistant from the speakers.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
So they eventually got around to porting Doom to the Archos, which is nice, and unexpected. Oh yeah, and Rockbox 2 was released, with lots of new features.
Da Blog
There are now a few choices of mp3 players that can record from internal FM, but AFAIK none of them allows a person to schedule a recording at a particular time and channel. This would be a killer feature for me, as there are all kinds of shows on the local jazz station and on NPR that are scheduled at regular times and which I'd love to listen to later. Without scheduling, the FM recording is of only marginal value to me.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
Best flash-based players are the Frontier Labs NexII and the Diva; see http://www.frontierlabs.com/ and http://mydivaplayer.com/. They both use standard CompactFlash (512MB is about $100 these days and the capacity keeps going up), don't have any stupid protection (so you can just copy mp3 files to the flash card using your computer), you can switch the cards, they are small as heck, have no moving parts, and the batteries last a long time.
I've been very happy with these. Much smaller and lighter than an IPod, and with 512MB, I fill them up about once a month for that month's running.
iPod iFM radio to debut next month