My 25,000+ music library will not even fit on my current 160 GB model. I'd be happy to see a HD size increase. A 220 GB SSD Touch would be nice, but until then, I hope Apple hangs onto the iPod Classic.
It's obviously not for exercising, but the Classic is perfect for my Subaru Forester, hooked up with an iPod interface that I control through the car stereo.
Depends on what kind of exercising you're talking about. I use mine all the time on elliptical trainers, stationary bikes, and treadmill...where I have a place to rest it and not have it strapped to my body. I do use a shuffle for weight lifting though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayCon
My 25,000+ music library will not even fit on my current 160 GB model. I'd be happy to see a HD size increase. A 220 GB SSD Touch would be nice, but until then, I hope Apple hangs onto the iPod Classic.
What compression rate are you using? I've got about 22,000 songs, plus a couple games and some videos and still have 55 GB free. That's why I've kept my files for the iPod at 128 kbps when ripping. For lossless with the audio alone I'd need 500-600 GB.
I've held off on an iPad or a new iPod purchase until they come out with 128+GB of memory, so I can store my whole music collection in Lossless. (~90GB)
90GB lossless is not that much. You could use the option to convert to 128 Kbps and easily put it all on the iPod with plenty of room to spare.
The audio quality of the iPod is not that great that you nould notice much of a difference.
It seems incredible to me that Apple has neither replaced the high capacity top end nor even mentioned their plans for it. The iPod was the very beginning of the idea that you could carry your entire library with you. I can't use a 30 GB or even a 60 GB player. I need to have large storage and carry it with me easily. Thousands of us out here are doing just that. Come on, Apple, let's at least tell the waiting multitude which way the wind is blowing. The wind just doesn't suddenly stop because you feel like building other devices.
It all depends upon sales. If it's profitable, Apple would likely upgrade it. If it's reaching the point where sales are just too low to justify its continuance, I would expect them to drop it.
I think that makes perfect sense. It's what happened to the X-Serve. However, if there's one Apple product that might survive for purely sentimental reasons, it's the click-wheel iPod.
Of course, that may already have been the case for some time.
90GB lossless is not that much. You could use the option to convert to 128 Kbps and easily put it all on the iPod with plenty of room to spare.
The audio quality of the iPod is not that great that you nould notice much of a difference.
The audio quality of a classic iPod is indistinguishable from a fairly high end CD player - at least my 3rd gen one is.. There is an internet meme that iPods have poor sound quality because Apple, in one of their typically stupid penny-pinching strokes of meanness, shipped iPods with possibly the lousiest sounding earbuds of any manufacturer. Many people came to judge the sound quality of iPods on the supplied earbuds, rather than try it with a decent pair, so the iPod is now stuck with a bad reputation it doesn't deserve.
Now you have the situation where a lot of people who value HiFi audio quality, believe Cowon, Sony et al, all deliver far higher sound quality than iPods do and so don't buy them, actively denounce them and advise people not to buy them.
I think 128kbps is too low, 160kbps would be the minimum I would recommend.
I would guess this one is the follow on to the series that are in my 2 platter 160GB Classic. But even if the specs for this one are off and 320GB is the biggest, my point is that we could have a Classic with much more storage if it was a priority to Apple.
Now some of the talk seems to be going more towards an upgrade versus a discontinuation. I hope that is the case.
One thing that is interesting in this topic is that while most of the pros about the Classic seem to be about its massive load carrying abilities (ie that it has a hard drive), there is a sizable percentage that like it from a click wheel. It will be interesting to see what happens to it when it RAM is finally cheap enough that storage really ceases to be an issue. Will it just become skinny, or will it vaporize??
Now you have the situation where a lot of people who value HiFi audio quality, believe Cowon, Sony et al, all deliver far higher sound quality than iPods do and so don't buy them, actively denounce them and advise people not to buy them.
I think 128kbps is too low, 160kbps would be the minimum I would recommend.
I shall utter the three words that strike mortal terror into the hearts of audiophools - double blind testing.
I've met people who say they can reliably detect high-res audio vs. CD-res audio in double-blind listening tests, but they admit the difference is extremely subtle.
Everyone has a different idea as to who should be banned. I get private messages from people wanting me to ban each other! Sometimes I think they should all be banned, including those demanding that people be banned. That's as annoying as the trolling.
But if someone's polite about it, it's harder to decide, and it takes longer.
Agreed, and like I said, I understand it's a slippery slope. If someone asks for a ban and then it happens that only encourages more users to complain. In this case I figured it was worth asking because I could do so in the context of your reprimanding him already.
That said, I see someone saw the merit of the request. Although I suspect he's been on thin ice for a while. Sometimes as a regular reader it's hard to cope with the most egregious trolls, but maybe the system works fine as it is.
I would guess this one is the follow on to the series that are in my 2 platter 160GB Classic. But even if the specs for this one are off and 320GB is the biggest, my point is that we could have a Classic with much more storage if it was a priority to Apple.
Now some of the talk seems to be going more towards an upgrade versus a discontinuation. I hope that is the case.
One thing that is interesting in this topic is that while most of the pros about the Classic seem to be about its massive load carrying abilities (ie that it has a hard drive), there is a sizable percentage that like it from a click wheel. It will be interesting to see what happens to it when it RAM is finally cheap enough that storage really ceases to be an issue. Will it just become skinny, or will it vaporize??
I don't think it's out yet. But, be that as it may, even 220 is a lot of storage for an iPod.
I shall utter the three words that strike mortal terror into the hearts of audiophools - double blind testing.
HeH heh! I try to get that done in the various audio clubs I'm a member of here in the NYC area. It's a tough argument. But it doesn't work with everything.
I've met people who say they can reliably detect high-res audio vs. CD-res audio in double-blind listening tests, but they admit the difference is extremely subtle.
I'll tell ya. A lot of this is nonsense, but not all of it. i just bought a Sony 5400ES SACD player. Too bad Sony is now discontinuing all of their CD and SACD players except the $179.95 300 CD disk player. If you want Cd or SACD, you've now got to buy one of their Blu-Ray players which supports it. Anyway, my new one replaces an older model. There is a difference. We can all hear it. Better on Cd's and SACD's.
But a lot of SACD's aren't better because of the engineering of the mixdowns. Garbage in, garbage out. And popular CD's these days are not only highly compressed, but they're also using limiters! But, it's true that even in my rather expensive and revealing system, the difference, while there with good disks, is subtle.
Comments
It's obviously not for exercising, but the Classic is perfect for my Subaru Forester, hooked up with an iPod interface that I control through the car stereo.
Depends on what kind of exercising you're talking about. I use mine all the time on elliptical trainers, stationary bikes, and treadmill...where I have a place to rest it and not have it strapped to my body. I do use a shuffle for weight lifting though.
My 25,000+ music library will not even fit on my current 160 GB model. I'd be happy to see a HD size increase. A 220 GB SSD Touch would be nice, but until then, I hope Apple hangs onto the iPod Classic.
What compression rate are you using? I've got about 22,000 songs, plus a couple games and some videos and still have 55 GB free. That's why I've kept my files for the iPod at 128 kbps when ripping. For lossless with the audio alone I'd need 500-600 GB.
I've held off on an iPad or a new iPod purchase until they come out with 128+GB of memory, so I can store my whole music collection in Lossless. (~90GB)
90GB lossless is not that much. You could use the option to convert to 128 Kbps and easily put it all on the iPod with plenty of room to spare.
The audio quality of the iPod is not that great that you nould notice much of a difference.
It all depends upon sales. If it's profitable, Apple would likely upgrade it. If it's reaching the point where sales are just too low to justify its continuance, I would expect them to drop it.
I think that makes perfect sense. It's what happened to the X-Serve. However, if there's one Apple product that might survive for purely sentimental reasons, it's the click-wheel iPod.
Of course, that may already have been the case for some time.
That's a good one.
Je ne regrette rien.
Une fois remis, un troll Internet redouble ses efforts. Nous ne pardonnons pas Ã* la légère.
Mae pobl sy'n maddau ac anghofio cael eu saint. Nid oes unrhyw saint yma.
Ba chóir a thabhairt buachaill an dara seans fiúntach é féin a chruthú, ach amháin nuair a bhÃ*onn sé ina leathcheann.
你能听到我吗？
90GB lossless is not that much. You could use the option to convert to 128 Kbps and easily put it all on the iPod with plenty of room to spare.
The audio quality of the iPod is not that great that you nould notice much of a difference.
The audio quality of a classic iPod is indistinguishable from a fairly high end CD player - at least my 3rd gen one is.. There is an internet meme that iPods have poor sound quality because Apple, in one of their typically stupid penny-pinching strokes of meanness, shipped iPods with possibly the lousiest sounding earbuds of any manufacturer. Many people came to judge the sound quality of iPods on the supplied earbuds, rather than try it with a decent pair, so the iPod is now stuck with a bad reputation it doesn't deserve.
Now you have the situation where a lot of people who value HiFi audio quality, believe Cowon, Sony et al, all deliver far higher sound quality than iPods do and so don't buy them, actively denounce them and advise people not to buy them.
I think 128kbps is too low, 160kbps would be the minimum I would recommend.
I believe a Toshiba 320GB drive is the biggest 1.8" drive available. So, 400GB isn't possible.
Tosh makes a 400gb 2 platter, 1.8" drive http://eetimes.eu/en/400gb-1.8-micro..._id=222904401#
I would guess this one is the follow on to the series that are in my 2 platter 160GB Classic. But even if the specs for this one are off and 320GB is the biggest, my point is that we could have a Classic with much more storage if it was a priority to Apple.
Now some of the talk seems to be going more towards an upgrade versus a discontinuation. I hope that is the case.
One thing that is interesting in this topic is that while most of the pros about the Classic seem to be about its massive load carrying abilities (ie that it has a hard drive), there is a sizable percentage that like it from a click wheel. It will be interesting to see what happens to it when it RAM is finally cheap enough that storage really ceases to be an issue. Will it just become skinny, or will it vaporize??
...
Now you have the situation where a lot of people who value HiFi audio quality, believe Cowon, Sony et al, all deliver far higher sound quality than iPods do and so don't buy them, actively denounce them and advise people not to buy them.
I think 128kbps is too low, 160kbps would be the minimum I would recommend.
Thanks but I'll stick with my SACD player...
It will join the Sony Walkman in the design heap of technology.
Spinning mini hard drives are like the multi-generational offspring of spinning casstte tapes recording PCM.
You fail to see the profit margin Apple makes on this thing.
Thanks but I'll stick with my SACD player...
I shall utter the three words that strike mortal terror into the hearts of audiophools - double blind testing.
I shall utter the three words that strike mortal terror into the hearts of audiophools - double blind testing.
I've met people who say they can reliably detect high-res audio vs. CD-res audio in double-blind listening tests, but they admit the difference is extremely subtle.
Everyone has a different idea as to who should be banned. I get private messages from people wanting me to ban each other! Sometimes I think they should all be banned, including those demanding that people be banned. That's as annoying as the trolling.
But if someone's polite about it, it's harder to decide, and it takes longer.
Agreed, and like I said, I understand it's a slippery slope. If someone asks for a ban and then it happens that only encourages more users to complain. In this case I figured it was worth asking because I could do so in the context of your reprimanding him already.
That said, I see someone saw the merit of the request.
Tosh makes a 400gb 2 platter, 1.8" drive http://eetimes.eu/en/400gb-1.8-micro..._id=222904401#
I would guess this one is the follow on to the series that are in my 2 platter 160GB Classic. But even if the specs for this one are off and 320GB is the biggest, my point is that we could have a Classic with much more storage if it was a priority to Apple.
Now some of the talk seems to be going more towards an upgrade versus a discontinuation. I hope that is the case.
One thing that is interesting in this topic is that while most of the pros about the Classic seem to be about its massive load carrying abilities (ie that it has a hard drive), there is a sizable percentage that like it from a click wheel. It will be interesting to see what happens to it when it RAM is finally cheap enough that storage really ceases to be an issue. Will it just become skinny, or will it vaporize??
I don't think it's out yet. But, be that as it may, even 220 is a lot of storage for an iPod.
I shall utter the three words that strike mortal terror into the hearts of audiophools - double blind testing.
HeH heh! I try to get that done in the various audio clubs I'm a member of here in the NYC area. It's a tough argument. But it doesn't work with everything.
I've met people who say they can reliably detect high-res audio vs. CD-res audio in double-blind listening tests, but they admit the difference is extremely subtle.
I'll tell ya. A lot of this is nonsense, but not all of it. i just bought a Sony 5400ES SACD player. Too bad Sony is now discontinuing all of their CD and SACD players except the $179.95 300 CD disk player. If you want Cd or SACD, you've now got to buy one of their Blu-Ray players which supports it. Anyway, my new one replaces an older model. There is a difference. We can all hear it. Better on Cd's and SACD's.
But a lot of SACD's aren't better because of the engineering of the mixdowns. Garbage in, garbage out. And popular CD's these days are not only highly compressed, but they're also using limiters! But, it's true that even in my rather expensive and revealing system, the difference, while there with good disks, is subtle.
I pity the Audiophiles for their affliction. I'm so glad I can just sit back and enjoy the music without being judgmental about it.
What does that mean?
What does that mean?
I think what he's saying is that he's glad he listens to music, rather than listening to his HiFi, if you see what I mean.