Pitch bug on Clip+?

The Sandisk programmers are probably much too busy to work on this now. My guess is that they may be working on a replacement for the View, which should have come out long ago. Imo Sandisk will probably have one more firmware update for the Clip giving it folder navigation. My guess is that this might be out some time next year. This seems to be  a matter of triage, with the most important matters being handled first, and the less important things being addressed when there is time. I would like to have folder browsing on my Clip.


Finally, some proof that my ears are not bad, and that almost no one can hear the difference.

@yelped wrote:
Finally, some proof that my ears are not bad, and that almost no one can hear the difference.

I never could hear it, but my ears are admittedly not the greatest…all those childhood ear infections surely took a toll, although I couldn’t hazard a guess as to how much of a toll.  But as I’m not rich, I won’t be going to an ear doctor to have my hearing tested. :wink:

Apparently the Clip is doing on the fly sample rate conversion to 48khz that’s why 48khz files don’t have the problem they aren’t getting resampled by the dodgy algorithm

It has never bothered me I have enjoyed the Clips immensely!!

No the reason is the PLL Clock settings / dividers are less optimal for 44 Khz vs 48 Khz material.  Nothing is on the fly resampled.

You’re back?! Slotmonsta called you back?! Are you re-employed at SanDisk or just answering these questions as a helpful forum poster? I hope the former!

Welcome back sansafix!!

Just being helpful


@yelped wrote:


The man, the Legend!

Hello Sansafix!

Bob  :smileyvery-happy:

I guess everyone knows that even a cheapest junk mp3 player is able to play mp3s with correct pitch and that has nothing to do with the price. It seems to me that some terrible conceptual engineering mistake was made with clip series of players right from the start, when such a trivial problem persists and can’t be easily solved by software. In other words a hardware bug which can be fixed only by complete redesign - and that is expensive. I believe that’s what they meant with the official statement about this issue. Of course they are never going to admit something embarrassing like that…

Message Edited by m9zf3n5w on 10-12-2009 07:10 PM

No, that’s not the problem.  The Clip has a very limited power supply, due to physical constraints.  Despite this, we have a long operational life on a full charge.  This is possible by carefully managing the device’s power consumption. 

Decoding at various clock speeds is possible by modifying the PLL parameters and clock dividers.  This was done previously, as discussed.  Please take into consideration that the Clip and Fuze each have several different variants, the revision 1 and 2 families.  Each of these has a different configuration internally.

The Fuze has different display and memory requirements (TFT display and µSDHC socket), plus video.  The Clip has two revisions, plus the new Clip+ has integrated µSDHC capability.  The original Clips have the illuminated control buttons.

In short, it’s not just a matter of tinkering with the PLL algorithm, there are issues unique to each revision and device.  Note that the Clip+ is closer in measured speed.  Slotmonsta is right, there are many issues behind the scenes that affect the final firmware releases.  A far greater number of users would be upset if the battery life dropped considerably, I would bet.  A happy balance between processor demands and battery life is the “holy grail”.

Time permitting, future firmware revisions will get us closer to this goal.  And there are cool things “behind the scenes” too, that require time and effort.


Now that’s a teaser:  “cool things ‘behind the scenes’ …”


Thought you’d like that.  The Lil’ Monsta never sleeps…


  Are you trying to say that all other mp3 players on the market would have a longer battery life if they’ve chosen to play MP3s at wrong pitch ? :slight_smile: Or it is about wrong choice of components used (no native support for 44,1KHz), which is closer to my assumption.

Message Edited by m9zf3n5w on 10-13-2009 05:38 AM

Actually, you should market it as an audiophile feature. Wow-and-flutter is inherent to analog audio reproduction :) 

@m9zf3n5w wrote:

Actually, you should market it as an audiophile feature. Wow-and-flutter is inherent to analog audio reproduction :) 


*Ding* *Ding* *Ding* *Ding*

We have a winner!  Authentic analog reproduction of digital files exclusively from Sansa! Like having vinyl on a turntable in the palm of your hand!

Suck on that Apple and Sony…