I manage all my music with Win Media Player… .wma… why does the Jam play some of my music but then not recognize other music in the same format? I get a ‘format not recognized’ message…
also… with the previous version of Clip Sport you had a choice to just play all music… you didn’t need to organize it or put it in playlists… it just played everything…
I had/have over 1000 songs in playlists… its a real drag, so to speak, to have to load each one into a file…
any suggestions?
JCBlues
Some wma files may be protected. The Jam can’t play protected wma files. Windows Media player has as its default to rip CDs to protected WMA. I suggest changing that to mp3 at 256kbps or 320kbps. Playing mp3 files also gives longer batter life than playing wma files.
You could play the songs by folder.
In my humble opinion, no need to use the extra space for such high bitrates–most likely, you wouldn’t hear a difference. But, it’s all individual choice.
MP3 at 256kbps or 320 kbps is a high bitrate? Look at all of those who use FLAC.
For spoken word files I use 32kbps mp3 mono on my player. For music I want at least 256 kbps mp3. Flash memory is cheap now.
OK… the bit rate business is retarded as is the suggestion to use folders…
I like the high bit rate… the more sampling the less the music is clipped… BETTER fidelity…
as for the folders…
its a frickin’ SPORT model… that means you should be using it when you run, jog, walk, elliptical, weight training, bike… whatever…
I’m riding a bkie at 5:30 in the morning… its DARK and I’m trying to keep from being run over by dimwits trying to get to work and not looking out for me…
how the hell am I supposed to use the damned folders?
who thought it was a good idea to not include the PLAY ALL option?
For me, folder view is just as easy to use as the database: navigate to the folder you want to play and play it; just like, with the database option, selecting the album you want to play and playing it. No “danger” at all–and, presumably, if you’re on a bike, you should be starting the play before you start biking, or otherwise be prime for disaster, at least in areas around other people (which you would be in if you were using either the database or folder view).
.For me, folder view is just as easy to use as the database: navigate to the folder you want to play and play it; just like, with the database option, selecting the album you want to play and playing it. No “danger” at all–and, presumably, if you’re on a bike, you should be starting the play before you start biking, or otherwise be prime for disaster, at least in areas around other people (which you would be in if you were using either the database or folder view).
As to “fidelity”: will, yes, in the abstract; but the studies show that most people can’t tell the differences that they think they can. An ultra-high bitrate simply is not needed for most people, for an enjoyable, quality experience. Having said that, YMMV: ears and people are all different.
(Also, might you refrain from saying that some discussion is “retarded”? Some people justifiably may be offended by that. Thanks–)
For me, folder view is just as easy to use as the database: navigate to the folder you want to play and play it; just like, with the database option, selecting the album you want to play and playing it. No “danger” at all–and, presumably, if you’re on a bike, you should be starting the play before you start biking, or otherwise be prime for disaster, at least in areas around other people (which you would be in if you were using either the database or folder view).
As to “fidelity”: well, yes, in the abstract; but the studies show that most people can’t tell the differences that they think they can. An ultra-high bitrate simply is not needed for most people, for an enjoyable, quality experience. Having said that, YMMV: ears and people are all different.
(Also, might you refrain from saying that some discussion is “retarded”? Some people justifiably may be offended by that. Thanks–)
@jk98 wrote:
MP3 at 256kbps or 320 kbps is a high bitrate? Look at all of those who use FLAC.
For spoken word files I use 32kbps mp3 mono on my player. For music I want at least 256 kbps mp3. Flash memory is cheap now.
LOL. And, yes, 256 or 320 kbps is a high bitrate in the MP3 area (320 kbps being the highest rate), and with the studies showing that the majority of people can’t tell the difference between such a high bitrate and a lower but still fine bitrate.
Bitrates: it is all a personal matter, depending on one’s own ears, and tradeoff. And while flash may be cheaper than before, portable DAPs, including higher capacity DAPs, still have limited space, depending on one’s needs.
@jcblues13 wrote:
OK… the bit rate business is retarded as is the suggestion to use folders…
I like the high bit rate… the more sampling the less the music is clipped… BETTER fidelity…
as for the folders…
its a frickin’ SPORT model… that means you should be using it when you run, jog, walk, elliptical, weight training, bike… whatever…
I’m riding a bkie at 5:30 in the morning… its DARK and I’m trying to keep from being run over by dimwits trying to get to work and not looking out for me…
how the hell am I supposed to use the damned folders?
who thought it was a good idea to not include the PLAY ALL option?
For me, folder view is just as easy to use as the database: navigate to the folder you want to play and play it; just like, with the database option, selecting the album you want to play and playing it. No “danger” at all–and, presumably, if you’re on a bike, one might suggest starting the play before biking begins, if at all possible, or otherwise be prime for disaster, at least in areas around other people (which you would be in if you were using either the database or folder view).
As to “fidelity”: well, yes, in the abstract; but the studies show that most people can’t tell the differences that they think they can. An ultra-high bitrate simply is not needed for most people, for an enjoyable, quality experience. Having said that, YMMV: ears and people are all different.
(Also, might you refrain from saying that some discussion is “retarded”? Some people justifiably may be offended by that. Thanks–)
@jcblues13 wrote:
OK… the bit rate business is retarded as is the suggestion to use folders…
I like the high bit rate… the more sampling the less the music is clipped… BETTER fidelity…
as for the folders…
its a frickin’ SPORT model… that means you should be using it when you run, jog, walk, elliptical, weight training, bike… whatever…
I’m riding a bkie at 5:30 in the morning… its DARK and I’m trying to keep from being run over by dimwits trying to get to work and not looking out for me…
how the hell am I supposed to use the damned folders?
who thought it was a good idea to not include the PLAY ALL option?
For me, folder view is just as easy to use as the database: navigate to the folder you want to play and play it; just like, with the database option, selecting the album you want to play and playing it. No “danger” at all–and, presumably, if you’re on a bike, one might suggest starting the play before biking begins, if at all possible, or otherwise be prime for disaster, at least in areas around other people (which you would be in if you were using either the database or folder view). In fact, I’ve always found folder view to be the easiest system to use.
As to “fidelity”: well, yes, in the abstract; but studies I’ve seen show that most people can’t tell the differences that they think they can. An ultra-high bitrate simply is not needed for most people, for an enjoyable, quality experience. Having said that, YMMV: ears and people are all different.
(Also, might you refrain from saying that some discussion is “retarded”? Some people justifiably may be offended by that. Thanks–)
@jk98 wrote:
MP3 at 256kbps or 320 kbps is a high bitrate? Look at all of those who use FLAC.
For spoken word files I use 32kbps mp3 mono on my player. For music I want at least 256 kbps mp3. Flash memory is cheap now.
LOL. And, yes, 256 or 320 kbps is a high bitrate in the MP3 area (320 kbps being the highest rate), and with popular studies I’ve seen showing that the majority of people can’t tell the difference between such a high bitrate and a lower but still fine bitrate.
Bitrates: it is all a personal matter, depending on one’s own ears, and tradeoff. And while flash may be cheaper than before, portable DAPs, including higher capacity DAPs, still have limited space, depending on one’s needs.
How did you do on this test? I got 4 out of 6 right, however that was in a quiet room concentrating on the test, focusing on high frequencies in the music, and not listening normally.
Pretty average, on my part–pretty much a confirmation of the study, for me . . . .
@jcblues13 wrote:
I’m riding a bkie at 5:30 in the morning… its DARK and I’m trying to keep from being run over by dimwits trying to get to work and not looking out for me…
how the hell am I supposed to use the damned folders?
You shouldn’t be listening while riding a bike anyway. It’s irresponsible and dangerous, especially in the dark. I ride a bike too, and as much as I’d like to listen to music I don’t while riding. You need to be listening for cars coming up behind you. Bikes are hard to see in the dark, even with reflectors and lights. And at 5:30 in the morning, some of those drivers in the cars aren’t fully awake yet and aren’t expecting to see anyone on a bicycle that early, so aren’t really watching for them.
They might consider YOU the dimwit.
I have posted a thread before about unsafe use of isolating headphones. In many places it is against the law to bicycle while wearing headphones or earphones. Even if it isn’t against the law though, cycling while using isolating headphones is very dangerous. When I walking around outdoors I use earphones which have earhooks and don’t isolate. I also keep the volume low.
I also posted this thread on Anythingbutipod and Head-fi, so if you want to respond to this on those sites as well,
please feel free to do so.
http://forums.sandisk.com/t5/Anything-goes/Unsafe-use-of-closed-headphones-or-earphones/td-p/341068
| Legal | Terms of Use | Privacy Statement | Forum Terms of Service |
|
| © Western Digital Corporation or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Western Digital Technologies, Inc. is the seller of record and licensee in the Americas of SanDisk® products. |