Sansa Clip + and 16GB Micro SDHC card....

I want a player midway in size between the Clip+ and Fuze, but I want it to have the scroll wheel, a mini USB connector,a full sized SDXC card slot(and a song limit of 32,000 songs, or perhaps no limit if tag browsing is disabled) and a low power monochrome LCD display like on a digital watch, so it can be on all the time while the player is on. It could have a dedicated backlight button that has the backlight on just while it is pressed. Think about the thousands of hours a digital watch display is on with such a tiny battery. I want true browsing by folders, and an option to disable tag browsing to avoid a database refresh when swapping cards.  I want the player to have 40-60 hours of battery life(although above 60 hours would be even nicer). I want it to be able to sufficiently power my Sony V6 and other headphones up to 100 ohms that are over 100 db/mw in efficiency. I also want it to have variable speed playback with pitch correction for podcasts and audiobooks.

@miikerman wrote:
I can understand that.  I just can’t see SanDisk coming out with an in-between version (if we’re talking the reality of the situation   ;)   ), and I think dropping the current size in favor of that could be a loss of some customers wanting the small size–at that point, Cowon has a nice player, as others have noted here.  Right now, SanDisk really has this size to itself (for players having features as full as the Clip). 

Just because a company has a niche product to itself, doesn’t necessarily make it a good one.  With any product there is always room for improvement, and the Clip+s weak point is it’s battery life.  I personally know of many people that got rid of their Clips due to it’s short operational time; so I guess at this point it’s Sandisk’s call.  Make a product that has desirous features with a decent battery capacity, or keep the product pretty much as it is.  

I just know that they can cross me off any potential buyers list, if they don’t improve the battery life.  That’s the great thing about the free enterprise system.  If one company doesn’t provide you with what you want, another company will. :wink:

Message Edited by fuze_owner-GB on 12-13-2009 06:52 AM

@marvin_martian wrote:



This has been a known issue here with corrupted files, the message of “not enough space for DB”. I used to run my Sansas with less than 10MB free for months upon end without issue. Yes, you can remove files and then it will work…but then you’re not getting the use of all the memory you’ve paid for. I believe JK98 is correct in suggesting chkdsk.

Yes, but if you’re running the device only 10 MB free space and the DB needs that 10 MB then surely you’re going to get the same error.

I’m assuming CHKDSK is the Window’s land file system check similar to fsck.vfat in a Linux environment? Sorry I don’t use Windows so am not familiar with it’s filesystem toolset. If you’re having to fsck the file system to get rid of the 90MB needed for DB message though, something has gone wrong somewhere…

I noticed when experimenting yesterday, artifically expanding the MTABLE.SYS file by using the unix DD command to fill the end of the file with zero’s causes a similar problem, i.e. the player seems to think that there isn’t enough room for the DB even where there is like 128 MB free on the device. Eventually freeing up loads of space makes it happy. I am assuming from this that any corruption to the MTABLE.SYS file could be what is causing the errors with the DB size… however in the case you mentioned above, yeah it’s annoying that you can’t have the advertised space purely for music. I believe the same true for other players though, I know the iPod uses a DB which grows in proportion with the number of files (thus tags) in the player.  I don’t think there’s a way around this.

I have had enough playing about with the clip this weekend so far… I am being dragged out to drink beer and stuff so would seem churlish to stay in messing with it.

My last hope at getting it to recognise all the tracks is going to be to remove all the ogg tag’s. From what I have seen so far this should reduce the MTABLE.SYS size by quite a bit, hopefully enough to allow all the music I want on it. This does mean being limited to using only the FileSystem view (split over 2 flash memory parts) but that’s just going to have to be the way it is for now…

I’ll contact SanDisc to report the findings so far.

I think that by artificially expanding the size of the MTABLE.SYS file I’ve made it so that there might be space for everything but I think then it hits the limit in the 90MB DB where ever that might live. Oh I dunno… maybe I could sign a non disclosure and have a look at the source code :slight_smile:

Pigs might fly though…

I’d be tempted to get the iPod Nano instead now (considering it’s a finished product that works) but that would mean fighting the Apple nastiness to get it working with Linux and it wouldn’t play ogg so would mean transcoding the MP3 collection again into some evil format, something that’s do-able but I am getting sick of having to hack consumer electronics just to get them to work properly :frowning: Maybe one day the RockBox will be available for the new Nano’s and that might be the solution or some other manufacturer will bring out a high capacity, ultra small, basic mp3 / ogg player and actually have it finished and working before marketting… again, flying pigs spring to mind.

Thanks again for all your help here chaps. I think I am going to leave it here for now.

Rob. 

fuze_owner-GB wrote:

 

Just because a company has a niche product to itself, doesn’t necessarily make it a good one.  With any product there is always room for improvement, and the Clip+s weak point is it’s battery life.  I personally know of many people that got rid of their Clips due to it’s short operational time; so I guess at this point it’s Sandisk’s call.  Make a product that has desirous features with a decent battery capacity, or keep the product pretty much as it is.  

 

I just know that they can cross me off any potential buyers list, if they don’t improve the battery life.  That’s the great thing about the free enterprise system.  If one company doesn’t provide you with what you want, another company will. :wink:

Message Edited by fuze_owner-GB on 12-13-2009 06:52 AM

Yep, you’re right as to the marketplace.  Not many other players out there that match or get close to the Clip, though–SanDisk did a nice job on many fronts.  Having just come out with the Clip+, I would be surprised to see SanDisk changing its physical form, at least for another year (or 2) minimum–but one never knows.

I’m sure that SanDisk would be happy to increase the battery life, as technology allows (this is the direction the company went in moving to the Clip+, with an increase in battery conservation while adding features).  Would be nice.  But I also think that the “niche” product already is a pretty good one as it is–fortunately, it meets my needs (and I guess that of many others, based on the product’s success).

Having said that, improvements always are welcome (a firmware fix version should be coming out in the near future, SanDisk, to deal with the battery charging issue, among other improvements?).  Personally, I like JK98’s player.   :slight_smile:

@miikerman wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:

 

Just because a company has a niche product to itself, doesn’t necessarily make it a good one.  With any product there is always room for improvement, and the Clip+s weak point is it’s battery life.  I personally know of many people that got rid of their Clips due to it’s short operational time; so I guess at this point it’s Sandisk’s call.  Make a product that has desirous features with a decent battery capacity, or keep the product pretty much as it is.  

 

I just know that they can cross me off any potential buyers list, if they don’t improve the battery life.  That’s the great thing about the free enterprise system.  If one company doesn’t provide you with what you want, another company will. :wink:

Message Edited by fuze_owner-GB on 12-13-2009 06:52 AM


Yep, you’re right as to the marketplace.  Not many other players out there that match or get close to the Clip, though–SanDisk did a nice job on many fronts.  Having just come out with the Clip+, I would be surprised to see SanDisk changing its physical form, at least for another year (or 2) minimum–but one never knows.

 

I’m sure that SanDisk would be happy to increase the battery life, as technology allows (this is the direction the company went in moving to the Clip+, with an increase in battery conservation while adding features).  Would be nice.  But I also think that the “niche” product already is a pretty good one as it is–fortunately, it meets my needs (and I guess that of many others, based on the product’s success).

 

Having said that, improvements always are welcome (a firmware fix version should be coming out in the near future, SanDisk, to deal with the battery charging issue, among other improvements?).  Personally, I like JK98’s player.   :slight_smile:

I don’t know why, but it seems like all the device producers think that the public wants super thin units, over battery performance.  Myself and most (if not all) of my colleagues would gladly accept a slightly thicker player, if it meant more playing time per charge.

I’ve had portable music players since they were introduced in the marketplace, and currently have players by Microsoft, Cowon, Archos, Creative and Sandisk…So, I know what the other companies are doing and know what I want in a player.  Sad to say, but the Clip+ in it’s present form is my least favorite player I own.  If I could find a buyer locally, I would cut my losses, sell it and move on…but guess what?  Nobody want’s it!!!  I was even prepared to give it to my Brother, but he didn’t want it either!  So, at least in my circles, it doesn’t seem to be that popular.

I do like a small player for on-the-go use; and in that regard I have an iAudio 7.  Sure, it’s thicker and a bit longer than the Clip, but it also boasts 60+ hr. battery life.  I’m not expecting the Clip+ to ever have close to that; but I think a real-world expectation of around 20 hours would and should be do-able.  Until that day arrives, my Clip+ will spend most of it’s time in the bottom of my sock drawer…:cry:


Frosty wrote:

I’d be tempted to get the iPod Nano instead now (considering it’s a finished product that works) but that would mean fighting the Apple nastiness to get it working with Linux and it wouldn’t play ogg so would mean transcoding the MP3 collection again into some evil format, something that’s do-able but I am getting sick of having to hack consumer electronics just to get them to work properly :frowning: Maybe one day the RockBox will be available for the new Nano’s and that might be the solution or some other manufacturer will bring out a high capacity, ultra small, basic mp3 / ogg player and actually have it finished and working before marketing… again, flying pigs spring to mind.


Look at Cowon, I can’t speak for the quality etc, I don’t own one. However, unless Fuze is lying to us, (s)he has one.

So, Mr (or Mrs, or Miss, or Ms) Fuze_… Could you be so kind as to answer some questions regarding the Cowon IAudio 7 for me please*.

Whilst playing MP3s people have reported ~40+ hours life in normal use. So, using this as a benchmark, how does Vorbis playback compare for battery life. Does it suffer the same as Clip, if so by how much (if still over 20hrs playback I’d probably be content).

Tag support: It has it for MP3s, but I’ve heard reports of it being broken for Ogg files, is this true?

Available space: The Clip+ uses ~200MB (or maybe more) for internal use. I consider this a fair cop, although informing people of the available space would be nice.

Roughly how much space is available on the 7? I currently have 8.4G of music, so it must be a 16G device, but it would be good to know before I cough up £130.

Any other issues? I’m a Linux user, although I’m guessing there won’t be issues there. Oh, and the ‘capsense inputs’ don’t scare me :slight_smile:

Cheers,

Mr (Although considering ‘its’ options) D.

*I’m aware implying someone may be a liar is not the best introduction before requesting help, but my tact went off looking for my intelligence, which ran away after my patience finally ceased to exist. None have been seen since.

@dihenydd wrote:

@frosty wrote:

I’d be tempted to get the iPod Nano instead now (considering it’s a finished product that works) but that would mean fighting the Apple nastiness to get it working with Linux and it wouldn’t play ogg so would mean transcoding the MP3 collection again into some evil format, something that’s do-able but I am getting sick of having to hack consumer electronics just to get them to work properly :frowning: Maybe one day the RockBox will be available for the new Nano’s and that might be the solution or some other manufacturer will bring out a high capacity, ultra small, basic mp3 / ogg player and actually have it finished and working before marketing… again, flying pigs spring to mind.

 

Look at Cowon, I can’t speak for the quality etc, I don’t own one. However, unless Fuze is lying to us, (s)he has one.

 

 

So, Mr (or Mrs, or Miss, or Ms) Fuze_… Could you be so kind as to answer some questions regarding the Cowon IAudio 7 for me please*.

Whilst playing MP3s people have reported ~40+ hours life in normal use. So, using this as a benchmark, how does Vorbis playback compare for battery life. Does it suffer the same as Clip, if so by how much (if still over 20hrs playback I’d probably be content).

Tag support: It has it for MP3s, but I’ve heard reports of it being broken for Ogg files, is this true?

Available space: The Clip+ uses ~200MB (or maybe more) for internal use. I consider this a fair cop, although informing people of the available space would be nice.

Roughly how much space is available on the 7? I currently have 8.4G of music, so it must be a 16G device, but it would be good to know before I cough up £130.

Any other issues? I’m a Linux user, although I’m guessing there won’t be issues there. Oh, and the ‘capsense inputs’ don’t scare me :slight_smile:

 

Cheers,

Mr (Although considering ‘its’ options) D.

 

*I’m aware implying someone may be a liar is not the best introduction before requesting help, but my tact went off looking for my intelligence, which ran away after my patience finally ceased to exist. None have been seen since.

Hello…For the record, I’m a Mr. :smileyvery-happy:

Some of the questions I can address, others I can’t.  I haven’t placed any ogg vorbis files on any of my Cowon units, simply because I like the sound signature of wma better; so I can’t offer any help there.

I personally have the i7 16GB model, so that should be sufficient for your storage needs…and I routinely get around 50-60 hrs. of battery life with normal, real-world use.  I haven’t run it down too often, as after awhile, I just charge it whether it’s close to empty or not.

The biggest complaint I’ve personally heard about the unit is that it has a bizarre, too sensitive user-interface.  Personally, I’ve had no such issues myself.  I like the UI just fine and works perfectly for my use.

Hope this helps a bit.

Cheers for the info.

I’ve found a bit more info on the unit regards Ogg support:

Browsing by tag is completely broken (but browsing by filesystem allows tags to display properly for Oggs).

Playlist support (of the non MTP variety, ie m3u) doesn’t exist.

Oh well, time to give up and continue to use my minidisc player. Yes, I’m that far behind the times.

It’s not that the two issues are major, they aren’t. I can rename all my directories to look pretty, and it is possible to live sans-playlist. But, for £130 they should be damned well ironing out these problems. Grr.

fuze_owner-GB wrote:




 

 I like the sound signature of wma

 

You know, it’s too bad that WMP is such a crappy-arsed ripper, because the WMA VBR works really well with the medium bitrates, comparable to much larger MP3 filesizes. But if your CD is scratched with WMP, forget it.

MediaMonkey will let you convert to it, and with VBR to boot, but it works by quality percentage, as opposed to bitrate ranges in WMP. I may experiment with this with some of my FLACs, to see what settings might work. My players both have good enough battery life to handle WMA decoding. Who knows, maybe in a couple weeks my 16GB player will hold well over 3,000 songs as opposed to its current 2,234, while living up to my standards of sound quality. :dizzy_face:

fuze_owner-GB wrote:

 

I don’t know why, but it seems like all the device producers think that the public wants super thin units, over battery performance.  Myself and most (if not all) of my colleagues would gladly accept a slightly thicker player, if it meant more playing time per charge.

 

I’ve had portable music players since they were introduced in the marketplace, and currently have players by Microsoft, Cowon, Archos, Creative and Sandisk…So, I know what the other companies are doing and know what I want in a player.  Sad to say, but the Clip+ in it’s present form is my least favorite player I own.  If I could find a buyer locally, I would cut my losses, sell it and move on…but guess what?  Nobody want’s it!!!  I was even prepared to give it to my Brother, but he didn’t want it either!  So, at least in my circles, it doesn’t seem to be that popular.

 

I do like a small player for on-the-go use; and in that regard I have an iAudio 7.  Sure, it’s thicker and a bit longer than the Clip, but it also boasts 60+ hr. battery life.  I’m not expecting the Clip+ to ever have close to that; but I think a real-world expectation of around 20 hours would and should be do-able.  Until that day arrives, my Clip+ will spend most of it’s time in the bottom of my sock drawer…:cry:

Your feelings about what SanDisk should be doing are understood.  Maybe you’re right and a bigger Clip wouldn’t be all that bad, and would be great in the end.  But it’s not going to happen in the short-term, most likely, as you likely can see.  And in the meanwhile, despite what people in your circle like, the Clips continue to be marketplace successes and well regarded by the critics. 

(And the Clips aren’t really super-thin units putting thin-ness over battery performance, either as to super-thin-ness or deficient battery performance.  They just don’t meet a longer battery preference.  They probably meet needs and expectations just fine for most people who don’t use a player beyond 10-15 hours a day.)

@marvin_martian wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:




 

 I like the sound signature of wma

 


You know, it’s too bad that WMP is such a crappy-arsed ripper, because the WMA VBR works really well with the medium bitrates, comparable to much larger MP3 filesizes. But if your CD is scratched with WMP, forget it.

 

MediaMonkey will let you convert to it, and with VBR to boot, but it works by quality percentage, as opposed to bitrate ranges in WMP. I may experiment with this with some of my FLACs, to see what settings might work. My players both have good enough battery life to handle WMA decoding. Who knows, maybe in a couple weeks my 16GB player will hold well over 3,000 songs as opposed to its current 2,234, while living up to my standards of sound quality. :dizzy_face:

With the current incarnation of wma, the settings are a bit more standardized than they’ve been in the past.  There are settings of 98, 90, 75, 50 and so on.  After plenty of experimentation, I’ve found that the 75 setting is still very musical, yet saving a substantial amount of storage space.  I can’t speak for WMP, because I don’t use the product, but if it doesn’t allow for encoding by percentages, they’ve never updated the codec handling in the software.  The new version of WMA is definitely better than the old version, IMO.

I just checked…Both Winamp and the Zune software also support the newer wma standard.  Both are free, and they also would be alternatives in ripping and converting to wma.

If you can accept the sound quality of 75; rip and save a CDs worth of material in that format, and then rip and save that same CD in mp3 in V1 or V0; then look at the space savings…Quite an eye opener!

EDIT:

Now grated wma at a setting of 75 won’t be perfect in sound reproduction, but I have multiple players for different needs.  For most situations, the wma files suit just fine; but when I want to kick back, enjoy a fine glass of wine and get totally absorbed in the music, I will use a high bite rate or lossless codec.

Message Edited by fuze_owner-GB on 12-13-2009 08:53 PM

fuze_owner-GB wrote:


@marvin_martian wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:




 

 I like the sound signature of wma

 


You know, it’s too bad that WMP is such a crappy-arsed ripper, because the WMA VBR works really well with the medium bitrates, comparable to much larger MP3 filesizes. But if your CD is scratched with WMP, forget it.

 

MediaMonkey will let you convert to it, and with VBR to boot, but it works by quality percentage, as opposed to bitrate ranges in WMP. I may experiment with this with some of my FLACs, to see what settings might work. My players both have good enough battery life to handle WMA decoding. Who knows, maybe in a couple weeks my 16GB player will hold well over 3,000 songs as opposed to its current 2,234, while living up to my standards of sound quality. :dizzy_face:


With the current incarnation of wma, the settings are a bit more standardized than they’ve been in the past.  There are settings of 98, 90, 75, 50 and so on.  After plenty of experimentation, I’ve found that the 75 setting is still very musical, yet saving a substantial amount of storage space.  I can’t speak for WMP, because I don’t use the product, but if it doesn’t allow for encoding by percentages, they’ve never updated the codec handling in the software.  The new version of WMA is definitely better than the old version, IMO.

 

I just checked…Both Winamp and the Zune software also support the newer wma standard.  Both are free, and they also would be alternatives in ripping and converting to wma.

 

If you can accept the sound quality of 75; rip and save a CDs worth of material in that format, and then rip and save that same CD in mp3 in V1 or V0; then look at the space savings…Quite an eye opener!

 

EDIT:

 

Now grated wma at a setting of 75 won’t be perfect in sound reproduction, but I have multiple players for different needs.  For most situations, the wma files suit just fine; but when I want to kick back, enjoy a fine glass of wine and get totally absorbed in the music, I will use a high bite rate or lossless codec.

Message Edited by fuze_owner-GB on 12-13-2009 08:53 PM

I don’t know about the new WMP12, but WMP11 gave you bitrate ranges to choose from, as opposed to settings like you describe. Is the newest version you’re describing the “wma 10 Pro”? 

@miikerman wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:

 

I don’t know why, but it seems like all the device producers think that the public wants super thin units, over battery performance.  Myself and most (if not all) of my colleagues would gladly accept a slightly thicker player, if it meant more playing time per charge.

 

I’ve had portable music players since they were introduced in the marketplace, and currently have players by Microsoft, Cowon, Archos, Creative and Sandisk…So, I know what the other companies are doing and know what I want in a player.  Sad to say, but the Clip+ in it’s present form is my least favorite player I own.  If I could find a buyer locally, I would cut my losses, sell it and move on…but guess what?  Nobody want’s it!!!  I was even prepared to give it to my Brother, but he didn’t want it either!  So, at least in my circles, it doesn’t seem to be that popular.

 

I do like a small player for on-the-go use; and in that regard I have an iAudio 7.  Sure, it’s thicker and a bit longer than the Clip, but it also boasts 60+ hr. battery life.  I’m not expecting the Clip+ to ever have close to that; but I think a real-world expectation of around 20 hours would and should be do-able.  Until that day arrives, my Clip+ will spend most of it’s time in the bottom of my sock drawer…:cry:


Your feelings about what SanDisk should be doing are understood.  Maybe you’re right and a bigger Clip wouldn’t be all that bad, and would be great in the end.  But it’s not going to happen in the short-term, most likely, as you likely can see.  And in the meanwhile, despite what people in your circle like, the Clips continue to be marketplace successes and well regarded by the critics. 

 

(And the Clips aren’t really super-thin units putting thin-ness over battery performance, either as to super-thin-ness or deficient battery performance.  They just don’t meet a longer battery preference.  They probably meet needs and expectations just fine for most people who don’t use a player beyond 10-15 hours a day.)

 

 

I never said I was an easy sell.  I am a difficult and demanding consumer and expect the best in the products I choose.  Maybe if more consumers were a bit more vocal in their likes and dislikes of products, companies would make units that people actually want.  I don’t want to sound cold, but I don’t really care if the Clip+ is popular; or that it suits the needs of most people.  Quite frankly, the only person it needs to please is me.  If my needs are too lofty for Sandisk to meet, it’s their loss, not mine…:wink:

@marvin_martian wrote:



I don’t know about the new WMP12, but WMP11 gave you bitrate ranges to choose from, as opposed to settings like you describe. Is the newest version you’re describing the “wma 10 Pro”? 

Ah…Leave it to Microsoft to make it confusing!!  The normal wma codec, which is contained in the wma 10 package is really wma 9.2.  This is the current wma codec.  Zune, Mediamonkey, Winamp and dbpoweramp are all supporting this current version of the wma codec.  The bitrate of the wma VBR codec is much more varied than the mp3 equivilent (and why it saves more space) so Microsoft felt that this wasn’t the best way to describe the settings, so that is why they changed it to the percent based ranges.

EDIT:  Sorry for the edits… wma 10 pro is a different specification altogether… Many portables don’t fully support that variant of wma; and it’s main benefit is multi-channel capability.  The wma 10 pro package contains both the 9.2 standard audio codec and the wma 10 pro variant.

Message Edited by fuze_owner-GB on 12-13-2009 09:29 PM

fuze_owner-GB wrote:


@marvin_martian wrote:



I don’t know about the new WMP12, but WMP11 gave you bitrate ranges to choose from, as opposed to settings like you describe. Is the newest version you’re describing the “wma 10 Pro”? 


Ah…Leave it to Microsoft to make it confusing!!  The normal wma codec, which is contained in the wma 10 package is really wma 9.2.  This is the current wma codec.  Zune, Mediamonkey, Winamp and dbpoweramp are all supporting this current version of the wma codec.  The bitrate of the wma VBR codec is much more varied than the mp3 equivilent (and why it saves more space) so Microsoft felt that this wasn’t the best way to describe the settings, so that is why they changed it to the percent based ranges.

Ok then. From this point I’m pretty much only ripping in FLAC (now that I have the HDD space) , and conversion of that for my portables. MediaMonkey in the conversion settings allows me to select VBR, then wants a quality percentage…I tried one earlier at 50% as a test, and it appeared to be bitrates in the 70’s and 80’s. Do I assume correctly that you were referring to 75% quality before?   I am going to tinker around a little with this as I continue my FLAC re-rips,  to see what different percentages give me, for both sound and bitrate.

No rush though…I still got a lot more of my collection to re-rip. :wink:

@marvin_martian wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:


@marvin_martian wrote:



I don’t know about the new WMP12, but WMP11 gave you bitrate ranges to choose from, as opposed to settings like you describe. Is the newest version you’re describing the “wma 10 Pro”? 


Ah…Leave it to Microsoft to make it confusing!!  The normal wma codec, which is contained in the wma 10 package is really wma 9.2.  This is the current wma codec.  Zune, Mediamonkey, Winamp and dbpoweramp are all supporting this current version of the wma codec.  The bitrate of the wma VBR codec is much more varied than the mp3 equivilent (and why it saves more space) so Microsoft felt that this wasn’t the best way to describe the settings, so that is why they changed it to the percent based ranges.


Ok then. From this point I’m pretty much only ripping in FLAC (now that I have the HDD space) , and conversion of that for my portables. MediaMonkey in the conversion settings allows me to select VBR, then wants a quality percentage…I tried one earlier at 50% as a test, and it appeared to be bitrates in the 70’s and 80’s. Do I assume correctly that you were referring to 75% quality before?   I am going to tinker around a little with this as I continue my FLAC re-rips,  to see what different percentages give me, for both sound and bitrate.

 

No rush though…I still got a lot more of my collection to re-rip. :wink:

Yup…75% Quality setting is the one I use most of the time.  In the Zune software it states at that setting the bitrates can swing anywhere from 85 to 145.  But, I know that this isn’t an accurate statement as I have seen bitrates of 160 or more in many of my files.  Like I said earlier, MS felt that bitrate values weren’t an accurate method to describe the quality of the various settings; that’s why they changed the terminology.  When all else fails, let your ears be the judge…

fuze_owner-GB wrote:


@marvin_martian wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:


@marvin_martian wrote:



I don’t know about the new WMP12, but WMP11 gave you bitrate ranges to choose from, as opposed to settings like you describe. Is the newest version you’re describing the “wma 10 Pro”? 


Ah…Leave it to Microsoft to make it confusing!!  The normal wma codec, which is contained in the wma 10 package is really wma 9.2.  This is the current wma codec.  Zune, Mediamonkey, Winamp and dbpoweramp are all supporting this current version of the wma codec.  The bitrate of the wma VBR codec is much more varied than the mp3 equivilent (and why it saves more space) so Microsoft felt that this wasn’t the best way to describe the settings, so that is why they changed it to the percent based ranges.


Ok then. From this point I’m pretty much only ripping in FLAC (now that I have the HDD space) , and conversion of that for my portables. MediaMonkey in the conversion settings allows me to select VBR, then wants a quality percentage…I tried one earlier at 50% as a test, and it appeared to be bitrates in the 70’s and 80’s. Do I assume correctly that you were referring to 75% quality before?   I am going to tinker around a little with this as I continue my FLAC re-rips,  to see what different percentages give me, for both sound and bitrate.

 

No rush though…I still got a lot more of my collection to re-rip. :wink:


Yup…75% Quality setting is the one I use most of the time.  In the Zune software it states at that setting the bitrates can swing anywhere from 85 to 145.  But, I know that this isn’t an accurate statement as I have seen bitrates of 160 or more in many of my files.  Like I said earlier, MS felt that bitrate values weren’t an accurate method to describe the quality of the various settings; that’s why they changed the terminology.  When all else fails, let your ears be the judge…

All right then, in that case, I am familiar with that quality level…I used it about a year ago with WMP11, and on the CD’s in good shape, it worked pretty well…and saved a ton of space. Granted, I’ll only be using this codec with the selections I am able to re-rip, but that’s still enough of my collection to make a difference in what I can carry around. And if I am home, I can listen to the FLACs if I want to just drift away with the tunes.At least the majority of my lossy files that I can’t re-rip are either LAME V0, or the next setting up on the wma vbr…which I think was 135-215, and those are pretty much transparent to my ears.

fuze_owner-GB wrote:

 

I never said I was an easy sell.  I am a difficult and demanding consumer and expect the best in the products I choose.  Maybe if more consumers were a bit more vocal in their likes and dislikes of products, companies would make units that people actually want.  I don’t want to sound cold, but I don’t really care if the Clip+ is popular; or that it suits the needs of most people.  Quite frankly, the only person it needs to please is me.  If my needs are too lofty for Sandisk to meet, it’s their loss, not mine…:wink:

I’m pretty particular in what I want as well and would like the best–it’s just that the Clips generally meet my needs (or I’m willing to adapt where they don’t).  I actually think that the Clips in fact meet many people’s needs and that is why they are popular.  It’s just that your needs may be different, from what SanDisk believes it should offer/what the majority of people want, in the size/battery capacity tradeoff; and in the commercial world, what sells the most (or, perhaps better, what is believed to) is often what wins out, combined with commercial realities.  I don’t think it’s a case of “lofty” needs–just different ones.   :wink:

@miikerman wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:

 

I never said I was an easy sell.  I am a difficult and demanding consumer and expect the best in the products I choose.  Maybe if more consumers were a bit more vocal in their likes and dislikes of products, companies would make units that people actually want.  I don’t want to sound cold, but I don’t really care if the Clip+ is popular; or that it suits the needs of most people.  Quite frankly, the only person it needs to please is me.  If my needs are too lofty for Sandisk to meet, it’s their loss, not mine…:wink:


I’m pretty particular in what I want as well and would like the best–it’s just that the Clips generally meet my needs (or I’m willing to adapt where they don’t).  I actually think that the Clips in fact meet many people’s needs and that is why they are popular.  It’s just that your needs may be different, from what SanDisk believes it should offer/what the majority of people want, in the size/battery capacity tradeoff; and in the commercial world, what sells the most (or, perhaps better, what is believed to) is often what wins out, combined with commercial realities.  I don’t think it’s a case of “lofty” needs–just different ones.   :wink:

Well, I just bit the bullet and ordered one of those Duracell USB battery extenders; which will make the Cllip+ a bit more flexible for my use.  Battery life is also a pretty important feature for my players because the area in which I live (in the heart of Indiana Amish Country) is 95% electricity-free.  So, electricity isn’t always available (or a computer) to charge my portable devices. My wife and I take 3 or 4 week-long local vacations at a nearby Bed and Breakfast where the entire facility is 100% electricity free (the family who runs it is Amish) and that’s where I have my biggest charging issue.  The last time we were there, I had to make a mad dash out to the car to charge a unit at 2:00 AM…Not necessarily a great situation where the owner’s family isn’t used to “city folk”…:smileyvery-happy:

It isn’t a perfect solution, but will at least make the Clip+ usable.

Those Duracell battery extenders are super; there is an alternate from Lenmar that is about the same size as the Clip itself that has been tempting–however, there is electricity where I live.   :wink:

http://www.frys.com/product/5726952?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN\_RSLT\_PG