Before buying: songs playing at a slower speed?

A watch’s purpose is to keep accuarate time and the accuracy over time will depend on the craftmanship and/or quality control of the manufacturer.

However, MY point was that the Fuze’s intended purpose and the appropriate tools for the appropriate job. The Fuze is for portable, personal, audio/visual enjoyment. My V1 Fuze sounds dead on. If the V2 Fuzes need a fix so be it. BUT, it aint either a timepiece or a digital recorder, people! 

Message Edited by bobletteross on 02-20-2009 05:57 AM

@bobletteross wrote:

However, MY point was that the Fuze’s intended purpose and the appropriate tools for the appropriate job. The Fuze is for portable, personal, audio/visual enjoyment. My V1 Fuze sounds dead on. If the V2 Fuzes need a fix so be it.

My point is that Sony can provide the same portable, personal, audio/visual enjoyment tool at the same economical price that meets the identical market and do so with a precise rate of accuracy.

I’m glad to know that there are differences that I should have been more aware of before entering this market.  I will be more apt to select cheap devices that possess a higher tolerence to error.

@bobletteross wrote:

 BUT, it aint either a timepiece or a digital recorder, people! 

Message Edited by bobletteross on 02-20-2009 05:57 AM

Why do you keep bringing that OT issue up?  BTW, 2 mouse clicks from this page shows Sansa saynig it is a recorder.

 

@donp wrote:


@bobletteross wrote:

 BUT, it aint either a timepiece or a digital recorder, people! 

Message Edited by bobletteross on 02-20-2009 05:57 AM


Why do you keep bringing that OT issue up?  BTW, 2 mouse clicks from this page shows Sansa saynig it is a recorder.

 

 

Don’t they refer to it as simply a “voice recorder” ?

My mistake…I meant to write DIGITAL MUSIC RECORDER…it in fact is touted as a voice recorder…now I will stop talking about it as some are not getting my point…

@bobletteross wrote:

It has been said before but I’ll say it again…the Fuze is NOT a digital recorder intended for reproduction of recorded music to be integrated into a sound reinforcement system to support a  concert venue OR is touted as a device for musicians to play along to. There is better equipment for that…and more expensive for many reasons.  

 

But it IS for private a/v pleasure…lets continue with the pleassure…

 

Musicians…buy the appropriate equipment please…

Message Edited by bobletteross on 02-20-2009 04:33 AM

Not all musicians can afford expensive gear. If we can make our less expensive devices perform well enough for use in a musician’s context, at little to no additional cost, then why not?

In this day and age of cheap, high performance digital audio equipment, most instances of gear snobbery are more a sign of ignorance than of knowledge. Today you can buy all of the digital audio hardware needed to produce professional quality, finished audio product for practically a song and a dance.

Of course there is plenty of ultra cheapo ■■■■ quality digital gear on the market, and that is to be avoided. But if you know how to choose wisely, new-in-box professional quality digital gear can be had for very cheap.

You can put together the digital hardware components of a decently functional personal studio, capable of producing professional quality output, for probably under $500, if you buy a used computer or build one from used parts. (I’m assuming audio interface ~$180, computer cost ~$320)

In this era, the knowledge in your head is more important than the amount of $ sunk into your equipment. 

Message Edited by maxplanck on 02-20-2009 08:23 AM

“silence” (I ain’t gonna take the bait…)

Bait?  OK, you don’t have to care whether your player is on pitch or not, but you are spending some effort (for what purpose?) getting on a thread of no apparent interest to you and telling everyone else that they must not care either.  Bait?

Message Edited by donp on 02-20-2009 11:55 AM

Do some really think this was asking too much?  There is an easy fix (different values in the pll registers for certain cases) and supposedly it’s been implemented in prerelease firmware.  The quality of hardware to provide what was requested was already there.  And as was was mentioned, inexpensive oscillators today are plenty precise for all but the most stringent requirements.  I think this issue can be retired, pending the actual firmware, of course, thanks to your diligence!! 

Easy people!

Accuracy in pitch matters more to some than others. It’s an indisputable fact, so lets not get heated about each other’s preferences & get this thread locked too…

It would be nice to keep it on a technical level, rather than discussing whether each other’s preferences are valid. Pretty please…

@daytona955 wrote:

Easy people!

 

Accuracy in pitch matters more to some than others. It’s an indisputable fact, so lets not get heated about each other’s preferences & get this thread locked too…

 

It would be nice to keep it on a technical level, rather than discussing whether each other’s preferences are valid. Pretty please…

It’s a simple engineering issue, preference is involved but ultimately it boils down to good engineering practices. When designing a product, should you design it so that:

A) It meets the needs of all users

or

B) It meets the needs of only some users

If both options cost the same, then obviously the engineer should choose option A.

(In this case option A costs slightly more than option B in terms of battery life, but quantitative analysis reveals that option A can be had for negligible cost of battery life).

QED.

@maxplanck wrote:


@daytona955 wrote:

Easy people!

 

Accuracy in pitch matters more to some than others. It’s an indisputable fact, so lets not get heated about each other’s preferences & get this thread locked too…

 

It would be nice to keep it on a technical level, rather than discussing whether each other’s preferences are valid. Pretty please…


 

 

 

It’s a simple engineering issue, preference is involved but ultimately it boils down to good engineering practices. When designing a product, should you design it so that:

 

A) It meets the needs of all users

 

or

 

B) It meets the needs of only some users

 

 

If both options cost the same, then obviously the engineer should choose option A.

 

(In this case option A costs slightly more than option B in terms of battery life, but quantitative analysis reveals that option A can be had for negligible cost of battery life).

 

QED.

@fuze_owner_gb wrote:


 

 


ROTFLMAO :smileyvery-happy: ^^

@marvin_martian wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:


 

 



ROTFLMAO :smileyvery-happy: ^^

Ditto… And Hey Marvin did you dl the clip update? did it fix this issue?

@conversionbox wrote:


@marvin_martian wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:


 

 



ROTFLMAO :smileyvery-happy: ^^


Ditto… And Hey Marvin did you dl the clip update? did it fix this issue?

I haven’t yet…I’m in the middle of a podcast and recharging the Clip at the same time.The changelog is up on the clip board though.

 Read it, just wondered if you had tried it, My clip is at work and ptobably wont get updated til tonight late

I already downloaded the zip, just haven’t added it yet.

:smileyvery-happy:

@conversionbox wrote:


@marvin_martian wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:


 

 



ROTFLMAO :smileyvery-happy: ^^


Ditto… And Hey Marvin did you dl the clip update? did it fix this issue?

I did the update, but my clip doesn’t have any issues!:stuck_out_tongue:

@marvin_martian wrote:


@conversionbox wrote:


@marvin_martian wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:


 

 



ROTFLMAO :smileyvery-happy: ^^


Ditto… And Hey Marvin did you dl the clip update? did it fix this issue?


I did the update, but my clip doesn’t have any issues!:stuck_out_tongue:

Have you noticed how everyone seems to be quoting fuze_owner-GB's post just so they can see the dead horse picture again? Very Monty Python-esque!

You’d think that guy’s arm would be getting tired by now.

I’m still laughing!

:smileyvery-happy:  :smileyvery-happy:   :smileyvery-happy:   :stuck_out_tongue: