Discussion in 'Headphones, Earphones & Portable Music' started by helpneeded, Aug 14, 2005.
Whats the best mp3 player under £75..????
Too subjective (and narrow) a question, mate. Too many variables ...
If I gave you £75 to buy an MP3 player, which one would you buy and why?
Aaah - that's better: '... and why?' See the difference?
Probably one of Creative's smaller AA-powered players (God knows which one; there are so many!). Basically, well built, great - if warm - SQ, reasonable power consumption, easy to use.
That do you?
That will do....
I hoped you'd say one with an internal rechargable battery, lol!
I'm never satisfied!
Aside from being more eco-friendly, I doubt internal rechargeable batteries at that price would give you much more bang for your buck than dry or ni-cads.
easy peasy, the shuffle.
And what is it about the Shuffle which you think makes it the best?
I don't quite get the concept of the shuffle, I like to see what is playing, or be able to see the songs when track skipping, maybe its just me, but with the price of small display screens these days, I would have thought that the addition of a screen to the shuffle would increase its desirability without a major increase in the price!
I may be wrong (correction: I think I am wrong, lol), but it adds to the convenience and ease of using a player?
Anyone got anymore MP3 Player favourites????????
Hmm - it's time for our annual argument, Gerbilly! I understand we declared a truce earlier, I know the HD5 and the iPod have two very different fanbases and that the machines offer certain functions and capabilities which might only appeal to one or the other - in the same way Christians and Jews might not convince each other that either is right. But WHY go for the nasty Shuffle when you can get a Sony flash player for the same money? The difference of course being that the Sony can be put on shuffle if you so wish but will also display the track name. Why would anybody with enough brains to close a transaction buy a Shuffle?? It beggars belief. It must be the most frustrating thing standing on a hot, over crowded train during rush hour with your finger on the skip button, skipping through tens of tracks until you find the track that has been playing in your head all day if you are after a specific one. But then again you might not bother. Which leaves you compromising your needs.
I am not personally attracted to the iPod's Duplo inspired design, but do acknowledge that it was well received by lifestyle and design magazines, at least in 2001. But the Shuffle is absolutely hideous! Complete with the neckstrap and when sported by the typical, erm..., model - shall we say - it just reeks of a cheap Netto cheeseboard (not that I have ever smelt one - promise!) - but I know cheese when I see it.
The Apple Shuffle must just be the most useless piece of hardware since Sony's Aibo...
just got he missus a creative muvo micro n200 for using in the gym and i'm well impressed (first one i've used admittingly).
good sound,easy to use,small and light, looks good in white,plus you can hook it up straight to your cd player and transfer from the disc to the player with the player doing the encoding...though i have'nt tried this yet.
definitely worth adding to your short list....thinking of getting one myself
My take on the shuffle:
Q: whats the cheapest flash player we can make boys and sell for the same price as feature packed rivals?
Answer: a player with no screen, FM or lots of play modes, just shuffle
unless you're using 98se
The Shuffle´s success really puzzles me. The regular iPod, while not a new invention, at least improved on the designs existing before it; the Shuffle on the other hand is like stepping back five years into the past, just with more memory. And yet people often rave about it and recommend it above other devices that are way ahead in all respects.
I once asked on a survival/outdoor-forum for recommendations for a rugged, flexible flash-player, and I said that I absolutely wanted one with regular battery (no built-in), drag&drop without drm, and metal case. And still I got at least two replies with "how about the iPod Shuffle, it´s so great"... Like Apple is hypnotizing people.
oooooh! its unanimous! Personally I agree with the belief that Apple only released the POS so that they can boost the total iPod's sold - it did help them to reach the 5 + million units sold so far claimed...
Hey thats not fair.....to Aibo. At least it has a small capacity to learn commands. Try telling a Shuffle to display track info
Shuffle? Sniffle, more like. Pathetic plastic junk ...
Ha! Where's Gerbilly now?
Name another flash player which can refill itself automatically with a varied selection of music from your library when you plug it in. It doesn't work in the conventional sense, but as a plug-&-go sports companion in particular it actually works quite well. Personally I like a display on my players but I don't knock the Shuffle as for what it does, it works very well. I think they should be clearer about how it works though. Not that that's Apple's strong suit...
Hmmm - the thing is, we didn't knock it for what it did. Play music. Shuffle. The use of iTunes and it's benefits. You're right, it is probably good at that, we're complaining about what it doesn't do - like display track names, the ability to listen to a chosen track etc.
For the same money I feel Sony will offer you a flash player that is more versatile...
The reason people will recommend the Shuffle is because they're under the impression that Apple's good build quality and premium price = an all-around good product. After owning and iMac, and thankfully finding out that I could return it by reading the detailed invoice, I can tell you that this certainly isn't the case.
Before making vast sweeping statements I think some of you should listen to it first.
Many of you like Johann criticise apple and say it is for poseurs. Yet you all criticise the shuffle for being plain. A tad hypocritical don't you think.
I also have one of the cheaper ones which i use for running and it is excellent for this purpose. I have no time to look at display so that is not an issue for me, it needs to be as simple as possible to work and you cant get more simpler than the shuffle.
It is the perfect companion for listening to music while exercising as you dont need 1000+ songs when you are running for 45 mins max or are in the gym for an hour.
If anything a display or an fm radio are a distraction here. If you want these functions then dont be a cheapskate and buy a 5gb player with nice wee display or a 20 or 30 if you can afford it.
The most important function here though is once again how it sounds. My shuffle sounds as good maybe even better than my pod and as far as I am aware the smaller Sony players sound quality isnt anywhere near as good according to the reviews I have read.
This is why I said The Shuffle and I stand by it.
Bring it on Sony Poseurs!!!
Are you being serious. I would never own a Bill Gates virus ridden shoddy software always crashing pc in my lifetime.
I have the misfortune of having to use a decent spec dell at work and it is a pain in the ass. I have a lovely I-Mac at home which works perfectly.
Macs are vastly superior computers just ask anyone who works in education, graphics , music, advertising, The Media.
I hear accountants prefer pcs due to a lack of software for macs.
Says it all really.
In the words of Delia " Lets be havin ya"
Don't know who you've been talking to about Macs, but working in the creative industry, I can tell you they go down more often tha ... [censored]. Basically, they can't handle what IT guys call 'dirty networks' (which most offices have), whereas PCs cope effortlessly. Whenever the IT guys are stressed, guess which computers they're fixing? Yep: Apple's!
Most IT guys grump and moan about computers they have not be trained to work on which is to be expected.
Most people in Grapics, The Music Industry and News and TV media use macs and in the US education sector it is again macs which are predominant.
You might not like them but most who uses them love them, which isnt the case with a pc.
No they don't.
I work for a media company, a very large one. I do web sites.
I use a PC, that works very well and never crashes (my PC at home is a self-built machine and is also stable and brilliant)
Some of the designers here use Macs, which they love. Some designers use PCs, which they love.
All our video aquisition is done on windows
All of our sound is cut on windows
News organisations don't use macs on the whole apart from things that look nice on a desk. Take the BBC for example, they use ENPS for all their news. They collate, write scripts, publish to the web all using PCs.
The Mac offers no significant advantage in any respect. So much so in fact that even Apple are beginning to admit that they don't need bespoke hardware anymore, and that actually, the PC is pretty much good enough, infact, maybe even slightly better:
Congratulations then Gerbilly! You are one of a FEW to enjoy your little Shuffle. Fact is, you seem to be out of touch with the real world. You provided one of perhaps two opinions in favour of the World's Ultimate Most Usless gadget.
If we had a referendum the Shuffle would have been scrapped. Wake up. Why would you want to have this hideous crime against humanity around your neck? It gives you 15 hours of battery life while Sony players can spit out up to 70. The Apple site has the nerve to try and sell the iPod Shuffle as a fashion accessory - I mean, I know costume jewellery is big this season, but surely not the cheap plastic necklaces found in Tesco's Value Christmas Crackers?? Listen, even my dedicated iPod following friends, who forever have to live with my knocking of the damn thing, look at people with Shuffles around their necks and would mutter 'sad' under their breaths...
It is just OLD technology - so far behind... Like those lovely new iPods with the colour screens currently being churned out which not even dare call themselves 5th Generation. Have you read the specs? 65 000 paltry colours - let me remind you, that is 5 year old technology. Screens with 65 000 colours first appeared on colour mobile phones in 2000.
The Sony Vaio Pocket on the other hand (by the way released more than a year ago now) had a HIGH RESOLUTION screen with more than 250 000 colours. Trust me, you see the difference! 65 bad 250 good.
It brings us back to the awful problem with the gapless playback (which you have seen with your own eyes DO BOTHER alot of people) and batterly life issues... Ground you and I have covered before, but technology that's been around for ages now and should be done and dusted, archived for next generations to study and documented for historical purposes.
There is NO reason why they should still get away with putting this under-performing, aged relic with ancient technology in a Starck-inspired box and carry on bluffing the world that what they have is a winner.
I am no longer arguing about the clarity of sound produced by the iPod. It could very well be crystal clear. Who knows, that certainly is a matter of taste - but the blatant lack of functionality and reliabilty coupled with age-old cheap technology being incorporated into new models is a disgrace - and in the REAL world out there, smart playlists certainly aren't the alpha and the omega.
So Gerbilly my dear, if you are then willing to take this bait, even though it is clearly one huge, glow-in-the-dark, plastic monstrosity of an artificial fly sitting on the tip of the hook, it has to be mentioned that I can't help but notice a slight ignorance glowing from your quarters...
Ah leave him alone.
But I do think flash players are at least £20 too expensive:
£100 for typical 1gb flash player *cough cough*
£150 for a 4-5gb player
Separate names with a comma.