[Peter]

http://www.olympus.co.jp/en/news/200...ote=0&nr=1

I like it!

MR-500i is positioned as the flagship of the m:robe series, and incorporates a 20GB hard disk drive that allows both music and images to be carried with the user. In addition to being an HDD music player that allows users to enjoy music playback, it is equipped with a 3.7-inch VGA monitor, a graphical image calendar function, and a camera function that turns the large LCD monitor into a viewfinder that lets users capture images simply by touching the screen. Under the concept of "REMIX YOUR IMAGES," it also features a Remix Play mode that allows users to freely create a fusion of music and images, by combining their favorite music and images with a variety of visual effect templates to easily edit and play original image content.

Camera sounds rubbish though. I'd rather have no camera and an extra 30mins of battery than some crappy camera.

[turtle777]

iPod killer # 3457654



To be fair though, I have seen far worse than this one...

-t

[d4nth3m4n]

this one is actually kinda cool. then again, im pretty partial to olympus and their products.

[storer]

Originally posted by turtle777:
iPod killer # 3457654

[CharlesS]

While it looks cool, it appears to suffer from the same problem that the iPod has - no record feature.

[Peter]

when you cant think of what to put on a gadget, put the most useless thing - a camera.
Anyone else notcing the mass iPod wannabes recently?

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by Peter:
when you cant think of what to put on a gadget, put the most useless thing - a camera.

No kidding. What's wrong with a simple microphone port?

[ambush]

Nice try.

[Zoom_zoom]

I think the design is pretty damn sweet, but a camera attached to it? it looks expensive and i don't think it will kill the ipod.

[rozwado1]

nice design, but no killlllar.

[ManOfSteal]

*Yawn*

[djohnson]

Originally posted by turtle777:
iPod killer # 3457654

I thought this was #3457655?

[effgee]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
While it looks cool, it appears to suffer from the same problem that the iPod has - no record feature.

Huh? In case you're refering to recording notes, interviews etc. with a mic why not check out these:

• Griffin Technologies iTalk
• Belkin Universal Microphone Adapter
• Belkin Voice Recorder

The Olympus looks like a nice player ... judging from the pics I really like the design. But an(other) iPod killer? Doubtful. And that camera ... that's about as useful as an *insertfavoritekillbillvol2quotehere* ...

[ambush]

oh hum. color ipod soon==gg other companies but apple =win

Peter, you could have consolidated this crap in a SINGLE thread instead of spreading it all over the lounge.

[Splinter]

there is only one true killar out there and thats the iriver palyer series. They won all the comparisons in like PC magazine and other mags over the iPod. mainly because of ALOT more features
Plays over 1200 hours of digital music
Up to 16 hours of battery life
Supports MP3, WMA, ASF, WAV and OGG music files
Ultra-fast USB 2.0 transfers (up to 40 times faster than USB 1.0)
Integrated FM tuner
Backlit remote control with 4-line display
Built-in voice recorder
Intuitive music navigation
Real-time MP3 encoding (no PC required)
40GB of internal storage
Store or transfer files of any type
Extra-large, 8-line, backlit LCD
Rechargeable Lithium Polymer battery
Optical input and output
Upgradeable to future formats and features
Backlit remote control with 4-line display
iRiver earphones
Carrying case
Installation software CD
AC adapter
USB 2.0 cable
Line-in cable
External microphone
Printed user manual... all this cool stuff.

http://www.iriveramerica.com/products/H140.aspx

[effgee]

the iriver might be a good product ... problem is the design, though ... it kinda looks like this:

• 

[besson3c]

the market is saturated with "swiss army knife"-type products that do many things poorly.

[RGB]

Originally posted by Splinter:


http://www.iriveramerica.com/products/H140.aspx

Useful. But Ugly.

As for the Olympus model, it's a looker, but we'll see how well it performs.

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

It looks really cool but I guess all the controls are on screen which sucks.

The remote is better then Apples though.

[Lancer409]

Originally posted by turtle777:
iPod killer # 3457654



To be fair though, I have seen far worse than this one...

-t

[chris v]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
While it looks cool, it appears to suffer from the same problem that the iPod has - no record feature.

/broken record, dude.

[Splinter]

Originally posted by RGB:
Useful. But Ugly.

As for the Olympus model, it's a looker, but we'll see how well it performs.

personal taste. I think its looks kick ass. not in the sleek way the iPod does but in a rougher way... kinda like a sleek sports car and a mean looking jeep.

I like them both, I personally own a 2nd gen 15GB iPod and am more then pleased with it. But before taht I was running the first iRiver slimX and I was DAMN impressed! sorta wish I had had the money to keep it along with the new iPod I had bought.

http://www.iriveramerica.com/products/iMP-350.aspx

while thier latest slimX is amazingly tiny... at just 128x136mm (CDs are about 120x120mm)and only 13.7mm thick!

[RGB]

Originally posted by Splinter:
personal taste. I think its looks kick ass. not in the sleek way the iPod does but in a rougher way... kinda like a sleek sports car and a mean looking jeep.

Looks more comparable to an Aztek or an Element than a sports car.

[Cubeoid]

I can't really imagine "robing" myself into my music.

[Superchicken]

That iRiver thing looks huge, how big is it!? Looks dang ugly and useable too.

That said this Canon thing looks spiffy, I'd almost be tempted. I like the idea of Camera and MP3 player, that said, they really should have had a better camera if they were Canon really.

That said least this isn't coming from someone like creative or something like that. This looks like it might actually be something you wouldn't be ashamed of having. I don't know that Id' want one but at least it doesn't suck.

[besson3c]

Originally posted by Superchicken:
That iRiver thing looks huge, how big is it!? Looks dang ugly and useable too.

That said this Canon thing looks spiffy, I'd almost be tempted. I like the idea of Camera and MP3 player, that said, they really should have had a better camera if they were Canon really.

That said least this isn't coming from someone like creative or something like that. This looks like it might actually be something you wouldn't be ashamed of having. I don't know that Id' want one but at least it doesn't suck.

I think the idea of a camera/MP3 palyer is absolutely retarded, personally. Again, more of multi-purpose products that do many things poorly.

As a designer, you design for a very specific demographic and usage, and attempt to exploit the medium being utilized. A camera and a MP3 player are so different it is like designing a microwave to also be a dishwasher or something. One utility seems like an afterthought of the other.

The market reaction is almost always the same. The geeks think it is cool, a bunch of wealthy guys buy a handful, the rest of the public just doesn't get it.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by effgee:
Huh? In case you're refering to recording notes, interviews etc. with a mic

Bad assumption.

[IFLY2HIGH]

I have a co-worker here that just got the new iriver thingamigiggy. Same size as my 1G iPod. Thing has so many ports on the outside of it. USB 1, USB 2, Headphone, Line Out, Mic, and a few other we don't have a clue of what they do. Overall it has nothing on the iPod. He has 1200 songs on it and it takes about 2 min, yes I just said 2 min to boot! He says the more songs he ads on it, the longer it takes to turn on to play anything. The color screen is nice, but not a real go getter IMO for playing MP3's. At 350$ to me this thing is junk. The ports are so confusing, why do you need two different usb ports? Why can't you sleep it like the iPod does, and why does it take longer to startup when you add more music.

I told him I have to wait to for mine to come on, no wait, I have an iPod, it's always ready to go.

[effgee]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Bad assumption.

Now I'm curious - care to enlighten me? Us?

[turtle777]

Originally posted by djohnson:
I thought this was #3457655?

No, you're wrong.
I just re-counted ALL of them.

-t

[spatterson]

I think it looks good. If competition means that apple has to improve its product, and the end result gets us a better iPod... The so be it!

[djohnson]

Originally posted by turtle777:
No, you're wrong.
I just re-counted ALL of them.

-t

Ugg! What about now? New day new iPod killarrrr...

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by effgee:
Now I'm curious - care to enlighten me? Us?

As I've said a billion times lately, I'm a piano major and I'd like to be able to record my performances. I'm currently using MiniDisc, but it sucks because the battery life is horrid (it runs on one AA battery), the tapes only hold 74 minutes of audio, the damn unit makes lots of noise which sometimes gets into the recording, you can't get a digital audio out port without buying one of the expensive models, and even if you had one you have to play the audio in real-time to transfer it to the computer. PITA. These hard disk-based players would be much nicer since the battery life is long and the storage space is huge, meaning I'd never have to worry about the recording stopping in the middle of a performance again. Audio can be transferred to a Mac by USB 2, or even better, FireWire, instead of having to play it in real-time. And finally, the things are probably pretty quiet and can't possibly be as noisy as my MD unit.

Apple makes a nice MP3 player, and it has some nice features, and I wish it could get it as a recorder (8 kHz mono is not good enough for music). If they don't, I'll eventually have to break down and get an iRiver or something.

So if there happens to be anyone in here who agrees with me that the iPod should be made usable for musicians rather than just the teeny-bopper crowd, send some feedback to this link:

http://www.apple.com/feedback/ipod.html

I've been doing so for some time, but they might listen if more people let them know.

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
As I've said a billion times lately, I'm a piano major and I'd like to be able to record my performances. I'm currently using MiniDisc, but it sucks because the battery life is horrid (it runs on one AA battery), the tapes only hold 74 minutes of audio, the damn unit makes lots of noise which sometimes gets into the recording, you can't get a digital audio out port without buying one of the expensive models, and even if you had one you have to play the audio in real-time to transfer it to the computer. PITA. These hard disk-based players would be much nicer since the battery life is long and the storage space is huge, meaning I'd never have to worry about the recording stopping in the middle of a performance again. Audio can be transferred to a Mac by USB 2, or even better, FireWire, instead of having to play it in real-time. And finally, the things are probably pretty quiet and can't possibly be as noisy as my MD unit.

Apple makes a nice MP3 player, and it has some nice features, and I wish it could get it as a recorder (8 kHz mono is not good enough for music). If they don't, I'll eventually have to break down and get an iRiver or something.

While I understand your desire for recording feature on the iPod maybe you should upgrade your Minidisc equipment. It would be less expensive.

I use MD to tape concerts all the time. The newer recorders allow you to record at different bitrates. There's SP, LP2, LP4. SP is roughly equivalent to 292kbps, LP2 is ~132kbps, LP4 is ~66kbps. Not as good as uncompressed audio but pretty damn good. A LOT better than 8 kHz. For comparison, most mp3's found on the Web are in the 128-192 range. Plus, if you record in LP2 mode using 80min discs (found everywhere) the record time goes up to 160min per disc. Recording at LP4 extends it to 320min.

I also use a powered pre-amp for the microphone which records a better range than the built-in mic and extends the battery time considerably. The pre-amp is 3/4 the size of the MD unit.

I have no answer for the real-time transfer problem. Sony's software is widely considered to be crap so I haven't even tried it. But hey, what gadget is perfect anyway?

Hope that helps.

[Splinter]

Originally posted by Superchicken:
That iRiver thing looks huge, how big is it!?

iriver

2.3(W) x 0.94(D) x 4.1(H)Inches

ipod is

2.4(W) by 0.69(D) by 4.1(H) inches

very small diffrences in size.

Originally posted by IFLY2HIGH:
I have a co-worker here that just got the new iriver thingamigiggy. Same size as my 1G iPod. Thing has so many ports on the outside of it. USB 1, USB 2, Headphone, Line Out, Mic, and a few other we don't have a clue of what they do. Overall it has nothing on the iPod. He has 1200 songs on it and it takes about 2 min, yes I just said 2 min to boot! He says the more songs he ads on it, the longer it takes to turn on to play anything. The color screen is nice, but not a real go getter IMO for playing MP3's. At 350$ to me this thing is junk. The ports are so confusing, why do you need two different usb ports? Why can't you sleep it like the iPod does, and why does it take longer to startup when you add more music.

I told him I have to wait to for mine to come on, no wait, I have an iPod, it's always ready to go.

your probably talking about this. the color thing. http://www.iriveramerica.com/products/H340.aspx

not quite the same as what was compared in the mags to the iPod.

[effgee]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
As I've said a billion times lately, I'm a piano major and ...

Got it. I even did a search before I posted my question but didn't see any of your earlier posts.

Safe to say that the gadget links I posted above are quite useless to you, then. Kind of weird, though - there has got to be a bunch of musicians out there who would appreciate the ability to record their work in decent quality. I'm surprised that Apple hasn't implemented this (yet?).

[d4nth3m4n]

Originally posted by Superchicken:
That iRiver thing looks huge, how big is it!? Looks dang ugly and useable too.

That said this Canon thing looks spiffy, I'd almost be tempted. I like the idea of Camera and MP3 player, that said, they really should have had a better camera if they were Canon really.

That said least this isn't coming from someone like creative or something like that. This looks like it might actually be something you wouldn't be ashamed of having. I don't know that Id' want one but at least it doesn't suck.

isn't olympus? or is there a cannon thing i don't know about?

Originally posted by Splinter:
(CDs are about 120x120mm)

i would hope the dimensions are the same, they're round.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by vmpaul:
While I understand your desire for recording feature on the iPod maybe you should upgrade your Minidisc equipment. It would be less expensive.

I use MD to tape concerts all the time. The newer recorders allow you to record at different bitrates. There's SP, LP2, LP4. SP is roughly equivalent to 292kbps, LP2 is ~132kbps, LP4 is ~66kbps. Not as good as uncompressed audio but pretty damn good. A LOT better than 8 kHz. For comparison, most mp3's found on the Web are in the 128-192 range. Plus, if you record in LP2 mode using 80min discs (found everywhere) the record time goes up to 160min per disc. Recording at LP4 extends it to 320min.

I also use a powered pre-amp for the microphone which records a better range than the built-in mic and extends the battery time considerably. The pre-amp is 3/4 the size of the MD unit.

I have no answer for the real-time transfer problem. Sony's software is widely considered to be crap so I haven't even tried it. But hey, what gadget is perfect anyway?

Hope that helps.

Are the MiniDiscs still limited to 74 minutes of music? Yes, the advertisements claim that you can now store 5 hours on a standard MiniDisc, but since my current player can put only 74 minutes on one, does this mean that they are getting these specs by encoding the audio at a really crappy bitrate (like many of these MP3 players basing the number of songs that the unit can store on 64 kbps WMA)? How much audio can a MiniDisc store at a decent bitrate?

Are the new MiniDisc units still powered by a single AA battery? This is important because I have had a huge problem with the battery dying in the middle of something I was recording. All the units I just looked at in a quick browse had a single AA battery, even one that cost $350. This is not acceptable.

Do the new MiniDisc players have optical out ports on the reasonably priced models now, or do I have to transfer the audio to the Mac using an analog cable?

Does the MD's interface still suck, and does it still forget the auto/manual recording level setting so that you have to reset it every damn time you record something with it?

Are the new MDs reasonably quiet, or do they still make loud whirring noises while recording, causing them to need to be muffled with a blanket?

Needless to say, I am quite pissed off with my current MD equipment. There is very little chance I will ever buy MD again unless they have made some dramatic improvements in the past few years.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by effgee:
Got it. I even did a search before I posted my question but didn't see any of your earlier posts.

Safe to say that the gadget links I posted above are quite useless to you, then. Kind of weird, though - there has got to be a bunch of musicians out there who would appreciate the ability to record their work in decent quality. I'm surprised that Apple hasn't implemented this (yet?).

Exactly, especially since they're specifically trying to attract musicians with their Mac-related products - digital audio in/out on the G5, Logic, GarageBand... coupled with iTunes and iPod, it's clear Apple wants to be The Digital Music Company, but there's a critical part missing.

It's frustrating because the iPod would be so perfect since it already records to uncompressed AIFF files. All they would need to do would be to remove the software block that allows only 8 kHz mono (since the iPod's hardware supports 96 kHz stereo) and put in a way to adjust the input level. The thing is quiet, the storage is huge, the battery life is long, it would be great! So, please send feedback to Apple.

http://www.apple.com/feedback/ipod.html

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Are the MiniDiscs still limited to 74 minutes of music? Yes, the advertisements claim that you can now store 5 hours on a standard MiniDisc, but since my current player can put only 74 minutes on one, does this mean that they are getting these specs by encoding the audio at a really crappy bitrate (like many of these MP3 players basing the number of songs that the unit can store on 64 kbps WMA)? How much audio can a MiniDisc store at a decent bitrate?

Again, I use 80 min discs and it depends on your definition of crappy bitrate. I'd agree 64kbps is crappy. I'd only use it for spoken word recording. I find 132kbps to be decent and 292kbps more than enough for quality recording. Consider what your end product is. Is it for your own reference or to release as a commercial CD? If it's the former then you'd be fine, if it's the latter then it wouldn't.

from http://minidisc.org/index.html

SP - 80min - 292kbps
LP2 - 160min- 132kbps
LP4 - 320min - 66kbps

Are the new MiniDisc units still powered by a single AA battery? This is important because I have had a huge problem with the battery dying in the middle of something I was recording. All the units I just looked at in a quick browse had a single AA battery, even one that cost $350. This is not acceptable.

My unit is single battery but you can get larger units. I use rechargeable NiMH's so I'm not paying for batteries all the time.

As I said before, I use an external pre-amp which takes load off the unit's battery. I get better dynamic range with my binaural microphone and longer battery life overall. I've recorded up to 4 hours with no problem but I've never had the need to test the limits so I couldn't tell you the high end. I think internal Mic's are the biggest culprit when it comes to battery usage. I use rechargeables in the pre-amp as well.

Using eBay and Mindisco, I bought a somewhat decent setup of MD unit, mid-level binaural microphone, and pre-amp all for around $200. It all fits in a small fanny pack I take to all shows I go to.

Do the new MiniDisc players have optical out ports on the reasonably priced models now, or do I have to transfer the audio to the Mac using an analog cable?

Mine doesn't have optical out (optical in though) but I bought it over 2 years ago. I would be surprised if it wasn't standard on lower end units now.

Does the MD's interface still suck, and does it still forget the auto/manual recording level setting so that you have to reset it every damn time you record something with it?

Mine always remembers the record setting. No problem there. Interface is no more complicated than any other gadget. If you're so manual-phobic not to give it at least one good run-through then I have no suggestion for you.

Are the new MDs reasonably quiet, or do they still make loud whirring noises while recording, causing them to need to be muffled with a blanket?

Never had that problem. But Sony's QC has been getting worse over the years. Look at the Sharp recorders. I hear they have a better feature/price ratio.

Needless to say, I am quite pissed off with my current MD equipment. There is very little chance I will ever buy MD again unless they have made some dramatic improvements in the past few years.

I don't blame you. I won't buy another if a better alternative comes around but what are the chances for that? You should seriously investigate the alternatives. I run into tapers all the time. Some have the same setup but use DAT boxes which are quite small as well.

My perfect music gadget would have all the above plus AM/FM + timed recording + WiFi for streaming broadcasts as well as a FM transmitter, all with a hard drive instead of using discs. I could be waiting a long time.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by vmpaul:
Again, I use 80 min discs and it depends on your definition of crappy bitrate. I'd agree 64kbps is crappy. I'd only use it for spoken word recording. I find 132kbps to be decent and 292kbps more than enough for quality recording. Consider what your end product is. Is it for your own reference or to release as a commercial CD? If it's the former then you'd be fine, if it's the latter then it wouldn't.

from http://minidisc.org/index.html

SP - 80min - 292kbps
LP2 - 160min- 132kbps
LP4 - 320min - 66kbps

Fair enough. Uncompressed AIFF on a multi-GB hard drive would still be best, though.

My unit is single battery but you can get larger units. I use rechargeable NiMH's so I'm not paying for batteries all the time.

It's not so much the cost of the batteries as it is having one die in the middle of a performance, so the recording is ruined.

As I said before, I use an external pre-amp which takes load off the unit's battery. I get better dynamic range with my binaural microphone and longer battery life overall. I've recorded up to 4 hours with no problem but I've never had the need to test the limits so I couldn't tell you the high end. I think internal Mic's are the biggest culprit when it comes to battery usage. I use rechargeables in the pre-amp as well.

My unit doesn't even have an internal mic, so I doubt that's the reason the battery dies so easily. I think it's just that a single AA battery isn't enough...

Mine always remembers the record setting. No problem there. Interface is no more complicated than any other gadget. If you're so manual-phobic not to give it at least one good run-through then I have no suggestion for you.

Hey, this post was pretty reasonable until you added this personal attack. The problem is that my unit doesn't remember the settings - I have to set it to manual and then set the input level to what I want each time I turn the device on. The process to do so is by no means intuitive, which is a problem since for a recital I have to have someone else do the recording. This person has to be given specific instructions about 1) how to set the input level, and what to set it to, 2) at what point in the concert to quickly swap the battery, and 3) to remember to set the input level again after doing so. Since most of the people I know that are willing to record for me are non-technical users, it's just a few more things for them to potentially screw up...

Never had that problem. But Sony's QC has been getting worse over the years. Look at the Sharp recorders. I hear they have a better feature/price ratio.

The noise my recorder makes is simply horrible. If their QC has actually gotten worse over the years, that's a bad sign to me.

I checked out the Sharp recorders and found this:

http://www.sharpusa.com/products/Typ...056,57,00.html

Looks like they are not currently being made.

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
Fair enough. Uncompressed AIFF on a multi-GB hard drive would still be best, though.

Very true. Even a 4gb mini-drive would get you a few hours of quality recordings.

It's not so much the cost of the batteries as it is having one die in the middle of a performance, so the recording is ruined.

My unit doesn't even have an internal mic, so I doubt that's the reason the battery dies so easily. I think it's just that a single AA battery isn't enough...

That's pretty bad. No wonder you're reticent to dive into MD again. Your unit sounds seriously tweaked. I'm on my 2nd. I was an early adopter (before mp3 players) and when my 1st one went I almost threw it in a river out of frustration.

Again, I've gone up to 4 hours with one battery but I'm sure it will go more. I usually slip an extra AA into the fanny pack but I've never had to use it.

Hey, this post was pretty reasonable until you added this personal attack. The problem is that my unit doesn't remember the settings - I have to set it to manual and then set the input level to what I want each time I turn the device on. The process to do so is by no means intuitive, which is a problem since for a recital I have to have someone else do the recording. This person has to be given specific instructions about 1) how to set the input level, and what to set it to, 2) at what point in the concert to quickly swap the battery, and 3) to remember to set the input level again after doing so. Since most of the people I know that are willing to record for me are non-technical users, it's just a few more things for them to potentially screw up...

Sorry, no offense meant. It's just that some people seem unwilling to put ANY effort into optimizing their gadgets' potential. Doesn't sound like you're one of them. Sorry. Hey, even Mac users need to consult Help once in awhile.

I think my cell phone is more complicated but I will say I hate the little buttons on these small MD's. I have many a recording of me swearing as I try to change a setting in the middle of a concert.

Part of the reason I haven't had to deal with your problem (very often, that is) is because I use the pre-amp and external mic. Better quality than a built -in mic and there's a Gain knob I can use to adjust recording level. A simple knob is much easier to explain than a multi-level Menu.

I don't want to suggest it's all rosy. Here are my 3 main gripes:
1) No backlit screen - big problem in dark niteclubs. I've solved it by snapping one of those keychain flashlights onto the fanny pack zipper. Supposedly, all Sharp units are backlit. I have a Sony.

2) Real-time transfer to computer - don't think there's a way around this one. Sony's NetMD is horrible and only for PC's (I think). The only solace is that at least when I'm done transferring to the computer it's in an editable format (AIFF) instead of one that can't be edited (mp3 or ATRAC). I know I can convert a mp3 to AIFF in iTunes, but I kind of like adjusting the Gain and Levels as I transfer from MD to the computer.

3) Switching discs - can be a pain when you're trying to be discreet. Luckily, almost all the shows I go to have breaks between sets. If I'm recording in LP2 mode, it's never a problem.

I know how you feel though. I hated my MD at one point too. I finally figured it was easier to change my viewpoint and seriously investigate alternatives rather than trying to change the product offerings of a multi-billion corporation to meet my needs. Who knows, maybe you'll have better luck.

In the meantime, with a few compromises and adjustments, I've got a keepsake of every show I've seen in the last 2 years. Makes paying those ridiculous ticket prices a little better. It's pretty cool.

Good luck.