Sparky191

I always assumed it referred to the original format ATRAC SP 292kps.

I reckon the HIMD is a more pocketable solution with a better ADC and DAC, with some usability issues. The iRiver needs the analog/optical line in and outboard ADC/DAC to achieve similar results. That would be the main difference (for me). For others depending on their usage, other issues might be more significant.

I think MD people have more faith in the abilities of the HD Digital amps than other people. http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=80152 However like Tunster said EQ/DSP's features serve a different purpose than an amp. At the end of the day it depends what you are trying to achieve. A sound you like, or a sound thats more accurate, to the original.

I find the ATRAC sound on MD and HiMD models fun and enjoyable to listen too, in the higher bitrates at least. But I've always thought that its less accurate. Certainly its adds something to the sound. In my experience of recording from poor cassette sources I find the ATRAC recording can even sound better than the original. However when I've done my own blind listening tests I discovered that I prefer the sound of original rips of music when encoded to Lame MP3's on other devices like a Zen Micro or a iPod Shuffle, it sounds closer to the original, perhaps its less fun, I dunno. Thats only my own subjective opinion based on my own ABX listening tests. I've done no scientific measuring tests with different sources. Generally I use lo fi equipment, perhaps using high end phones and amps I'd change my mind.

Thats a tired old argumrnt. Some HD maybe, the majority are fine. I see plenty of 5-10yr old drives still working fine. Besides a HD has many other advantages over optical drives, like capacity and speed. Its not designed as a long term archive medium.

Theres an offical outboard AA attachment for the H3xx. http://www.iriver.eu.com/accessoires.html?p_id=393&L=0

iRiver HD introduces noise into the recording.. maybe. Except that the H3xx lacks the optical I/O. Oddly enough the H1xx seems to be easier to source, on ebay etc.

Did I miss a point by point comparision of recording Rockbox iRiver vs HiMD somewhere? Why the random rant/self promotion? On this thread I read... Facts ~~~~~~ You can split/edit tracks on HiMD (may/maynot be buggy on some configurations) A few bugs around in the firmware/software (which bugs exactly?) Recording with an external mic overloads it. (IFP795) IFP-795, through line-in, sounded muffled and watery. (...doesn't pick up any high end) iHPs do work as external drive without loosing high bitrate recording. The 700 series, the (USB drive) firmware ... REMOVES the high-bitrate recording choices HiMD requires SS Some iRivers (Flash?) require iRiver music manager software (HD players?) iHP min. 20 GB on board, iHP external drive functionality iHP (rockboxed) live recording level adjustment and recording levels You can adjust the recording levels live on every Hi-MD recorder. e1ghtyf1ve owns a bunch of gear and means to sound harsh Subjective opinions ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Recording quality is far better on the RH1 at Hi-SP compared to 256k MP3 on the H3xx The mic amp is better on the RH1, lower noise. Hard disk based players ...cannot compare in sound quality to a real recorder. (why?) Suspect that the quality of the HiMD recordings are superior That the summation of the post (here) thus far. I haven't read the iRiver forums thread yet. In the past the biggest issues against the iRivers HD players for recording was H1xx players supported WAV recording and the H3xx players didn't. Also you couldn't see the levels, and the internal mic picks up the HD noise on the player. Seems like these issues have been resolved to some degree with Rockbox. While its interesting to hear about the flash players I assume (perhaps incorrectly) that most people would primarily be interested in the HD units. I note on the iRiver forums it says This suggests that WAV recordings on the iHP sound better than SP on legacy MD. Any thoughts?

Its hard to get an objective opinion here alright... Me too, I've never seen a comparision with Rockbox installed.

Whats that got to do with FW?

About a quarter of the time I'd guesstimate based on my experience. One of the reasons I rarely use my HiMD as a player. Transfers are too slow. In fact I'd buy a cheap 2nd HiMD to use for uploading/downloading and the other for using.

What do people usually to do minimize SS4 memory wastage. What services can you stop etc.

Not sure thats helping him

On Head-Fi people seem to hang them up. They have a head phone tree. (like a coat stand). Or just a hook on the wall.

I assume CP is for "connect player" which used to be used with the MP3 players.

What a company...

Actually it looks better in silver than the black. http://forums.minidisc.org/index.php?showtopic=11669

Those UK models only have a line in and no mic in, is that correct. Is there a connection for a remote on them?

Depends on the circumstance of the test. At best in a sustained operation it can be almost twice as fast. However it simply not as widespread so unless you really need the speed USB is more useful. Firewire comes into its own on data I/O intensive applications like Video processing.

Speed differences over USB 2.0 would be insignificant on a portable player. FW has been around for over 10years and is older than USB 1.1 never mind USB2.0. Its as common as it will ever be.

Anyway thanks for the info grf didn't mean to be so negative.

Impressive meaning its not abysmal as you'd expect, just merely bad.

64kps isn't SQ.

Whats the point of firewire on a HiMD or a HD player. It wouldn't take advantage of the extra speed and is a less common standard.

What has "think different" campaign? "switch campaign" got to with morals? Haven't heard of the itunes fair deal, links?