Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Replacement for an aging 1st gen nano w/rockbox? (Read 11829 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Replacement for an aging 1st gen nano w/rockbox?

Reply #25 –
Quote from: saratoga on
Clip+ is probably your best bet for a newish Sansa player.  The e200v1 is much more stable and works amazingly, but its pretty hard to find these days.


OK I agree, you know more about this.

@Northpack:

from the bug report FS#11385
Quote
Closed by  Rafaël Carré (funman)
Sunday, 13 June 2010, 19:05 GMT+2
Reason for closing:  Not a Bug
Additional comments about closing:  Like bertrik said, the precision is about 1.1% when playing 44.1kHz audio with the PLL clocked at 240MHz.

Not a bug, it's well enough for human ears.

If you want to enhance the precision, open a patch which sets the PLL to 384MHz like the AMSv1. (we don't know how to modify the PLL yet, because the meaning of each bit in PLLA register is unknown)


So in the end the hurdle is understanding the hardware fully.  The Sansa original firmware had the same issue and was eventually fixed in a firmware update last year.  Relevant thread Sansa Forum Fuze pitch It's a long read.

Changing the pitch in Rockbox sounds like a good idea but it has to be done on a track by track basis.  When I tried it on some ogg -q 7 tracks of female vocals I found it introduces some bad artefacts with the sound even breaking up and stuttering.....much more noticeable than the 1.1% error!  Personally I can live with the speed error because 99 times out of 100 I don't even notice it.  Very occasionally I do, but I don't care that much.  If it gets a fix I'll be happy.  I know some people do find this issue very important but I guess I am somewhat cloth eared.
 

Replacement for an aging 1st gen nano w/rockbox?

Reply #26 –
Quote from: probedb on
I'm loathed to give up rockbox as I want replaygain support, last.fm, gapless support etc.
Apart from last.fm (AFAIK), the Clip+ will give you all this out of the box. Ogg + FLAC too. And 5-band EQ.

Cheers,
David.

Replacement for an aging 1st gen nano w/rockbox?

Reply #27 –
Quote from: probedb on
There's still the whole iTunes problem  Plus a nano is still several times the price of a Clip+.
.... but you can use foobar2000 with the appropriate component to synchronise with an iPod.

Replacement for an aging 1st gen nano w/rockbox?

Reply #28 –
2Bdecided: That sounds good, I'll have to give it a try as it before I start playing

Nick.C: I know about that but you still need iTunes for firmware updates and they're still at least twice the price.....I'm on a budget for the next year so until then this sounds ideal.

Replacement for an aging 1st gen nano w/rockbox?

Reply #29 –
It seems you're well on your way with a solution that is best for you.  My intention was to inform people that some of the things you listed can be handled by an iPod.  I wasn't trying to convince you to get one.

Replacement for an aging 1st gen nano w/rockbox?

Reply #30 –
Quote from: 2Bdecided on
Quote from: probedb on
I'm loathed to give up rockbox as I want replaygain support, last.fm, gapless support etc.
Apart from last.fm (AFAIK), the Clip+ will give you all this out of the box. Ogg + FLAC too. And 5-band EQ.


No gapless MP3 though, plus the EQ is non-parametric and battery life with Ogg/Flac is much worse.

Replacement for an aging 1st gen nano w/rockbox?

Reply #31 –
Quote from: Northpack on
The pitch issue is a tradeoff made because the Clip is a ultra low power device (you get 8 hours of playback out of 290mAh!!). Technically pitch-perfect playback is quite trivial (and possible on rockbox via pitch setting) but due to the use of buffering more battery expensive. For maximum effiency, the CPU clock has to be a multiple of the sampling frequency... this doesn't work with 44.1khz, so the nearest possible multiplier is used, resulting in 1% pitch error.

@saratoga: please correct me if I'm wrong


After some testing today it looks like the pitch bug is mostly fixed (pitch error of ~ 0.1%), so it'll probably be corrected in SVN builds as soon as everyone agrees its stable.

Replacement for an aging 1st gen nano w/rockbox?

Reply #32 –
Quote from: greynol on
It seems you're well on your way with a solution that is best for you.  My intention was to inform people that some of the things you listed can be handled by an iPod.  I wasn't trying to convince you to get one.


No probs and thanks for the info