New classic

[mj_355]

I have a nano 5th gen 16gb. I would like to get more storage abilty. When I bought a new nano touch and hated it I then bought a 5th gen nano used. I would like some advice on buying a classic. I will probly buy a used classic. What generation and gig should I get? Where is best place to buy a used classic?

[AlTouch]

Well, if your budget will let you, get the latest 160GB Classic. I think it is known as the Gen 7... I had (actually, still have) a 5th Gen but in 32GB... Apart from a few extra options in the menu's, I can see no difference between the two models, none whatsoever. 160GB will surely see you alright for ANY storage you might have a mind to use in any iPod...

I have 35 movies and about 600 songs on mine and there's still about 130GB left... I love my Classic...

[kornchild2002]

There are differences between the iPod classic (2009) and 5G/5.5G iPods. The iPod classic is going to net longer battery life for audio and video playback, it has an anodized aluminum front instead of a clear plastic coating (which scratches even if you look at it wrong), the iPod classic works with in-line headphone remotes (the 2007 models do not, only the 2008 and 2009 versions), and there are a few other things I am leaving out.

Right now, if you are going to get an iPod classic, you might as well go for the latest 160GB model. They have an MSRP of $250 but you can often find them at a lower price at many places. Right now, Amazon is selling new ones for $230. Best Buy will also often mark them down to the same range. Best Buy currently has them at the same price as Amazon, same with MacMall. If you don't mind buying used, you should check your local Craigslist page. Some people list the 160GB iPod classic (2009) as being the 7G or 7.5G iPod classic. Just make sure it is the one that was released in 2009 (Apple hasn't updated it since then) and has a capacity of 160GB. There was an iPod classic released in 2007 with a 160GB capacity but it doesn't provide a solid experience and is still buggy, I don't recommend buying that one.

[mj_355]

So yall think I should go with a new gen 7. On ebay they have a bunch of different new models. Which one showed I buy?

[AlTouch]

Ah, there you go, someone who knows his models,,

Me, I just plug heaphones into 'em and use 'em and in that respect, I can operate it exactly the same as the old 32GB model and if I didn't have a new black model now, I'd never be able to tell you which was which. Yes the battery life is certainly much much greater but I didn't know of any other actual updates. Nice to know...!!!

If you're into lots of songs and like the occasional video, the Classic 7th Gen 160GB is a great model to have, mainly because of that 160GB's of storage. I put mp3's onto mine only at 320kb/s and 48kHz, because with 160GB's you can afford to have the better sounds of a higher enocoding rate, or you may even want to use lossless audio like FLAC which is a lot larger filesize per song but very worth it. I think iPods support FLAC...

If you're more into videos/movies, I'd go more for the Touch 4, which I also have (64GB model). It's a great unit and has a much larger screen but it's very thin and hard to use the control buttons like On/Off, Volume UP/Dn because these are on a curved surface and my fingers just can't quite hold the Touch and work those little buttons easily, and, you need to put one of those see-thru plastic screen protector shields on it so you don't scratch the screen and find some sort of case or silicon skin for it becuase it's so thin and shiny and slippery, you'll end up dropping it if you're not careful. I dropped mine just once onto my bed and that was enough to convince me. Once you get past that though, the Touch 4 is a neat model. Cost of the 64GB model is just above the Classic 160GB's price but the 32GB and 16GB models are quite affordable but of course your storage room gets less...

For me the Classic 160GB is a great choice for all-round use...

[kornchild2002]

Originally Posted by mj_355

So yall think I should go with a new gen 7. On ebay they have a bunch of different new models. Which one showed I buy?

As has been previously stated: yes, go for the 160GB "7G" iPod classic. It isn't technically a 7G iPod classic (Apple stopped with the "G" moniker when the iPod classic was first introduced). Just make sure it is the one released in 2009. If you like, you can find ones that fit within your price range and post links to them here. That way you can get full confirmation (as best as we can do) of what you are buying.

Originally Posted by AlTouch

MIf you're into lots of songs and like the occasional video, the Classic 7th Gen 160GB is a great model to have, mainly because of that 160GB's of storage. I put mp3's onto mine only at 320kb/s and 48kHz, because with 160GB's you can afford to have the better sounds of a higher enocoding rate, or you may even want to use lossless audio like FLAC which is a lot larger filesize per song but very worth it. I think iPods support FLAC...

I'm going to comment on this as it struck me as odd. I am not trying to be rude but what you are doing is actually degrading the music even further. Unless your lossless source files are also at 48KHz, resampling 44.1KHz audio (like that found on audio CDs) doesn't actually "upscale" or improve anything but rather reduces the audio quality of your tracks. You should never upsample audio as it does absolutely no good. You can't gain anything from something that isn't there. The only reason to encode lossy audio at 48KHz is if you are downsampling from something higher (like 96KHz) or if it is a 48KHz source.

On top of that, 320kbps is overkill for ANY portable player. The best option is to go with what one hears, not just the highest number on the encoder settings. The majority of people out there would actually fail a proper blind ABX test comparing 128kbps VBR AAC/mp3 audio and the source lossless file. Very, very, very few people actually require more than 128kbps for listening. Even with a large capacity player, there is no need to encode higher than what your ears can perceive. Having the space for those huge files isn't an excuse to encode at that setting.

Lastly, the iPod cannot support FLAC. The only lossless formats it supports are PCM WAV (44.1 and 48KHz), AIFF (44.1 and 48KHz), and Apple Lossless (44.1 and 48KHz). There are other players that work with FLAC but Apple chose to use their own lossless encoder (Apple Lossless, or ALAC for short) instead of relying on something that was open source.

[mj_355]

Looking at best buy. the model # is MC297LL/A. Is that a goodone?

[AlTouch]

Cheers Kornchild,

I see your point. What I actually do is when I copy from a music CD I have (store bought) I just let the ripping program suggest what it does then if the options to go any higher are available I usually try to go to the higher setting of 320/48 as opposed to 128/44.1 which is usually a default for many programs. You're right in saying that if I downloaded a 128kbs mp3 and tried to recode to 320, I wouldn't get any better sound, absolutely right as all you are doing is getting a kind of high quality copy of an original low quality and it will sound no better. The one thing I didn't say is that I keep all my songs not for the iPod(s) but for my own library on my PC for normal listening. I simply copy them over to the iPod as they are, without resampling down. Of course the reason I choose to start off with 320kb is you can always go down in quality by resampling to say 128kb/s but as you say, you can't go up and hope to keep the sound as good. I was just trying to say that the 160GB Classic has plenty of room to hold your higher bit rate songs. Right now, I have just on 100GB if songs on my PC,, not all at 320 either, but all the later stuff deserves the best start in life so is done at 320. 60's and 70's stuff which is full of noise is no better at 320 than it is at 128 and I simply hate listening to higher sounds that sound like they are coming through the walls from the next room in a cheap motel.

I'm willing to bet that my hearing is not as good as it once was but listening to stifled audio is a terrible experience and I just use the higher settings to try to start out at the highest quality - if indeed you can call mp3 "quality"...
One thing I have learned though is when editing audio in a program like Adobe Audition, it's a lot easier to work with 320kbs than 128. That's when the shortcomings of lower bitrates show up...

I wasn't quite sure if FLAC was playable on iPods or not. Now I know,,, thanks...

[AlTouch]

Originally Posted by mj_355

Looking at best buy. the model # is MC297LL/A. Is that a goodone?

Sure looks like the same as what I have got. I bought mine only about 6 - 8 weeks ago so I assume it's the very latest. Mine is black, as I've stated. Didn't know they also come in silver. That may have been a go for me if I 'did' know...

[mj_355]

on ebay I found one for 205.00 free shipping its model number is MC297LL. is that a good one?

[kornchild2002]

Originally Posted by mj_355

Looking at best buy. the model # is MC297LL/A. Is that a goodone?

That is the one we have been telling you to get. It is the current generation iPod classic.

Originally Posted by mj_355

on ebay I found one for 205.00 free shipping its model number is MC297LL. is that a good one?

That is still the same thing. The model numbers are often listed as being just that or with an "/A" at the end. The full model numbers are going to be different for the previous generation iPods. As for buying on eBay, unless that is new, sealed in box and has free shipping, you would be better off picking it up from Best Buy. A $200 price sounds nice if it is new but the seller probably charges $15-$20 for shipping putting it at the same overall price as buying from Best Buy. You can even check Amazon as they may not charge sales tax in your state.

Originally Posted by AlTouch

You're right in saying that if I downloaded a 128kbs mp3 and tried to recode to 320, I wouldn't get any better sound, absolutely right as all you are doing is getting a kind of high quality copy of an original low quality and it will sound no better.

Actually, thats not what I am saying. You are taking an audio CD with the Red Book standard of having 44.1KHz, 16-bit lossless audio encoded at 1,411,200 bits per second. You are then taking that audio CD, ripping it (making individual PCM WAV files, this process is done on-the-fly with ALL encoders), and encoding bloated 320kbps mp3 file out of it. Somewhere in the process, you are needlessly upscaling the sample rate to 48KHz. It doesn't matter where that is happening (either in the ripping to PCM WAV or the encoding to mp3), that is where you are actually reducing the quality of your music. You always want to encode at the same sample rate as your source. You gain absolutely nothing by going from 44.1KHz to 48KHz and are only reducing quality further by trying to upsample (which you can't accurately do without the source digital tapes). It isn't about going from 128kbps to 320kbps but rather 44.1KHz to 48KHz.

[mj_355]

I think im gonna just stick with my nano 16g. If I get more songs ill just lower the quality. Thanks for all your input and ideas.