iPod 5.5g, V3.8 - First impressions - is

[iVinyl]

This is the first time I have used Rockbox, an admirable idea to see what can be done with existing hardware.

There is a bug I believe. With OSX, the ipod does not reappear - and yes, I set the HID option to no. It appears in XP running in bootcamp. I loaded some AAC and FLAC tracks and had a play. I had some issues with large hesitations and had several freezes, which required a reboot, but I went with it because I was interested in how it sounded.

SQ:
This is where I need some guidance.  With flat EQ - is a Rockbox meant to sound better, that is FLAC on Rockbox'd ipod 5.5g vs ALE or AIFF on a regular ipod?  I don't have two identical ipods to compare ABAB but nothing was jumping out at me. It might be that compressed music sounds better only? I really could do with some feedback on this one.

If the general response is there is uncompressed music is not compromised by the Apple OS, then I'm inclined to contribute to the cause and return to the original OS.

[[Saint]]

"Better" is far too subjective and personal a thing to judge in most cases.

Better to me might be worse to you, and vice versa...just check out an audiophile forum if you doubt that

It's also not entirely fair to try and compare a format Rockbox *can* play with a format that the Apple OF can't...as you'll never get your answer to that so it could be endlessly debated.


[St.]

[Llorean]

Lossless music should never sound "better" in one OS or another (barring sound changing options like use of an equalizer) unless one of them has errors in playback somewhere and isn't doing it right, either by decompressing them wrong or by utilizing the hardware incorrectly.

[iVinyl]

"Better" is far too subjective and personal a thing to judge in most cases.

Better to me might be worse to you, and vice versa...just check out an audiophile forum if you doubt that

It's also not entirely fair to try and compare a format Rockbox *can* play with a format that the Apple OF can't...as you'll never get your answer to that so it could be endlessly debated.
[St.]

Completely understand, barring two things. These are both lossless codecs and Rockbox's purpose, if I understand it correctly, is to reproduce music at a higher quality level, so the question is not unfair.
The question is, should I expect a better audio quality, comparing lossless codecs, at Flat EQ, or are the gains only apparent with the better implementation of EQ's and crossfade in RB.

[soap]

"Better" is far too subjective and personal a thing to judge in most cases.

Better to me might be worse to you, and vice versa...just check out an audiophile forum if you doubt that

It's also not entirely fair to try and compare a format Rockbox *can* play with a format that the Apple OF can't...as you'll never get your answer to that so it could be endlessly debated.
[St.]

Completely understand, barring two things. These are both lossless codecs and Rockbox's purpose, if I understand it correctly, is to reproduce music at a higher quality level, so the question is not unfair.
The question is, should I expect a better audio quality, comparing lossless codecs, at

No, Rockbox's purpose is to be a kick-ass firmware with as much format and user-choice support as possible.

Accurate playback is a commodity today.  Most all MP3 players can accomplish it.  Where accurate playback is not accomplished by a modern MP3 player it is most always due to hardware, something Rockbox could not change.

[JdGordon]

Where accurate playback is not accomplished by a modern MP3 player it is most always due to hardware, something Rockbox could not change.

of course, in the case of the clip's we still do a better job of sucking-less than the OF