Nano 1g runs unstable after multiple successful installations

[spaceviking]

Hello together!

Here my issue: i use an ipod nano 1g, made back in 2005, according to info on the device's back.

After normal rockbox installation (current release, automatic install)  i reboot the ipod and rockbox start screen with yellow logo comes up. Then, a couple of minutes later it says: ".rockbox directory missing, installation incomplete" - but this directory IS THERE!

After that, rockbox menu pops up (sometimes!) and sometimes i'm able to enter files directory, simetimes the UI lags and sometimes it freezes. I managed to get rockbox to run once, but WavPack playback was laggy and stalled all the time.

One time i tried to build the DB in order to use songs loaded by iTunes. After successful build I was asked to reboot - after reboot it froze again.

I tried installing rockbox with a different ipod nano 1g - same issues there. So - is it true, that rockbox runs stable on ipod nano 1g? In my case it's unusable.
 
What could be a solution to the problem? Google delievers no answers at all.

[[Saint]]

spaceviking,

So - is it true, that rockbox runs stable on ipod nano 1g?

I can assure you that the current build (I am using r27834 currently, on several Nano1Gs) is perfectly usable for me.

I would suggest you do a complete uninstall, by deleting the entire .rockbox folder from the root of the player, and then try again with a fresh installation.

For the sake of testing (in an attempt to verify your issues), I installed the release version 3.6 on two separate devices (both Nano1Gs) and it was running fine.

My recommendation is to use the daily builds, and not the release builds. There's nothing *wrong* with the release build...it is just quite outdated now compared to current SVN, and for a mature port such as the Nano1G the daily builds are regarded as very stable.

Also: Another thought...how old is your bootloader? It may pay to update your bootloader when you do the complete un-install/reinstall (simply for the sake of keeping things current).

Please check back here and let me/others know how you're getting on, and don't hesitate to ask for further instruction if you need to.

All I can really say at this point is  that the current daily SVN build is running perfectly fine on all my Nano1Gs, and the release build 3.6 ran fine on the two Nano1Gs I tested on trying to duplicate your issues.



[St.]

^{PS: Remember to back up your config.cfg if you want to keep your settings!}

[spaceviking]

>I would suggest you do a complete uninstall, by deleting the entire .rockbox folder from the root of the player, and then try again with a fresh >installation.
>
>My recommendation is to use the daily builds, and not the release builds. There's nothing *wrong* with the release build...it is just quite outdated
>now compared to current SVN, and for a mature port such as the Nano1G the daily builds are regarded as very stable.

Sure, I'll give the daily build a try tonight.


>Also: Another thought...how old is your bootloader? It may pay to update your bootloader when you do the complete un-install/reinstall (simply for the sake
>of keeping things current).

I really do not know how old my bootloader is - I install it by running the downloaded release 3.6 - so I suppose it is the latest one.


>Please check back here and let me/others know how you're getting on, and don't hesitate to ask for further instruction if you need to.

Thank You so much for your help!

[spaceviking]

Now, I tried to install the current release from SVN and it runs just fine for MP3. Thank You for your help!

Still - when fed e.g. with WavPack 24/192, the nano still produces sound lags and dropouts during playback. I assume, it is the weak CPU.

[Multiplex]

Still - when fed e.g. with WavPack 24/192, the nano still produces sound lags and dropouts during playback. I assume, it is the weak CPU.

Rockbox only plays 44kHz 16bit - you are wasting the CPU decoding it then down-sampling it to play back. There is a page in the Wiki that gives the performance of various codecs on various players (but I'm not sure it covers WavPack in 24 bit 192kHz)

[soap]

Man, I wish I had your hearing!
I'm lucky to hear 17 kHz in sine sweeps, 15 kHz in real music.

To hear 96 kHz!  Dang that's impressive.

[spaceviking]

96 kHz stands for DAC sampling rate, not the maximal possible tone frequency.

Or was it irony?

[torne]

You referred to 192KHz sampling, which is only needed if you want to reproduce frequencies up to 96KHz (see Shannon). If you disagree with this mathematical result then yes, we are making a joke

[spaceviking]

I happen to have heard about Shannon I develop frequency filters for a german HiFi company. And no - I'm not a audiophile freak

Still - DVD-A and SACD often present music in 24/96 - and I just wanted to listen to this in the train to work. Seems to be a little bit too much expectation.

Thanks for your help.

[torne]

We get a lot of people coming around who think that you actually need to have audio at that rate for it to be better quality, which is why we joke

The solution to your problem is, indeed, don't encode your audio at that rate, the CPU can't really keep up (especially since it just has to downsample it for output anyway).