Cool MP3?

Jodun

Hi

Not sure if this is the right place to post this, but...

I've got twins approaching their 13th birthday and I wanted to get them MP3's. I'd been thinking of mini ipods, but at about £130 each that's a bit pricey for me. Can anyone suggest a cheaper alternative that will still be cool at school?! (And what's an ipod shuffle? Can you only download your cd's onto that?)

Thanks for any suggestions.

alison74

Someone will come on and give you the full low down on MP3s, I am not an expert.

But in the meantime, an Ipod shuffle is just really a small version of the ipod (in both size and amount of memory space)

Depends on which one you go for, but the 512mb Ipod shuffle will allow your twins to have up to 120 songs on it to listen to at any one time and they are about £70.

If you have a computer, they could download and change their songs every day and this would only take minutes.

Obviously, the more memory you go for, the more songs you can have, but then you can only listen to 1 at a time !

Hope this helps you in the meantime, before the experts on MP3s post

wolfman

The Shuffle is a pretty good mp3 player, I got my 1gb version for £70 (after selling my 20gb Photo iPod). It does lack a screen, but for me is a different way of listening to music.

For a 13 year old, a regular, or even mini iPod is a bit overkill. I'd go for a Shuffle. Or if you'd like something similar to the Shuffle but with a screen, look up the Creative Muvo TX, or Muvo N200, or Muvo V200. They're all very small, and look "cool". The Muvo TX is currently well priced on Amazon, the Muvo V200 would be my choice of the three Creative models although is a bit more expensive.

I was actually going to get a Muvo V200, but opted for the Shuffle as I could get it at a good price (look around on eBay), and it's very small/light.

1gb is generally a good size to go for, but with budget in mind maybe 512mb. I wouldn't go lower than that though.

Donnie

Better than that is the Philips Key 015; http://www.consumer.philips.com/consumer/catalog/product.jsp?language=en&country=GB&catalogType=CONSUMER&productId=KEY015_00_GB_CONSUMER
Available for £59.99 at Dixons/Currys

One of the very few mp3 players to have a remote control. It's small and has a nice LCD screen. So you can play in songs in any order, unlike the Shuffle.
Not only does it have the built in rechargeable battery, you also get a free add on battery pack.
Looks good too.

-TangleFoot-

A decent-looking site I've recently come across is Anything But iPod. There are quite a few cool-looking gadgets listed there.

T'was this little gem that caught my eye though: the MobiBLU DAH-1500 Cube. It's absolutely tiny, and weighs practically nothing. The top-of-the-line model does however cost just as much as the iPod Mini. Pity.

wolfman

Donnie wrote:

Better than that is the Philips Key 015; http://www.consumer.philips.com/consumer/catalog/product.jsp?language=en&country=GB&catalogType=CONSUMER&productId=KEY015_00_GB_CONSUMER
Available for £59.99 at Dixons/Currys

One of the very few mp3 players to have a remote control. It's small and has a nice LCD screen. So you can play in songs in any order, unlike the Shuffle.
Not only does it have the built in rechargeable battery, you also get a free add on battery pack.
Looks good too.

I've read bad things about that player, although it does have a good price tag. Tom's Hardware especially don't rate it too highly. From what I've read it only has a battery life of 5 1/2 hours, and the screen is purely for display, you still have to listen to tracks sequentially just like on a Shuffle. Also, in my opinion a remote on something that size really isn't necessary. In fact you can't control it without the remote (no buttons on it) so it kind of leaves you in a tricky situation if you don't want to use the remote.

Something like the Creative Muvo V200 is one of the few static (memory) based mp3 players that will let you browse music, as opposed to listening to it sequentially like on the Shuffle or Philips players.

Donnie

wolfman wrote:

I've read bad things about that player, although it does have a good price tag. Tom's Hardware especially don't rate it too highly. From what I've read it only has a battery life of 5 1/2 hours, and the screen is purely for display, you still have to listen to tracks sequentially just like on a Shuffle. Also, in my opinion a remote on something that size really isn't necessary. In fact you can't control it without the remote (no buttons on it) so it kind of leaves you in a tricky situation if you don't want to use the remote.

Something like the Creative Muvo V200 is one of the few static (memory) based mp3 players that will let you browse music, as opposed to listening to it sequentially like on the Shuffle or Philips players.

That shows that you shouldn't believe everything that you read.

My girlfriend has this model.
As I have written before, you CAN play the tracks in ANY sequence that you wish. Within folders too.
If you take the time to look at the link supplied....
There is also a 'SuperSkip' function. (Hold your 'cursor' over the links in the features page for more details.

As to the remote, you may prefer to deal with tiny fiddly buttons on a tiny player. I wouldn't.
It's small and well designed.
I can't really think of a circumstance when I would prefer not to use the remote control, especially when it's on the same lead as the headphones.

As to the battery life, six hours continuous hours is not bad, plus it comes with a free battery pack(Takes a standard/alkaline AAA battery) which extends play time by 7 hours. Looks good too.

Of course you are wrong about the display too. not only can you see which tracks you are listening to, (in quite a cool way. The artist and song details scroll from right to left as you are listening. When you select a new track, it appears to come from underneath the player and then starts scrolling right to left) but you can browse through folders.
The headphones supplied are good quality as is the sound.

Remember that this player sold for £119.99. At that price it may not have been so attractive.
At £59.99 is the best.


So, not only is it one of the few 'static' players that lets you browse music. It also has a bluelight two line LCD display and comes with a remote control and a free battery pack.

So, far she's VERY happy with it.
I also bought the cheaper 128MB version for her sister for £20. http://www.consumer.philips.com/consumer/catalog/product.jsp?language=en&country=GB&catalogType=CONSUMER&productId=KEY011_00_GB_CONSUMER
They are both very happy with them and use them almost non stop.

wolfman

Donnie wrote:

That shows that you shouldn't believe everything that you read.

I was only going on a few trusted sources. Tom's Hardware is a very respectable site. I doubt they got it wrong, possibly an older model.

Donnie wrote:

As to the remote, you may prefer to deal with tiny fiddly buttons on a tiny player. I wouldn't.

The buttons on the remote are probably no bigger than the ones on my Shuffle, so they aren't exactly "tiny fiddly". I just believe that with a player of that size a remote isn't really necessary. It's just adding something else to be carried around.

Donnie wrote:

As to the battery life, six hours continuous hours is not bad, plus it comes with a free battery pack(Takes a standard/alkaline AA battery) which extends play time by 7 hours.

Well to be honest six hours isn't that great at all, given most players such as the Creative Muvo range will last for 15-20 hours. Even my Shuffle lasts for 12 hours and I'm no fan of the battery life of Apple products. The added battery addon is a useful accessory though but I'd imagine adds to the size of the product.

Donnie wrote:

Of course you are wrong about the display too. not only can you see which tracks you are listening to, (in quite a cool way. The artist and song details scroll from right to left as you are listening. When you select a new track, it appears to come from underneath the player and then starts scrolling right to left) but you can browse through folders.

Sounds lovely. Guess I was wrong, or at least Tom's Hardware were. There's only so much you can display on a screen that size though. I looked at the Muvo range, and did like the screen, but found it quite restrictive due to its size.

It's a nice player, it's main point is the great price. I'd still be tempted by a Creative Muvo V200 though. Or maybe a Shuffle, but I only got my Shuffle because it was £68 for the 1gb version. Also another negative towards the Philips is that it's only USB v1.1. Just means transferring tracks takes that little bit longer.

Donnie

Without labouring the point... The Creatives are just plainly ugly, need an extra battery to make them work and the display looks like just the one line.

With the Philips you don't have to carry the remote around, it's attached to the headphones. The buttons are well spaced.

Obviously, your 'trusted source' Tom's hardware were wrong about the Philips.
Maybe you should try something before you express such strong opinions about it?

The negative you mention, USB 1.1 means that the average mp3 CD will load in around 5 secs. Hardly stressful.

The 'Creative' that you mention needs a battery anyway, which is why you can have a life of 15 hours. With a battery the Philips has 13 hours use.

I actually believe that the smaller the player the more necessary a remote control.
Faffing about on a player with little or no screen and tiny buttons doesn't sound user friendly to me.

You can read all the specification sheets that you want. The Philips is a more fun and better featured than all others at the price band. I've no doubt what a 13 year old would prefer. A Shuffle for the brand name. The Philips once they know what it can do.
Creative? No way Jose. That's for nerds.

wolfman

The Creatives are hardly ugly. Have a look at:
http://www.creative.com/products/product.asp?category=213&subcategory=215&product=10732

My point about the remote with the Philips, was that I thought in order to function the device you had to have the remote as the unit itself doesn't have any controls. The Shuffle is designed much like a remote control, so there isn't the need for one.

I've actually looked at the Philips all be it for a few minutes in a shop. I always like to see them in my hands before buying online. The only reason I use sources like Tom's Hardware are because they've tested it for a number of days, so have a more in depth view of things. Before buying my Shuffle I did look around, including the Philips, but found there are better mp3 players although they are more expensive (iRiver iFP795, Cowon iAudio U2, and the Creative Muvo N200 and V200)

The point about the battery is that the Creative only needs one. Two batteries on a unit is just adding to the size. I'm sure if the Creative had two batteries it would last beyond 25 hours.

If you think a remote is really necessary, then I doubt you've picked up a Shuffle or even a Creative Muvo. Go to a shop and look. I can control my Shuffle in my pocket instinctively without having to look at what I'm pressing. You can't beat Apple in terms of useability when it comes to buttons/click wheels etc...

And USB 1.1 isn't quite that quick. USB 1.1 is around 12MBits a second (USB 2 is 480Mbits a second, around 40x faster), which is about 1.5mb a second maximum, but you never get that. It'd take around 1 minute, to transfer a 50mb album. Not a huge deal, but most manufacturers offer USB 2 as standard.

I'm not saying the Philips is a bad product. There are a few questionable design flaws, much like with the Shuffle. I think the main quality of the Philips is its price, as in terms of battery life, size, transfer speed, useability (I wouldn't like a remote) it's often out performed. For me, personally, size and battery life are two key features of such a player. If I wanted something bigger then a mini iPod (or similar) would be the way to go. Otherwise the Creative Muvo V200 would be my recommendation, as much as I like my Shuffle.

Donnie

Hmmm.. of course there are 'better' players.. but not at this price.

"The point about the battery is that the Creative only needs one. Two batteries on a unit is just adding to the size. I'm sure if the Creative had two batteries it would last beyond 25 hours."

It doesn't, so what's the point of that? You have to place a battery(AAA)inside the Creative to get it to work. Do the same with the Philips and you get similar playback times. The Philips with it's built in rechargeable battery is lighter than the Creative before you even put a battery in. So the Philips will ALWAYS be lighter than the Creative even when you use the battery pack.
Size? It's certainly lighter(and cheaper) than the Creative. Useability? The Shuffle is certainly no great shakes there. The Philips is far more versatile.

"I can control my Shuffle in my pocket instinctively without having to look at what I'm pressing."

I can imagine what people might think you were doing, shuffling through tracks with your hand in your trouser pocket. Doesn't sound convenient to me.

A remote control hanging from the headphone cord coupled with a clear LCD display will almost always be preferable to a player which not only doesn't allow you to see which folder you are in. Not only that, it doesn't even allow you to play them in the order of your choosing.(iPod Shuffle)
It's nonsense. Style over substance.

Of course you conveniently overlook these 'design flaws'.

Regardless, the Creative Muvo V200 doesn't look a bad player for £70. (-; If I wanted FM radio and recording, I would certainly consider it.

Personally, I make do with my Philips KEY011 with a mere 128MB(3 CDs recorded at 128kbps on WMA) Unbeatable at £20 with the same features as the more expensive model.

It will interesting to hear what was chosen for the 13 year olds in the end.










The