Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

I wonder if they didn't have DRM didn't have the mess of hardware DRM,ect to support and such if it would cost a 1oth of that....

---

Originally posted by KillerBug:

---

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

I wonder if they didn't have DRM didn't have the mess of hardware DRM,ect to support and such if it would cost a 1oth of that....

---

Probably...it must take a lot of server power to confirm a license every time someone listens to a single track.


...Just think how much ubisoft wastes on always-on DRM!

---

Originally posted by KillerBug:

---

with audio quality below that of some other units

---

Originally posted by Mez:

---

Originally posted by KillerBug:

---

with audio quality below that of some other units

---

What makes you say that? Most mp3s, even the chipods have great sound because it costs nothing to make a HiFi signal @ 100 miliwats or less. Apple does believe in LoFi ear buds. The STD mug-me whites are as LoFi as Chipod buds (the 20/$100 kind) and even their very expensive top of the line buds are still LoFi. Replace them with some 7 USD in the ear buds and you hear HiFi.

Well luckily Apple has never had to worry about their budget. Even though I hate their guts, I do own their stock. They know how to make money.

---

Originally posted by Mez:

---

Zippy the best I ever got were actually $7! I had bought the same model a few yrs back for $22. Most in-the-ears have remarkable fidelity. They use a very tiny ultra-powerful rare earth magnets. The physics of something that small with such a powerful magnet must produce amazing sound.

With in the ears it is not about quality, all are amazing, it is the how comfortable they are and the suppleness of the wire, ect. All very trivial things.

Then you have Apple, selling fancy looking but LoHi buds for a few hundred bucks. That is why they don't need to be worried about budgets.

---

Originally posted by Mez:

---

Well my friend, they would not be for me. They are light on the base compared with in the ears and ultra high impedance (32 Ohm). They should sound 1/4 as loud as an in the ear at 8 ohms for the same volume. In the ears can deliver sub woofer lows @ 8 Hz. I bet they deliver better base than most sub woofers.

---

Originally posted by Mez:

---

I just read the specs from your link. They are a bit different than what I saw on another site. Since your link is an official sight I will differ to yours. I actually never heard of any ear phone or speaker at 32 ohm. I should have guessed it was a misprint.

You are right about loudness 120+ db is right up with in the ear buds. 120 is the border between safe and not safe listening. 120 and above is where short intervals can damage your ears. All the in the ears are in the 120s. I guess I am not as smart as I thought. It is using half the power of an 8 ohm system and still getting the volume. However, 8 vs 19 Hz is not many Hz but is a big difference because it is very hard to get below 20 Hz. The power need to generate the sub sonics is considerable and is technically challenging. Maybe that is why they need to be 8 ohm. Below 20 you feel rather than hear the sound.

They look expensive. Too much for my wallet. I bet they don't pop out of your ears.

---

Originally posted by Mez:

---

That price isn't bad at all. I usually keep a nano with ear buds wrapped around them on my person all the time. You never know when you will be in a situation with nothing to do. With the buds, the package is tiny.

I might ask a kid to get me a pair for X-mass. My wife has heard in the ears are dangerous and my hearing is not all that good. I am old and I was exposed to very loud noises during my first job of ten yrs. Some days you would come home with ringing ears. That was before OSHA. I even remember the event that started it all. Someone put silver cyanide in an acid tank instead of a water tank. That event killed everyone in the factory with cyanide gas. My wife has threatened to smash my buds if she finds them out. Maybe she will be fooled that these are safer and I can listen to music in the house again.

---

Originally posted by willyguzz:

---

iTunes while updating iPods/iPhones makes it a no brainer overall.

---

Originally posted by Mez:

---

Originally posted by willyguzz:

---

iTunes while updating iPods/iPhones makes it a no brainer overall.

---

As apposed to what??? itunes 9 rated as least capable of all the popular audio management software. Even Windows Media Player handily beat itunes. Apple restricts what you can do in the hopes that Apple will make more revenue. itunes is good only if you would prefer few choices to more choices. There are people that don't care about much other than being easy. itunes is for them.

---

Originally posted by Mez:

---

Exactly, my friend! Out of the 20 apps that can sync an ipod, itunes takes the booby prize. If you can't think for yourself and do not like to make choices, itunes is perfect. Well WinAmp is actually at the top of the heap with Media Monkey. I have seen several audio manager reviews WP and MM are always above 95% in the ratings. The rest start near 50. itunes rings in at about 20% and is consistently by far the worst. WMP even kicks its ass and that is pure garbage. The two continue to duke it out for first place with the next contender not even in sight. For what I do Media Monkey is best but I tip my hat to WinAmp and I have 3 juke box apps on my computer. I also use Foobar for a particular job from time to time. With those 3 you have all the bases covered.

---