MicroSD Card & Sansa Clip Questions
 

So, im curious as to how the clipzip (or clip+/fuzev2) handles microsd cards etc.
Can this one http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...=ATVPDKIKX0DER for example be used successfully in the clipzip? What are the advantages of the different classes? What should we look for in a microsd scard for the clips?

Basically i'd like a sticky thread on what to consider when buying memory for mp3 players, what to expect from certain cards etc.

Anything like this exist already?

Yes a 64GB card will work if you format it to FAT32. fat32format is the format software that most have used successfully.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_...d_Class_Rating

Edit: BTW that's a great price for a SanDisk Ultra microSDXC UHS-I Card (64 GB) and SD adapter

so in terms of putting a 64gb sd card in a sansaclip (a non video playing/recording device) will class 2 do fine? Will it be faster database refreshes etc if u buy a higher class, or (and i think im recalling a previous conversation here) isnt the refresh speed nothing to do with sd card and just sansa internal parts doing the best they can irrespective of card type?

Has anyone got a 64gb (pretty close to being full) in their sansaclips what's the experience like?

Yes, it will work fine. As the link stated, the SD Association defines standard speed classes indicating minimum performance to record video and transfer speed.

The latter of your statement is correct, class will not help you in db refresh but rockbox will :)

I haven’t yet but wouldn’t even consider it without running rockbox, although the price on the link you posted is mighty tempting for me to get one. That said I run a 32GB on my Clip Zip and it works great with rockbox …

Edit: I edited your title for it to better reflect your thread and it's easier for members to search, if you feel you have a better title feel free to change it again

Yeh np, i always struggle with titles lol.
I didn't realise 64gb cards are getting THAT cheap. Surely this elevates the clips to being a pretty AWESUM device, i mean 70gb of space on a device THAT small with THAT SQ!
Your move apple!

The SanDisk 64 GB microSD cards have been as low as $50 recently. Here @Amazon for $55.

http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Mobile.../dp/B005LFT40G

Note that a higher class card will be faster for file transfers if you are putting the card in a separate card reader/directly into your computer. And seconded that with a 64GB card, you really need to be using Rockbox on your player, given the Clip's current file number limitations as well as database refresh issues.

If using .mp3 or other lossy files, certainly. But using .flac files, I doubt you'd hit the ceiling with the OF. My 8 gig Clip+ and 32GB card, which are both full of .flac only files only have a total of approx. 1300 tracks. Adding another 32GB of space is only going to allow another 1,000 tracks (more or less), far below the OF's database limitation of 8,000 or even 4500 or 5,000 that some people have had experience with.

As far as as the database refresh time yes, it will be a few minutes longer but that only happens when adding/deleting files from the card or internal memory, not every time you turn the player on (like the old e200v1's). So while a 15 minute or so refresh sounds extreme. it's really not that bad of a "real-world" inconvenience. Go brew a pot of coffee, take a shower, surf the 'net or TV for awhile, make a sandwich, check your e-mail or even call your kids/parent and see how they're doing. You don't just have to sit there waiting for the refresh to complete. ;)

Considering that most realize FLAC on a DAP is a useless waste of space...

To each his own. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion.

So now that we have covered the sd card part lets discuss 'Flac or not too Flac!'
I listen to mp3's, 320kbps most of the time, would i really hear a noticeable difference going to FLAC, when i use a rockbox sansaclipzip paired with Ultimate Ears Super fi 5 IEMs?

http://anythingbutipod.com/forum/showthread.php?t=68675

http://smileys.on-my-web.com/reposit...popcorn-03.gif

^^ lol this guy.

FLAC vs. MP3 is such a hotly debated topic that the popcorn dude was a necessity...lol.

Probably not, but you should test things for yourself. And if you're going to test things you should consider going in the opposite direction for the advantages that smaller files give you in greater storage capacity. Start by switching to VBR and begin at -V0 and work downward.

I'd be very surprised if you can tell any difference at LAME -V2, which (assuming an average of about 190 kbps across all files) would let you store 68% more music in the same space vs using CBR 320. All of a sudden your 64 GB card is a 107 GB card.

It is such a hotly debated topic like a flat earth is such a hotly debated topic.
It is such a hotly debated topic like slavery is such a hotly debated topic.
It is such a hotly debated topic like the sun orbits the earth is such a hotly debated topic.
It is such a hotly debated topic like intelligent design is such a hotly debated topic.

You have misinterpreted my statement, I think. My saying "hotly debated" refers to the fact that the lossy vs. lossless discussion often gets heated, often going beyond the limits of civility, both here and in other forums.

Fact is, I am firmly on the side of leaving the FLACs on the hard drive, as an archive....I use lossy for 99% of all my listening.

As far as your examples above, they have all been "hotly debated" at one time or another, and in fact the intelligent design premise, as ludicrous as it is, still has many proponents out there....so that debate rages on, even in the halls of government. :cool:

I doubt most can on portable gear regardless of what others have said or written here, but only you can tell for sure. That thread that Marvin linked you to is a good way for you to determine which is the best audio format for you, so I quoted him below.

Hmmm, seems we've had this discussion before BB. I'm guessing you haven't had a chance to follow up. I really would. Once you establish what YOU can hear you'll never have to consider anyone's "opinion" again. It's fairly simple to establish what you can or can't hear and then encode to the settings that are best for you.

I would definitely explore this if you're looking to maximize storage space without losing audible quality. What he describes was exactly my experience. Once I stopped encoding at quality levels above what I could actually hear and switched to VBR quality settings instead of CBR bitrate settings my effective storage jumped by ~30% without spending a penny.:D

Yeh yer right, i didn't follow up, and really should. Right now i treat my portable gear as containing 'the best of' my music collection and i struggle to get past 16gb when i am picking just one or two songs off an album i really like etc. But if i recode as mentioned above, buy a 64gb stick, I could feasibly put all my music on a sansaclip lol.

So basically do the foobar test thingy majig, then if i have albums at 320kbps recode to lesser (for whatever that is for my ears) = smaller size. But of course if I have 160kbps tunes, i can't turn it into 192kbps, it is only possible to downgrade, in those situations i would have to redownload the album at a higher bitrate right?