android
  #1  
Old 10-31-2012, 07:28 AM
ninogui ninogui is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 22
Default clip+ or zip wav battery life ?

Hi guys

Im still deciding on buying a clip+ or zip to rockbox (based only on battery life)
as a second mp3 player, I do have the first e200v1 and a sony A-866 which is my main player
Could also get an older fuze but I really dislike the sensitive scroll wheel of the e200 (fuze should be similar?)

However a deciding factor is I only play wav files, no mp3

I tried searching but I could not find any day to day use or benchmark for playing wav files, only mp3 and flac

So on this scenario what should I expect on either of these regarding battery life ?

thks in advance
Reply With Quote

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

  #2  
Old 10-31-2012, 07:34 AM
Marvin the Martian's Avatar
Marvin the Martian Marvin the Martian is offline
Ultra Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: east central NY state
Posts: 10,602
Default

Nobody here uses .wav on their Sansa...it doesn't make any sense to do so. If you must have lossless, use FLAC, not .wav.
__________________
iPod Touch 5G 32GB, Touch 4G 32GB, Clip Sport 8GB. Rockbox-> Clip Zip 4GB, iPod Nano 2G 4GB, iPod 5.5G 80GB
2012 Nexus 7 32GB, Asus MeMoPad 8 16+64GB, LG Optimus G Pro, Nokia Lumia 900 and Lumia 520
Reply With Quote

  #3  
Old 10-31-2012, 07:59 AM
ninogui ninogui is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 22
Default

thks for the answer marvin

I plan on using a 32gb microsdhc class 6 which is now at about 24 euros

To use wav will not be a problem regarding space, so again my question remains regarding battery life on using flac vs wav ?

and battery life on rockboxed clip+ vs zip ?
Reply With Quote

  #4  
Old 10-31-2012, 08:34 AM
skip252 skip252 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,355
Default

If no one else has done the testing, no one can tell you for sure what the battery life would be. That would be the same for both the sandisk firmware and Rockbox. People don't tend to test for outlier situations like yours. Most people simply don't waste space on a portable device with a lossless codec. If they do, they usually use FLAC.

The audio information is exactly the same as a .wav file and FLAC files can be easily tagged. That makes them much more useful for most people.

Looking at both the Codec performance testing for Rockbox http://www.rockbox.org/wiki/CodecPer...5_40ARM922T_41 and the Sansa Runtime table http://www.rockbox.org/wiki/SansaRuntime I don't see any results for .wav.

Just guessing, I think that battery life may be good in Rockbox as .wav usually decodes quickly. That might be affected by frequent buffering due the enormous file sizes. saratoga would have a much better idea on that.

The only way to know that for certain would be to run a battery benchmark in Rockbox. If you decide to go ahead with using .wav files in Rockbox you can add your results to the runtime table.
Reply With Quote

  #5  
Old 10-31-2012, 08:37 AM
ninogui ninogui is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 22
Default

thks a lot

ok I will !

somehow also suspect battery life will be (even if marginally) better with wav

on a sidenote which would be the appropriate flac compression level to use ?
Reply With Quote

  #6  
Old 10-31-2012, 09:09 AM
skip252 skip252 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,355
Default

I use the default level of -5. My limited testing when I was ripping my library didn't show any significant space saving between that and the max -8. The lowest compression setting did raise the average file size enough where the quicker encoding and decoding times weren't worth the additional space they occupied. Remember all of that is on a PC so I'm not sure the effect on a portable player.

The good part is you can easily perform your own testing by encoding to various compression levels and seeing what works best for you. Unlike lossy to lossy transcoding, lossless to lossless encoding has no quality loss. If you encode your .wav files at any FLAC compression level and don't like the results you can re-encode to another level and the audio information will be exactly the same.

If you decide to go with FLAC you'll want to investigate Rockbox further. There are reliable report that FLAC using the sandisk firmware cuts battery life but as much as 50%. The same FLAC files played in Rockbox will give you an additional couple of hours battery life over a well encoded mp3 file.
Reply With Quote

  #7  
Old 10-31-2012, 09:23 AM
ninogui ninogui is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 22
Default

ok great thks for the info.

clip+ 4gb (brand new) are still available locally at about 40 euros
Reply With Quote

  #8  
Old 10-31-2012, 10:38 AM
skip252 skip252 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,355
Default

I think the Clip+ may be around for a while. There was a recent, unexpected, firmware update like the one when they made a minor change to the memory configuration on newer models. It didn't seem to add any changes to the UI. It seemed to be issued so all the hardware would be compatible with an available firmware.

There was also no new model released by sandisk this year. There was an update to their Facebook page that showed different colors of the Clip+ than what have been seen before. I'm guessing when you add it all together the Clip+ is the new model.
Reply With Quote

  #9  
Old 10-31-2012, 01:28 PM
ninogui ninogui is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 22
Default

lol that seems a logical assumption

anyway the so called pitch error (0.25%) when using original firmware was never corrected on the clip+ was it ?
Reply With Quote

  #10  
Old 10-31-2012, 01:43 PM
skip252 skip252 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,355
Default

Never tracked on that myself as I can't hear a pitch deviation that small. You can take a look here http://www.anythingbutipod.com/forum...ad.php?t=48208 and here http://www.anythingbutipod.com/forum...&postcount=745 to help you make your decision.
Reply With Quote

  #11  
Old 10-31-2012, 02:09 PM
ninogui ninogui is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 22
Default

great info thks!
Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:05 AM.