Alternative iPod Firmware - Rockbox

[MrCrowbar]

Playback with gaps is intentional. Missing gaps can be very annoying. Try to copy a fast faced album and remove the 2 seconds between the tracks. It's horrible. However live albums are meant to be gapless so you have one long stream divided into tracks like chapters in a DVD so you won't notice the switch (at least on good CD players).

Another thing with gapless playback it loud clicking noise when songs are changing. It's a shame, but many Audio CDs were not mastered correctly to have a zero crossing at the start and at the end of the track. An intentional gap allows to add a transition to 0 dB after the song ended.

If you really need gapless playback for a live album, you can set the ga for specific tracks in iTunes.

 

[bloodycape]

Man is cnet a little behind on their news. I saw this like a month ago posted all over the net.

 

[MrMickS]

So I can make my iPod like an iRiver. Wow, that's impressive.

Don't all of these things miss the point. Its the integration between iTunes and the iPod that makes it usable. Not just what you can do on the device.

 

[NicP]

Wow - time for Apple Legal to get on the ball with this thing before it causes ipod failures left and right....wait...if installing Rockbox voids the warrantee then GeniusBar would have to charge to fix it - upside: an influx in revenue from repairs. Downside: an influx in repairs. Something about this story rubbed me the wrong way.

by your logic installing linux or windows on a mac should void the warranty

 

[superleccy]

I used Rockbox a two-or-three years ago when I owned an Archos Jukebox (that was back in my Windows ME days). The Archos UI was terrible, and Rockbox was a huge improvement, once you worked out how the hell to use it.

It looks like Rockbox has since come along in leaps and bounds. But, no, I won't be putting it on my iPod, for "if it ain't broke don't fix it reasons". But, if I had a spare iPod and a whole load of time on my hands, I might have given it a go just out of curiosity.

Apple won't see this as a threat, but if the extra features keep them on their toes even tiny a bit, then that's a good thing.

Regds
Superleccy

 

[Gherkin]

I just bought Marvin Gaye's "What's Going On." I demand gapless playback. Why doesn't Apple just offer it as an option at least?

 

[Gerwin]

If you buy the cd instead of itms, there is an option in itunes to encode the whole cd as one track. I do it regularly with opera's, because the tracks are unnatural. So if you want gapless, you have to plan ahead, not complain afterwards.

 

[Gherkin]

There's other music that flows together besides opera. And we'd like to split it up as well as have gapless playback. Not asking too much here. Just an option, so everyone can have their way.

 

[toughboy]

Or anyone who doesn't want their music collection tied up in a format controlled by the marketing whims of a single company. I put all my CDs in FLAC format because I really cannot say that in 10 years I'll still be using an OS that Apple supports with iTunes.

In 10 years, I really can't say if I'll be living or dead.. One thing I'm sure though is that there will be Apple and they will somehow show people ways to convert their music even if they wont be using Apple Loseless anymore..

 

[xUKHCx]

Man is cnet a little behind on their news. I saw this like a month ago posted all over the net.

i looked into installing this on my ipod about 5 months ago now, when they just started supporting the 4th gen, it was old news then.

 

[joost538]

So if you want gapless, you have to plan ahead, not complain afterwards.

That is rediculous. Apple is all about providing the ultimate user experience. On a Mac, you don't have to plan ahead or memorize stuff just to get some work done. It Just Works. If I rip a cd that was mastered without gaps, I expect that cd to be playable without gaps, without any planning ahead on my part.

 

[(L)]

SO what? This is totally useless garbage, and of little use to anyone. It only gets interesting if there's something out there that becomes a viable alternative and can therefore pressure Apple into incorporating similar features etc, done right. Doing something minor poorly just doesn't go anywhere. More like a hobby; nothing for others to see.

 

[sunfast]

With the excpetion of gapless playback, this is of no real interest to me. I wish Apple would just sort out gapless playback though!

 

[shalghamz]

by your logic installing linux or windows on a mac should void the warranty

You're right...no wait; you're wrong.
Going by your logic then Apple would be the new troubleshooter for Windows and Linux. Likewise Apple can't [and won't] be liable for the problems "RockBox" can foreseeably bring about for your iPod.
So you see it OBVIOUSLY at least has the potential to void the warranty on some level.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Those themes are waay cool! Maybe Apple should take a page out of rockbox's book and give us some themes...

 

[steve_hill4]

I like some of the ideas this brings, but I won't be recommending it to anyone.

 

[Evangelion]

This would be interesting to me as i do not buy music from itunes but even then, what if the software hoses my ipod? would i be able to restore the original ipod operating system?

Yes you could.

What's so great about OGG and FLAC?

Both are royalty- and patent-free and open-source (unlike mp3 for example). FLAC is lossless, whereas Ogg is lossy. Most people think that Ogg has superior sound-quality when compared to mp3's.

I hope there isn't any Linux users on this forum... if so, you are about to get your answer...

I'm a Linux-user, and I don't think there was anything wrong with my reply

 

[ccunning]

... and don't want to bother burning/ripping the songs and dealing with associated loss (since someone is bound to point that out)...

These comments always crack me up. If you really cared about sound quality you wouldn't be buying your music in a lossy format to begin with. I'd venture to say if you can't hear the difference between CDDA-->AAC, then you're not likely going to hear the difference between AAC-->MP3

 

[Evangelion]

So I can make my iPod like an iRiver. Wow, that's impressive.

Don't all of these things miss the point. Its the integration between iTunes and the iPod that makes it usable. Not just what you can do on the device.

I find my iPod to be a wonderful piece of equipment and it works flawlessly, and I don't use itunes with it.

 

[p0intblank]

Gapless playback... !

 

[j-a-x]

Sounds interesting, but I don't think I'm ready to give up my default iPod firmware just yet...

 

[glowingstar]

mmmmm.....

gapless playback.......and crossfades......! been waiting for that since day one.

 

[Keebler]

i used to use this

on my previous archos player.

it's not as slick looking as the ipod software, but definitely functional. perhaps their new version has some new features, but i found the ipod had more features after i made the switch a few years ago.

the software was rock solid...didn't crash...worked well.

i could never see not using the ipod software? it seems to do almost everything??

 

[jzeiders]

Yea - more options are only a good thing -

 

[Shintocam]

These comments always crack me up. If you really cared about sound quality you wouldn't be buying your music in a lossy format to begin with. I'd venture to say if you can't hear the difference between CDDA-->AAC, then you're not likely going to hear the difference between AAC-->MP3

And replies like this crack ME up. Yes I can hear the difference between CDDA and AAC but the difference is tolerable for the most part (although I really wish Apple would move to 192 rather than 128bit for iTunes).

The problem is the second part of your reply. You are not converting from a clean CD anymore you are converting from an already lossy format into another lossy format, and I tell you something I can most definately notice this difference and it is not tolerable.

Your logic is not fully thought out. Take a TIFF image and convert it to JPG. You will notice some quality loss - particularly if you zoom in, but if it is the first conversion it is probably tolerable. Now convert that image back and forth between PNG and JPG for a bit and you will see the quality degrade dramatically overtime.

Creating an AAC from a raw CD is one thing. Then taking that modified file and converting it again is another.

EDIT: It has been pointed out to me that I was mistaken that conversion from AAC to CD causes quality loss (thanks Yvan256). Also I mistakenly said RIP to CD and meant Burn. Anyhow the post above has been corrected.