Having a hard time picking between iAUDIO or iRiver?

[Fennec]

iRiver vs iAUDIO


I?ve checked out every decent sports oriented flash player from the Rio S35S, Creative MuVo2 X-Trainer, RCA Lyra RD1071, and the Nike ACT21017. Finally narrowing my search between the iRiver iFP-395T and the iAUDIO CW300 512MB as these two players are seemingly the best flash MP3 players available that meet my needs at the time of this writing.

Hard drive based players and Minidisc players were out of the question, as they are not gym friendly. They have a potential to skip, and are more bulky then flash MP3 players. (Although i've never heard anyone complain that their Minidisc player skipped on them - it is possible however since it does have moving components.)

What's surprising is that no one on the web has taken the time to do a comparison write up on these two
stunning players.

My review.

I own neither of these players, though with extensive MP3 research, I thought it would be nice to offer some feedback in hopes of helping a confused consumer pick out a player that works best for him or her. I will discuss what I deem to be ? the more important parts of the player that helped me pick between the two. There was obviously a lot more that I could have written about ? such as a Mic comparison, FM capabilities. Etc. I left out the features that I deemed unimportant to myself, and I?m sure whatever I left out would be deemed unimportant or least important to the majority of the people who buy these players. However, I am a pretty picky consumer, so beware.


iFP-395T vs CW300 512MB

Weight w/o battery: 35 Grams (Winner) 42 Grams

Battery Life: 24H 30H (Winner)

Transfer Rate: 6.4Mbps (Winner) 6Mbps

S/N Ratio: 90dB 95dB (Winner)


IRiver Pro?s and Con?s

Pro: Plays WMA in addition to MP3 music files.
Pro: Transfers .4Mbps faster
Con: 6 hours Less battery life.
Con: No belt clip offered.
Con: No optional remote.

IAUDIO?s Pro?s and Con?s

Pro: 6 more hours of battery life
Pro: Comes with a belt Clip
Pro: Optional remote control
Con: 7 grams heavier.
Con: Only plays MP3 Files
Con: Slower transfer rate by .4Mbps


My conclusion: The iRiver can play WMA files in addition to MP3 files. Who really cares? I don't know anyone that has a collection of WMA files. MP3 files are a higher quality format then WMA. If i'm paying this much money for an MP3 player you better believe the damn thing should be playing top notch tune quality. So therefore I can live without the player compatibility of the WMA format.

If the figures are correct, the iAUDIO packs 6 more hours into it's battery life. That's pretty huge. I usually spend roughly 2 hours at the gym every time I go. So that's an extra 3 visits I can make without recharging or replacing the batteries.

While not much of a con, the Iriver doesn't come with a belt clip. Granted you could probably buy one else where or make one for cheap enough, (I didn't see an option to buy one on their website.) but I like the fact that iAUDIO took care of that concern and included it with the player. When working out at the gym or going for a run, it's all preference in regards to how you want to hold the player. Having 1 more option available is always a good thing - I may very well enjoy and prefer clipping the player onto my belt or pants rather then strapping it to my arm or wearing it as a necklace as I go for a jog or workout.

Now I am not aware of any optional remote control for the iRiver but I could not find any such device on their website for this product (whether you can purchase a remote for the product remains to be seen) whereas iAUDIO gives you the option of purchasing a remote with your player. That's a big deal to me. Lets say I don't like strapping the player to my arm (find it uncomfortable for whatever reason(s) or wearing it around my neck as I jog - I don't think I want a digital device that is this expensive - bouncing back and forth against my chest as I jog/run for 45 minutes solid. It may be alright for walking around with but I hardly doubt it?s ideal for jogging/running with the player like that. That leaves me with the belt clip to attach the device to my body, and i'm positive a remote control would come in very handy - sure after a while i'll bet you could reach down to your side without even looking at the player and press the right combination of buttons, but with a remote I have the option of clipping it onto my shirt or holding it in my hand without having to look down as I jog.
I'll pay an extra $12 for that! Also if I decide to throw the player in my pocket it saves me from having to fish it out every time I want to change a track, adjust the volume, etc.

The iAUDIO player happens to be 7 grams heavier then it?s opponent. Woopie do? I can live with that, and justify my response in saying that the iAUDIO player not only looks more sleek and sexy, but it appears to be on a different level of craftsmanship. Aluminium casing for the most part, and while the iRiver player may be bundled up in a highly durable plastic - it's still... plastic. Plastic looks cheap, and feels cheap. When i'm laying out this kinda dough on a player you better believe it should not only look great, but feel sleek and sexy to the touch.

The iAUDIO happens to be .4Mbps slower then the iRiver if iRiver?s calculations are correct. Would you really notice this? Maybe, maybe not. But if it means that I wait around for another minute or so for my music to transfer over, i'm sure I can handle that.

The dB S/N ratio of the iAUDIO is 5 up on the iRiver product. If you're a true Audiophile - that should matter to you, and once again if you're paying this much cash for a portable player - why not get the best bang for your buck. It's a music player. Music was meant to be played loud, and played clear.
'nuff said.

My only question:

What MP3 device plays louder? I looked around but couldn't find accurate information on this. If anyone knows I would appreciate a response. If any of the info I have written about for either of these products is incorrect I would also appreciate and hope for any corrections necessary. What was written about is most likely common knowledge to iRiver or iAUDIO users. However, once again this information was intended for someone of limited MP3 knowledge to help whoever has an interest - decide for themselves what player they should best go with.

My verdict: iAUDIO CW300 wins!

[thek]

Originally Posted by Fennec

My only question:

What MP3 device plays louder?

Well, check the "Which plays louder - iRiver or iAudio" thread. ;-)

[inspix]

Originally Posted by thek

Well, check the "Which plays louder - iRiver or iAudio" thread. ;-)

I just bought the iAudio CW300. The main reason is because iAudio supposedly has a better voice recording ability than iRiver.
Well, the voice recording function was indeed quite good. It was able to pick up sounds quite loudly. You can adjust the mic sensitivity to 2 levels as well as set the recording quality to 2 levels. The voice-acutated function can also be set to 5 levels. Very well-designed overall for this voice recording function.

However, sound quality was a bit dissapointing. While the bass is very good, the mids, however, tend to be overwhelming, causing the sound to be 'muddy'. If I try setting the treble at the highest level, in some earphones, it becomes very shrilling I think iAudio team should make some EQ adjustment for the mids.

I was also quite dissapointed with the firmware. It seems iAudio can't add any new features, except to refine the existing features. Compare that to those of iRiver, the difference is apparent. In any case, iRiver's features are already more than iAudio.

Sigh, if only iRiver had a good voice recording function, I definitely would have bought it. For those who are not particularly concerned about the voice recording, they should get iRiver.