MP3 Insider

X-Series Walkman takes on the Samsung P3

Q: I am finally ready to cross that bridge and get me a touch-screen player. I wanted to know your expert opinion on the Samsung P3 and the Sony Walkman X-Series. I purchase all my music from Napster, Amazon and some from Rhapsody. I use Window Media Player 11, so I need a player that is compatible with that. Please let me know what you think. -- bensworld411, via e-mail

A: Although I've only used a preproduction sample of the X-Series Walkman, I can tell you that I favor it over the Samsung P3. Granted, the X-Series is quite a bit pricier, but I personally prefer the onscreen interface and touch-screen implementation (though the P3's is certainly flashy). I also straight-up love the fact that the Walkman has tactile buttons on the top for controlling playback (say, while you have the player in your pocket). Both devices will work equally well with the system you use for music, and both offer excellent sound quality.

Really, I would narrow it down to two things: price and whether you prefer Bluetooth or Wi-Fi. If you want a cheaper device that includes the ability to sync up Bluetooth headphones, go with the P3. If you want something with a slicker interface that has Wi-Fi and built-in Slacker capability (free music!), go with the Walkman. Better yet, if you can hold off a few more days, I'm expecting a retail unit of the X-Series to be delivered to my desk tomorrow, which means we'll have a full review up for you very soon.

Q: Recently I have been considering a new pair of headphones because I am getting quite tired of the standard Apple earphones that the iPods come with. I have three products in mind, and I am having trouble deciding which one is the best choice. They include the Bose QuietComfort 3, the Beats by Dr. Dre, and the Shure SE530. As you can tell, they aren't the cheapest ones out there, but price at this point really isn't an issue. Which one out of the three is the most comfortable, has the best audio quality, and is the most durable; again, price really isn't a factor. Thank you very much for your help. -- John, via e-mail.

A: Comfort is a very personal thing, especially when you are comparing such different styles of headphones--in this case, an in-ear canalphone, an on-ear (supra-aural) set, and a full-size (circumaural) pair. Personally, I think they all offer excellent sound quality, although my personal preference probably pushes the Shure to the top with the Bose very slightly under that and then the Monster Beats very slightly beneath those. In any case, you are going to get great audio quality, so narrowing it down will probably come to comfort.

The safest bets in terms of comfort are probably the on-ear style (Bose) and the full-size set (Beats), but here I would eliminate the Beats because I noticed a slight rattle in the right earcup (where the noise-cancellation module is) whenever I walked around with the headphones on. Although it's only a minor annoyance, this leads me to think that Monster needs to fine-tune the design of those headphones before they are a sure-fire winner. Also, some people find that full-size cans make their ears sweat, which can lead to discomfort.

By process of elimination, that leaves us with the Bose, though if you have average-to-large size ears and are looking for something very compact, you would probably be quite satisfied with the Shures as well. However, the large earpieces will not fit all listeners comfortably.

MP3 Mailbox Monday is a recurring feature in which I answer a selection of questions about MP3 players and accessories, such as headphones, speakers, and music services and software. Check back often to see if the advice presented here might be of some use to you, or send your questions directly to me. (Note: We never include last names, but if you prefer to remain completely anonymous, please state as much in your e-mail.)

Q: I have yet to really build a music file online. I have dabbled with Napster and iTunes, but really don't have much of a collection. I would like to begin ripping music CDs to my computer. It is confusing, but from what I have read it appears I should rip my music up in MP3 format, which would make it very versatile for different uses. I have several music players (an iPod Touch, a Nano and a Creative Zen V Plus for the gym). I do like iTunes and probably would download less than 75 songs a year. Is there a way to purchase iTunes Plus songs in MP3 format? Do you have any other suggestions for me? -- Jim, via e-mail

A: It sounds like you're pretty happy with iTunes (and it's a pretty simple program to use), so I'm going to provide you with some basic instructions that center around that jukebox. First, since you're using a variety of players (one of which doesn't support AAC), it's going to be easiest if you rip CDs and purchase music in MP3 format. The default for iTunes is to rip CDs to AAC, so you will want to change the settings in the software first.

To do that, open iTunes and go to Edit > Preferences. Under the General tab, click the button for Import Settings. Using the drop-down menu, select the MP3 Encoder. Below that, you have the option to adjust the bit rate. The higher the bit rate, the bigger the resulting file and the better the audio quality. Only go with a lower bit rate if you are looking to conserve space on your hard drive or want to fit more songs on your MP3 player. Click OK twice and you're done there. Next time you pop in a CD, iTunes will prompt you to rip it.

Unfortunately, iTunes itself only sells files in AAC format, so that will not work if you are looking specifically for MP3s. For purchasing music online, I would suggest the Amazon MP3 Store. All music is in MP3 format, and you can set it up so that when you download from Amazon's store, the files are automatically added to your iTunes library.

MP3 Mailbox Monday is a recurring feature where I answer a selection of questions about MP3 players and accessories, such as headphones, speakers, and music services and software. Check back often to see if the advice presented here might be of some use to you, or send your questions directly to me. (Note: We never include last names, but if you prefer to remain completely anonymous, please state as much in your e-mail.)

Q: I am writing about the new iTunes price change. I remember reading that it would happen, after Apple announced it a couple of weeks ago. I was ecstatic about having iTunes Plus with all of the songs, and the opportunity at having cheaper prices. However, at the time, it seemed that some songs were going to go to a new price of $0.79, with most staying at $0.99, and a small portion going to the higher price of $1.29.

The time has come where the price change is in full effect and I have to say that I am disappointed. Not only are there barely any cheaper songs, but most of the popular songs that I purchase regularly now cost more. Will this be in effect forever, or will they slowly drop the prices? I really don't want to pay more for a song. Most importantly, why the price hike, and when will a better change happen? -- "Disappointed Customer", via e-mail.

A: It's hard to say what will last in this market, but you can probably expect the prices of songs to get lower the longer the track has been available. For example, a hot new Justin Timberlake song may cost $1.29 now, but then go down to 99 cents after six months or so. And maybe it will eventually be 79 cents, although I have to say that the vast majority of low-priced songs I've noticed in iTunes and other online music stores are the short transitional or skit tracks.

If you're looking for a bargain price on digital music, it's a good idea to keep an eye out for the deals offered by various music stores. For example, Amazon MP3 has a daily deal where it sells an entire album for as little as $2.99 (there's a dedicated area for this in the upper left-hand corner of the store's main Web page). Near the bottom of the iTunes Store, you can find the "Free on iTunes" section, which has a handful of tracks that won't cost you a cent. Many other online outlets also offer daily or weekly specials; just don't expect to find many huge hits.

The price hike was a result of negotiation with the labels to get rid of DRM. They've been after Apple to do variable pricing for some time now, as it gives them an opportunity to make more money on hotter tracks. I have to agree with you that it reeks of suckitude, but I don't foresee it changing anytime soon.

MP3 Mailbox Monday is a recurring feature where I answer a selection of questions about MP3 players and accessories, such as headphones, speakers, and music services and software. Check back often to see if the advice presented here might be of some use to you, or send your questions directly to me. (Note: We never include last names, but if you prefer to remain completely anonymous, please state as much in your e-mail.)

(Credit: CNET)

Q: I have a question about the new Walkman or really any MP3 player. How do I know the Walkman or the Creative Zen will work with iTunes? The rest of my family already have iPods, and I want something different but my concern is all the music I have tied up in iTunes, how do I know what MP3 players will work with that music?--Marty, via e-mail

A: The short answer is: it depends. First off, if we're taking about working with iTunes the software, the answer is no...unless you want to use a "hack" such as iTunes agent. Now, when it comes to iTunes, the music store, things get a bit more complicated. If the music was purchased in iTunes at 99 cents a pop before the DRM restrictions lifted (which happened on April 7 of this year), then it will only be compatible with the iPod, since that is the only MP3 player that supports protected AAC. However, if the files are unprotected AAC--purchased after the date above or as AAC+ tracks at $1.29 per--they will play on the most recent Walkmans and the most recent Zens (as well as other players, such as the Sansa Clip).

If you're really gung ho about not using an iPod and have a bunch of protected music, you can run it through a program like TuneBite. ... Read more

What can I say: I'm a sucker for constructive feedback. Recently, I posted a piece about why I'm so infatuated with Rhapsody's subscription service, and I was pleased as punch to hear that the unconventional music model has some supporters aside from myself. The article also generated a fair amount of questions about the service and how exactly it works--understandable, what with the fact that the subscription music model is not exactly transparent. This week's MP3 Mailbox Monday addresses two aspects the model that I think will be particularly helpful for subscription music newcomers.

Q: I was told by a friend that once he declined the yearly service offered by Rhapsody, he was no longer able to play his MP3 songs already downloaded to his personal MP3 player. I do not know the maker of the personal player, but I know he had downloaded the files to his computer, and transferred them to the player, free MP3's, which were part of a trial offer from Rhapsody. What I would like to know: how can the player not function and play those MP3's once he no longer had an active account at the Rhapsody site? Thanks for your help. -- Richard, via e-mail.

A: I doubt that they were "free MP3s." If he signed up for a free trial of Rhapsody, he would have been able to download and stream any music from the Rhapsody catalog during that free trial, but after the trial was up, he would no longer be able to play the files (unless he continued the subscription by paying for it). The tracks themselves were not free--the subscription was during that time. Once the subscription is up, you no longer get access to the music.

Also, the files were likely not MP3s at all, but DRM-protected WMAs, which is what Rhapsody uses for its subscription catalog. The reason it uses this type of file is that WMA DRM10 tracks are capable of having a timer built in, which allows them to lock after a certain time period if a person does not continue paying for the subscription. (Likewise, in order for a device to support subscription music, it has to have a hardware clock built in that is compatible with this timer.)

Q: What is the best all-around Bluetooth speaker adapter if I want to connect my laptop to some good speakers that are not equipped with Bluetooth?--Tom, via e-mail

(Credit: GE)

A: What you would want is a Bluetooth receiver, which can be a challenge to find; actually, we don't review them at all at this time, so I can't give you a personal opinion on any specific product of this kind. Generally, I get questions from people who are looking for a Bluetooth transmitter, which will allow you to connect a non-Bluetooth audio device with headphones or speakers that do have the technology built in.

In fact, many of the Bluetooth "receivers" I've come across in my search are actually mislabeled transmitters, so you'll want to pay particular attention to the feature and spec listings when searching for this product. However, it looks like the GE Bluetooth Home Stereo Transmitter and Receiver would do the trick. It won't come cheap--the unit will set you back about $100--but if you really want a no-nonsense wireless set-up, it's probably a safe bet. (I welcome other suggestions--please comment below.)

Get stereo separation with the Sony SRS-M50

Q: I've recently started looking for either a small MP3 player with a good speaker on it, or a small portable speaker that I can travel with that will work with my Zune and other players. I prefer a nonfolding one. I tried to look for a recent review of either category, but didn't find any. Can you help?--Jeremy, via e-mail

A: Right off the bat, I recommend checking out our top 10 portable speakers product roundup. Any of those speakers come with a high recommendation.

However, if you're looking for something ultracompact, pay particular attention to the Soundmatters FoxL, the Samsung BS300, and the iMainGo 2 (this last one does double duty as a protective case for your player).

One other option that did not make the top 10 but still might be a good choice for you is the Sony SRS-M50. It's plenty compact and the two speakers can actually be separated for wider sound.

Philips SHE9850

Q: I read that I could send an e-mail for help on products?! I am only 16, so I couldn't really say that I am an audiophile or have mastered the world of sound. I do, however, love music and the art/technology of sound.

I used to own a pair of Shure SE120, which really introduced me to the world of above-standard sound. Those broke twice, but I got a new pair each time from Shure and I was very happy. Right now, I own a pair of Phillips SHE9850 and am very happy with those.

I was thinking of moving up from earbuds to full-size headphones. As I said, I am only 16 so around $100 is what I'm looking for, and I've seen many good-looking sets for sale. I always look to CNET for reviews, and I just realized something: there are no 5-star headsets, and I highly recommend you implement them. There is no way for me to tell what the difference between a $500 set and a $50 set is when they are both 4 stars and recommended.

Do you have any personal recommendations for a full-size headset in my price range?--Steve, via e-mail

Shure's SE530 earphones will set you back nearly $500.

A: First, let me answer your question regarding the price differences for two headphones that have the same rating. We always take several factors into consideration when reviewing headphones--fit/comfort (design), features (any extras that are included), and sound quality (performance). We then weight all of these things against the price to consider the overall value of the product. In this way, a four-star $50 headset doesn't necessarily sound as good or offer as many features as a four-star $500 headset, but it gets four-stars for being an excellent value, all things considered. That is, we think it sounds good, fits well, and/or offers an impressive array of extras for the money. (By the way, if you hover over the stars with your mouse, you can see a bit more granularity with the scoring.)

We don't pit $50 headphones head-to-head against $500 headphones because that just wouldn't be fair: they're not in the same playing field. Also, five-stars for us is basically a perfect score. I have yet to come across a perfect--or nearly perfect--pair of headphones. I still hold out hope, though!

As for full-size or earcup headphones in the $100 or less category, I would recommend the following: the Sennheiser HD280 Pro, the Sony MDR-V700DJ, the Koss PortaPro Headphones, or the Sony MDR-710LP.