Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 30
  1. #1
    John Navas
    Guest
    To check out contradictory (and some negative) statements about the MP3
    audio capabilities of the new Motorola RAZR V3xx, I've run careful tests
    to see what it can and cannot handle, and how it sounds. My encoding
    was done with LAME 3.97 from high-quality CD originals.

    What I found is that the V3xx supports MP3 bitrates up to an _average_
    of 256 Kbps (320 Kbps peak).

    According to MP3'Tech <http://www.mp3-tech.org/tests/gb>):

    256kbs: The sound is indiscernible from the original. It is
    impossible to make the difference with the original recording.

    The quality at 128kbs is also indentical to the one obtained with the
    original CD on a mini or midi Hi-Fi installation, and on the vast
    majority of Hi-Fi installations in separated elements.

    Conclusion : For a computer use, the 128kbs rate produces a quality
    equal to an audio CD. But in the case of an MP3 use in advanced
    Hi-Fi, it is necessary to use a 256kbs bitrate to reach an identical
    result to the CD sound.

    In blind A-B listening tests of 256 Kbps ABR MP3 V3xx against the
    original CD source through a high-end home audio system, none my
    audience could hear any difference.

    I also compared 256 Kbps ABR MP3 V3xx to iTunes AAC encoding played back
    from a current generation video iPod. The V3xx was better than 128 AAC,
    and as good as 192 Kbps AAC.

    Hopefully that will put to rest claims that the V3xx isn't a good audio
    player.

    --
    Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
    John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>



    See More: MP3 audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)




  2. #2
    John Navas
    Guest

    AAC audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    In addition to MP3, the Motorola RAZR V3xx supports (unprotected) AAC
    audio. To test its AAC capabilities I encoded with Windows iTunes
    7.1.1.5 from the same high-quality CD originals. The V3xx properly
    played all bitrates (constant and variable) up to (and including) 320
    Kbps.

    Playback options for both MP3 and AAC audio include playlists, albums,
    artists, genres, and composers, with optional auto-repeat and shuffle,
    plus recently played, with the usual playback controls (skip
    forward/back, fast forward/back, volume, play/pause). It also feature
    external play/pause and volume with the flip is closed, with album and
    track info on the external display.

    In short, it's an excellent portable audio player.

    On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 14:49:07 GMT, John Navas
    <[email protected]> wrote in
    <[email protected]>:

    >To check out contradictory (and some negative) statements about the MP3
    >audio capabilities of the new Motorola RAZR V3xx, I've run careful tests
    >to see what it can and cannot handle, and how it sounds. My encoding
    >was done with LAME 3.97 from high-quality CD originals.
    >
    >What I found is that the V3xx supports MP3 bitrates up to an _average_
    >of 256 Kbps (320 Kbps peak).
    >
    >According to MP3'Tech <http://www.mp3-tech.org/tests/gb>):
    >
    > 256kbs: The sound is indiscernible from the original. It is
    > impossible to make the difference with the original recording.
    >
    > The quality at 128kbs is also indentical to the one obtained with the
    > original CD on a mini or midi Hi-Fi installation, and on the vast
    > majority of Hi-Fi installations in separated elements.
    >
    > Conclusion : For a computer use, the 128kbs rate produces a quality
    > equal to an audio CD. But in the case of an MP3 use in advanced
    > Hi-Fi, it is necessary to use a 256kbs bitrate to reach an identical
    > result to the CD sound.
    >
    >In blind A-B listening tests of 256 Kbps ABR MP3 V3xx against the
    >original CD source through a high-end home audio system, none my
    >audience could hear any difference.
    >
    >I also compared 256 Kbps ABR MP3 V3xx to iTunes AAC encoding played back
    >from a current generation video iPod. The V3xx was better than 128 AAC,
    >and as good as 192 Kbps AAC.
    >
    >Hopefully that will put to rest claims that the V3xx isn't a good audio
    >player.


    --
    Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
    John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>



  3. #3
    Scott
    Guest

    Re: AAC audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:[email protected]:


    What was the frequency response of all units tested? What was the
    compression factor of each recording? Were the same speakers used to
    playback each device, and if so, were they rated to work with each of the
    devices? What is the advertised distortion rate for each amplifier used
    (whether it be internal or external) and what was the advertised wattage of
    each amplifier? How did the test devices compare to the advertised specs?
    How many different acoustical test environments were used?

    I already know that you are unable to answer these questions, as your tests
    never have any controls associated with them. My fifth grader's last
    science project had more controls than your precious little experiment.

    But then again, he's not trying to shill for Motorola or Cingular.



  4. #4
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: AAC audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    Scott wrote:

    > I already know that you are unable to answer these questions, as your tests
    > never have any controls associated with them. My fifth grader's last
    > science project had more controls than your precious little experiment.


    I'm in the process of preparing a science presentation for fourth
    graders for the school's enrichment day, and one key aspect of it is to
    emphasize how important it is to use controls when doing measurements,
    in order to ensure accuracy of the experimental results. Had I not been
    subject to the claims of so many uncontrolled tests in this newsgroup, I
    might have been less resolute in insisting that the students pay close
    attention to the controls, and how they compare their experimental
    results to the theoretical results.



  5. #5
    Jack Mac
    Guest

    Re: AAC audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 12:39:04 -0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Scott wrote:
    >
    >> I already know that you are unable to answer these questions, as your tests
    >> never have any controls associated with them. My fifth grader's last
    >> science project had more controls than your precious little experiment.

    >
    >I'm in the process of preparing a science presentation for fourth
    >graders for the school's enrichment day, and one key aspect of it is to
    >emphasize how important it is to use controls when doing measurements,
    >in order to ensure accuracy of the experimental results. Had I not been
    >subject to the claims of so many uncontrolled tests in this newsgroup, I
    >might have been less resolute in insisting that the students pay close
    >attention to the controls, and how they compare their experimental
    >results to the theoretical results.



    Well John, I suppose you expected such a response from Larry and Moe!
    In making the comparison you made between the CD and the V3xx
    using the same Amplifier and Speaker systems it makes no difference
    what the specific responses are for them. These are common for both
    devices!



  6. #6
    Scott
    Guest

    Re: AAC audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    Jack Mac <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:[email protected]:

    > On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 12:39:04 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Scott wrote:
    >>
    >>> I already know that you are unable to answer these questions, as
    >>> your tests never have any controls associated with them. My fifth
    >>> grader's last science project had more controls than your precious
    >>> little experiment.

    >>
    >>I'm in the process of preparing a science presentation for fourth
    >>graders for the school's enrichment day, and one key aspect of it is
    >>to emphasize how important it is to use controls when doing
    >>measurements, in order to ensure accuracy of the experimental results.
    >>Had I not been subject to the claims of so many uncontrolled tests in
    >>this newsgroup, I might have been less resolute in insisting that the
    >>students pay close attention to the controls, and how they compare
    >>their experimental results to the theoretical results.

    >
    >
    > Well John, I suppose you expected such a response from Larry and Moe!
    > In making the comparison you made between the CD and the V3xx
    > using the same Amplifier and Speaker systems it makes no difference
    > what the specific responses are for them. These are common for both
    > devices!
    >


    If by Larry and Moe, you are asserting our inability to take anything
    Novice says at face value- thank you! If, OTOH, you are trying to slam us
    for actually having more than pedestrian consumer experience in many of the
    areas that Johnny tries to show expertise in- too bad, you missed your
    mark.

    To explain it to you- any amplification that was done would inevitably
    produce distortion, as all of the playback devices he mentions using have
    no line level output available and any device that is desined to handle the
    amplified signal of one of these devices is biased towards that product.

    If that confuses you (which I'm sure it does), try this little experiment.
    Take an old home (not portable) CD player. Using the necessary adapters,
    take the analog "line out" signal from the back of the unit and try to
    listen to it either straight through speakers or headphones and let us know
    how that works for you. That line level signal is free of any
    amplification. Unlike the headphone jack on a Razr ot iPod, it not subject
    to the exponential rate of distortion that they are when their amplified
    signal is amplifeied again. The Razr has no such line level output
    available.

    The test is horrible flawed.

    Now, Jack- wanna explain your take on the testing, or shall you simply
    continue to look like Navas's lover?



  7. #7
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: AAC audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 21:42:12 -0400, Jack Mac
    <[email protected]> wrote in
    <[email protected]>:

    >On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 12:39:04 -0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>Scott wrote:
    >>
    >>> I already know that you are unable to answer these questions, as your tests
    >>> never have any controls associated with them. My fifth grader's last
    >>> science project had more controls than your precious little experiment.

    >>
    >>I'm in the process of preparing a science presentation for fourth
    >>graders for the school's enrichment day, and one key aspect of it is to
    >>emphasize how important it is to use controls when doing measurements,
    >>in order to ensure accuracy of the experimental results. Had I not been
    >>subject to the claims of so many uncontrolled tests in this newsgroup, I
    >>might have been less resolute in insisting that the students pay close
    >>attention to the controls, and how they compare their experimental
    >>results to the theoretical results.


    LOL

    >Well John, I suppose you expected such a response from Larry and Moe!


    Yep. As usual, they just stoop to ad hominems, having nothing
    substantive to offer in rebuttal, just resentment and jealousy.

    >In making the comparison you made between the CD and the V3xx
    >using the same Amplifier and Speaker systems it makes no difference
    >what the specific responses are for them. These are common for both
    >devices!


    True. Although a poor audio system could mask some differences, the
    V3xx is a _portable_ audio player, and should be judged as such, driving
    speakers typical of portable audio players. What I did was thus
    overkill, since I used high-end home audio gear (quite a bit better than
    the great majority of home audio systems, not to mention speakers
    typical of portable audio players) in order to make any differences as
    apparent as practical and possible, as noted in my report.

    --
    Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
    John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>



  8. #8
    Scott
    Guest

    Re: AAC audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:[email protected]:

    > On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 21:42:12 -0400, Jack Mac
    > <[email protected]> wrote in
    > <[email protected]>:
    >
    >>On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 12:39:04 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
    >>wrote:
    >>
    >>>Scott wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I already know that you are unable to answer these questions, as
    >>>> your tests never have any controls associated with them. My fifth
    >>>> grader's last science project had more controls than your precious
    >>>> little experiment.
    >>>
    >>>I'm in the process of preparing a science presentation for fourth
    >>>graders for the school's enrichment day, and one key aspect of it is
    >>>to emphasize how important it is to use controls when doing
    >>>measurements, in order to ensure accuracy of the experimental
    >>>results. Had I not been subject to the claims of so many uncontrolled
    >>>tests in this newsgroup, I might have been less resolute in insisting
    >>>that the students pay close attention to the controls, and how they
    >>>compare their experimental results to the theoretical results.

    >
    > LOL
    >
    >>Well John, I suppose you expected such a response from Larry and Moe!

    >
    > Yep. As usual, they just stoop to ad hominems, having nothing
    > substantive to offer in rebuttal, just resentment and jealousy.


    Wrong, Zippy- I wrote an entire post in this thread that is very
    substantive and in typical fashion you are incapable of responding to
    it. You can't deal with facts anymore and act more and more like a
    senile old man.

    >
    >>In making the comparison you made between the CD and the V3xx
    >>using the same Amplifier and Speaker systems it makes no difference
    >>what the specific responses are for them. These are common for both
    >>devices!

    >
    > True. Although a poor audio system could mask some differences, the
    > V3xx is a _portable_ audio player, and should be judged as such,
    > driving speakers typical of portable audio players. What I did was
    > thus overkill, since I used high-end home audio gear (quite a bit
    > better than the great majority of home audio systems, not to mention
    > speakers typical of portable audio players) in order to make any
    > differences as apparent as practical and possible, as noted in my
    > report.
    >



    Your third grade science project is far from the great thing you are
    making it out to be.



  9. #9
    xPosTech
    Guest

    Re: AAC audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    On 4/9/2007 6:32 PM, Scott wrote:
    > John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
    > news:[email protected]:
    >
    >> On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 21:42:12 -0400, Jack Mac
    >> <[email protected]> wrote in
    >> <[email protected]>:
    >>
    >>> On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 12:39:04 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Scott wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> I already know that you are unable to answer these questions, as
    >>>>> your tests never have any controls associated with them. My fifth
    >>>>> grader's last science project had more controls than your precious
    >>>>> little experiment.
    >>>> I'm in the process of preparing a science presentation for fourth
    >>>> graders for the school's enrichment day, and one key aspect of it is
    >>>> to emphasize how important it is to use controls when doing
    >>>> measurements, in order to ensure accuracy of the experimental
    >>>> results. Had I not been subject to the claims of so many uncontrolled
    >>>> tests in this newsgroup, I might have been less resolute in insisting
    >>>> that the students pay close attention to the controls, and how they
    >>>> compare their experimental results to the theoretical results.

    >> LOL
    >>
    >>> Well John, I suppose you expected such a response from Larry and Moe!

    >> Yep. As usual, they just stoop to ad hominems, having nothing
    >> substantive to offer in rebuttal, just resentment and jealousy.

    >
    > Wrong, Zippy- I wrote an entire post in this thread that is very
    > substantive and in typical fashion you are incapable of responding to
    > it. You can't deal with facts anymore and act more and more like a
    > senile old man.
    >
    >>> In making the comparison you made between the CD and the V3xx
    >>> using the same Amplifier and Speaker systems it makes no difference
    >>> what the specific responses are for them. These are common for both
    >>> devices!

    >> True. Although a poor audio system could mask some differences, the
    >> V3xx is a _portable_ audio player, and should be judged as such,
    >> driving speakers typical of portable audio players. What I did was
    >> thus overkill, since I used high-end home audio gear (quite a bit
    >> better than the great majority of home audio systems, not to mention
    >> speakers typical of portable audio players) in order to make any
    >> differences as apparent as practical and possible, as noted in my
    >> report.
    >>

    >
    >
    > Your third grade science project is far from the great thing you are
    > making it out to be.

    Please don't give senility a bad rep.

    --
    Ted
    I wasn't born in Texas but
    I got back here as soon as I could
    (Don't forget to take out the trash)

    Hard work often pays off after time, but laziness always pays off now.



  10. #10
    Lyman Green
    Guest

    Re: MP3 audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    On Apr 8, 10:49 am, John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
    > To check out contradictory (and some negative) statements about theMP3
    > audio capabilities of the new Motorola RAZR V3xx, I've run careful tests
    > to see what it can and cannot handle, and how it sounds. My encoding
    > was done with LAME 3.97 from high-quality CD originals.
    >
    > What I found is that the V3xx supportsMP3bitrates up to an _average_
    > of 256 Kbps (320 Kbps peak).
    >
    > According toMP3'Tech <http://www.mp3-tech.org/tests/gb>):
    >
    > 256kbs: The sound is indiscernible from the original. It is
    > impossible to make the difference with the original recording.
    >
    > The quality at 128kbs is also indentical to the one obtained with the
    > original CD on a mini or midi Hi-Fi installation, and on the vast
    > majority of Hi-Fi installations in separated elements.
    >
    > Conclusion : For a computer use, the 128kbs rate produces a quality
    > equal to an audio CD. But in the case of anMP3use in advanced
    > Hi-Fi, it is necessary to use a 256kbsbitrateto reach an identical
    > result to the CD sound.
    >
    > In blind A-B listening tests of 256 Kbps ABRMP3V3xx against the
    > original CD source through a high-end home audio system, none my
    > audience could hear any difference.
    >
    > I also compared 256 Kbps ABRMP3V3xx to iTunes AAC encoding played back
    > from a current generation video iPod. The V3xx was better than 128 AAC,
    > and as good as 192 Kbps AAC.
    >
    > Hopefully that will put to rest claims that the V3xx isn't a good audio
    > player.
    >
    > --
    > Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
    > John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>


    All I care about is that the stupid phone (my V3XX) won't play any of
    the stuff I ripped at 320Kbps CBR. It seems to handle 256Kbps CBR
    just fine.

    I guess that I will only be able to listen to my eMusic downloads on
    my phone, as I'm NOT re-ripping all my stuff from CD or wasting the
    time to convert many, many MP3's from 320Kbps CBR to something less
    for the phone.

    Hmph.

    Oh plus, what's the stupid 32 character filename limit? That's
    really, really annoying.

    Lyman Green




  11. #11
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: MP3 audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    On 13 Apr 2007 10:27:47 -0700, "Lyman Green" <[email protected]> wrote in
    <[email protected]>:

    >On Apr 8, 10:49 am, John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>[SNIP]


    >All I care about is that the stupid phone (my V3XX) won't play any of
    >the stuff I ripped at 320Kbps CBR. It seems to handle 256Kbps CBR
    >just fine.
    >
    >I guess that I will only be able to listen to my eMusic downloads on
    >my phone, as I'm NOT re-ripping all my stuff from CD or wasting the
    >time to convert many, many MP3's from 320Kbps CBR to something less
    >for the phone.


    Why use 320 CBR? 256 CBR is indistinguishable from the original, and
    you can use 256 ABR (320 peak) if you want better.

    If you really care that much about ultimate fidelity, you should
    probably be using a form of lossless compression.

    'Course CDs aren't all that incredible to begin with.

    >Oh plus, what's the stupid 32 character filename limit? That's
    >really, really annoying.


    The screen is really, really small.

    --
    Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
    John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>



  12. #12
    Jer
    Guest

    Re: MP3 audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    John Navas wrote:
    > On 13 Apr 2007 10:27:47 -0700, "Lyman Green" <[email protected]> wrote in
    > <[email protected]>:
    >
    >> On Apr 8, 10:49 am, John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>> [SNIP]

    >
    >> All I care about is that the stupid phone (my V3XX) won't play any of
    >> the stuff I ripped at 320Kbps CBR. It seems to handle 256Kbps CBR
    >> just fine.
    >>
    >> I guess that I will only be able to listen to my eMusic downloads on
    >> my phone, as I'm NOT re-ripping all my stuff from CD or wasting the
    >> time to convert many, many MP3's from 320Kbps CBR to something less
    >> for the phone.

    >
    > Why use 320 CBR? 256 CBR is indistinguishable from the original, and
    > you can use 256 ABR (320 peak) if you want better.


    Given the nature of the equipment relevant to this thread, I agree.
    Given the nature of most mp3 downloads so popular with the younger
    crowds of today, I think 64Kb VBR rips would likely be sufficient within
    the subjectiveness of the typical listening audience on cheap ear buds.

    Personally, I have over 28Gb of 320Kb CBR rips stored on my rather
    extensive home system, but like Lyman, they're staying where they are
    for the same reasons he's already mentioned. Besides, my own
    subjectiveness says jazz and classical is best enjoyed when one is not
    engaged in something (anything) else.

    >
    > If you really care that much about ultimate fidelity, you should
    > probably be using a form of lossless compression.


    True, but mp3 is good enough if the bitrate is kept high enough to not
    notice.

    >
    > 'Course CDs aren't all that incredible to begin with.


    The error correction genie can be quite busy.


    >
    >> Oh plus, what's the stupid 32 character filename limit? That's
    >> really, really annoying.

    >
    > The screen is really, really small.
    >



    --
    jer
    email reply - I am not a 'ten'



  13. #13
    3Gfreak
    Guest

    Re: MP3 audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    On Apr 8, 9:49 am, John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
    > To check out contradictory (and some negative) statements about the MP3
    > audio capabilities of the new Motorola RAZR V3xx, I've run careful tests
    > to see what it can and cannot handle, and how it sounds. My encoding
    > was done with LAME 3.97 from high-quality CD originals.
    >
    > What I found is that the V3xx supports MP3 bitrates up to an _average_
    > of 256 Kbps (320 Kbps peak).
    >
    > According to MP3'Tech <http://www.mp3-tech.org/tests/gb>):
    >
    > 256kbs: The sound is indiscernible from the original. It is
    > impossible to make the difference with the original recording.
    >
    > The quality at 128kbs is also indentical to the one obtained with the
    > original CD on a mini or midi Hi-Fi installation, and on the vast
    > majority of Hi-Fi installations in separated elements.
    >
    > Conclusion : For a computer use, the 128kbs rate produces a quality
    > equal to an audio CD. But in the case of an MP3 use in advanced
    > Hi-Fi, it is necessary to use a 256kbs bitrate to reach an identical
    > result to the CD sound.
    >
    > In blind A-B listening tests of 256 Kbps ABR MP3 V3xx against the
    > original CD source through a high-end home audio system, none my
    > audience could hear any difference.
    >
    > I also compared 256 Kbps ABR MP3 V3xx to iTunes AAC encoding played back
    > from a current generation video iPod. The V3xx was better than 128 AAC,
    > and as good as 192 Kbps AAC.
    >
    > Hopefully that will put to rest claims that the V3xx isn't a good audio
    > player.
    >
    > --
    > Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
    > John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>


    Finally something you are right on John, the V3xx is a horrible music
    device. If you own one trash it and get a SYNC. Blows everything else
    (except Ipod) out of the water.

    3GFreak
    www.mobilevertigo.com




  14. #14
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: MP3 audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    3Gfreak wrote:

    > Finally something you are right on John, the V3xx is a horrible music
    > device. If you own one trash it and get a SYNC. Blows everything else
    > (except Ipod) out of the water.


    It doesn't blow a lot of the other music players out of the water
    either. The Sync audio quality is acceptable. The wired headset sucks,
    and a Bluetooth stereo headset costs as much as the phone.

    The V3xx audio quality is also acceptable, though nothing like an iPod
    or a Sandisk Sansa.

    The reason to avoid the V3xx is that it's not really usable in Europe
    and Asia, as Motorola forgot to include 900 MHz GSM which is the most
    used band in Europe and Asia. 1800 MHz in Europe and Asia is like 1900
    MHz in North America, the latecomer carriers ended up with it, and the
    coverage is not as good as the more popular 900 MHz.



  15. #15
    3Gfreak
    Guest

    Re: MP3 audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)

    On Apr 15, 3:43 pm, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
    > 3Gfreak wrote:
    > > Finally something you are right on John, the V3xx is a horrible music
    > > device. If you own one trash it and get a SYNC. Blows everything else
    > > (except Ipod) out of the water.

    >
    > It doesn't blow a lot of the other music players out of the water
    > either. The Sync audio quality is acceptable. The wired headset sucks,
    > and a Bluetooth stereo headset costs as much as the phone.
    >
    > The V3xx audio quality is also acceptable, though nothing like an iPod
    > or a Sandisk Sansa.
    >
    > The reason to avoid the V3xx is that it's not really usable in Europe
    > and Asia, as Motorola forgot to include 900 MHz GSM which is the most
    > used band in Europe and Asia. 1800 MHz in Europe and Asia is like 1900
    > MHz in North America, the latecomer carriers ended up with it, and the
    > coverage is not as good as the more popular 900 MHz.


    The SYNC does blow it out of the water - read the reviews! The bit
    rate is of the V3xx is way to low ( just download some tones from
    American Idol and see for yourself ) and the quality is below par.

    3GFreak
    www.mobilevertigo.com




  • Similar Threads




  • Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast