Re: iPod and S40/V50 (MistralV50)

Yeah, Volvo really dropped the ball on this one!

 

Re: iPod and S40/V50 (irmiger)

Steve Jobs has been known to say that Apple is the BMW of the computer world. I've never heard him say Apple is the Volvo of the computer world, but some security IT just might. Time for a new mantra! http://********************/smile/emthup.gif

 

Re: iPod and S40/V50 (MistralV50)

Well, one can always hope that Volvo product marketing gets the hint (from BMW) and contact Apple and develop a similar kit for the S40 (and the rest of the Volvo car line). It is certainly possible to do - Volvo just needs to make the decision to proceed.

 

Re: iPod and S40/V50 (avolvofan)

I think it has less to do with Volvo and more to do with Ford. They'd be the ones to contact Apple and, quite honestly, I don't see them doing that!

 

Re: iPod and S40/V50 (irmiger)

And why wouldn't Ford sanction an integration effort between Volvo and Apple's ipod? I may be missing something, but how does the ipod compete with an existing offering of Ford? Following your line of reasoning, Volvo wouldn't have done anything with Dolby Laboratories on the stereo system.

 

Re: iPod and S40/V50 (avolvofan)

Primarily, it's my personal opinion that Ford tends to drag it's feet, allot, but there is some substance behind my thoughts. I see it like this, why bother to pay Apple the exorbinant licensing fees for what is essentially an adapter cable and worry about meeting IEEE 1394 compliancy yourself, when your electronics partners (Bose & Pioneer) are already working on it? Alpine's is almost out and was at CES already. Pioneer is expecting product out this next year along with Panasonic. Clarion and Kenwood have made grumblings about working on it. Sony's doing their own thing. Since these are the companies that make most of the OEM systems, why pay for the cow when you can get the milk for free? Sure, you miss out on the initial marketing hype, but if you can wait a bit and do it cheaper...then why not? After all, this adapter certainly won't make me run right out and drop 38k on a brand new BMW! Maybe an S40, but not a bimmer.

 

Re: iPod and S40/V50 (irmiger)

Interesting perspective on the aftermarket. I am reminded of how Volvo approached the add-on of 6-CD players for both the 850 and S70 models - you bought something from the Volvo parts department, or you passed on a CD-player that was integrated to the head unit in the passenger comparment. I believe that this situation still applies across the entire ICE (In Car Entertainment) offering for Volvo.

Since the head unit (or whatever the unit is called that controls the radio/CD in the front control stack) will still need to be integrated into an iPod offering, Volvo will still control the entry gate, so to speak. I would imagine that Apple developed the interface for the iPod connection to the BMW ICE system, and that the development effort was on Apple's dime, not BMWs. BMW probably gets the lion's share of the sales of the interface since Apple wants to be able to offer a maximum connection opportunity for iPods. The question is whether Apple has approached Volvo for a similar effort (and if so, whether Volvo would be favorably disposed)....

 

just offer a minijack audio input... will work with anything, but clean quality!

Come on Volvo... get their heads out of their asses!

<---- LOVES his iPod

 

Re: (doug242ti)

Quote, originally posted by doug242ti »

just offer a minijack audio input... will work with anything, but clean quality! Come on Volvo... get their heads out of their asses! <---- LOVES his iPod

I concur...after reading up on the features of BMW's unit, I'm not that impressed. It doesn't even display song or playlist titles! The best thing about it are the steering wheel controls for volume and track, but how hard is it just to reach over and adjust the volume on the head unit? I like the idea of a simple 1/8" phono (headphone) jack so you can patch in any MP3 player you may have.

 

We all know Volvo blew it on this one. You figure they would have made a quick addition to the 2005 models once the 2004.5 stop production.

Just shameful.

 

Re: (joemama)

Adding an AUX jack would certainly be a simple approach. However, I wonder if the current system circuitry provides for such an approach. I tend to think not. Separately, going the Apple/BMW route provides an additional source of accessory revenue for Volvo from sales of the interface kit. Remember, it is all about revenues (and low costs, which result in profits to both Volvo and the dealer). Think of the car as a platform for sales to you the consumer. To the extent that a proprietary solution is available, more sales flow back to Volvo. An AUX jack does not contribute much back to Volvo; a proprietary interface kit to the iPod would be a win for Volvo and a win for Apple. The only question is whether Apple proposed and Volvo listened (and ultimately accepted).

 

Re: iPod and S40/V50 (MistralV50)

Hi there. IPOD in a Volvo will go. You have to hunt for RF connector/converter . This is available off Ebay in the UK. The part is £20. This part is simply connected to the stereo via the radio ariel. The part has an audio in left and right via phono sockets. You conenct the ipod via the headphone jack. You then have to tune the stereo in to revieve the signal(sound) from the IPOD. Hey Presto!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! http://********************/smile/emthup.gif

look for user gtonlin on ebay.

 

Re: (avolvofan)

Quote, originally posted by avolvofan »

Adding an AUX jack would certainly be a simple approach. However, I wonder if the current system circuitry provides for such an approach. I tend to think not.

Good question. The BMW accessory adapter just takes the place of a CD changer. It mimicks the same functions in exactly the same way. To the head unit, it's just another CD changer.

Does the new S40 have an ad-on CD changer option? Just our luck that that one's optical too!

 

MP3 playback (or lack of) is the only thing keeping the V50 from perfection for me..

Some of the publicity photos show a CD/MD button on the stereo, which seems to imply some sort of add-on capability.

If MP3s are not a realistic option, I'll probably skip the premium audio and stick with the basic package when I order a V50 in a few months. I don't listen to CDs anymore (they're all packed away after converting to MP3) and AM talk radio will sound just fine with the cheap base radio.

 

Re: (Stark33)

Quote, originally posted by Stark33 »

MP3 playback (or lack of) is the only thing keeping the V50 from perfection for me.. Some of the publicity photos show a CD/MD button on the stereo, which seems to imply some sort of add-on capability. If MP3s are not a realistic option, I'll probably skip the premium audio and stick with the basic package when I order a V50 in a few months. I don't listen to CDs anymore (they're all packed away after converting to MP3) and AM talk radio will sound just fine with the cheap base radio.

LOL, if all you listen to is MP3's then you might as well be listening to AM radio because sound quality is pretty much the same.

I still don't understand why, when CD's are a-plenty, that people would want to listen to inferior sounding versions of the music they enjoy. If anything, Volvo should put a DVD-Audio or SACD player into their cars (which is a significant step up from CD) vs. putting in MP3 players (which is a signifcant step down from CD).

Listening to MP3's is like listening to the radio - IMO.

 

Re: (Arkay)

you'd be suprised.

my little dell jukebox has 1480 songs from 170 different cds and it's only 2/3 full.

ripping them with the R3Mix settings (96-224 Kbps) with the Lame encoder makes highly listenable files. sure, they may not sound as good as a CD, but having the best songs from my collection available in a package that fits in my pants pocket is a far better solution than lugging around a huge 100 disk caselogic cd case and worrying about scratching disks every time I want to change artists.

Maybe some people can get by with 6 disks worth of music loaded in their "premium audio" system. After a few months of enjoying my favorite songs from the collection I've built up over the years, that's just not an option for me. Somehow, I think I am not alone.

 

You are NOT alone....

To me...A 4000 song MP3 player sounds better than any cd or cd changer....

Plus if you really felt like it you can still fit 1000+ songs of cd quality audio on an Ipod or whatever..And even at the rate I use, (192kbps) MP3, it's quite hard to tell the difference...At 224+kbps only the best of ears can tell the difference....

 

Re: (Arkay)

To those who are comparing FM to MP3 quality (I don't agree, but regardless) with a 40GB iPod (60GB coming soon) and Apple Lossless (new feature on iTunes), you can rip at FULL CD QUALITY (half the file size of the CD file -- like .TIFF for music) and still be carrying around many CD's worth of music..... so the issue of sound quality is moot, really... it still trumps CD convenience.

 

Re: (SwedeFiend)

Quote, originally posted by SwedeFiend »

To those who are comparing FM to MP3 quality (I don't agree, but regardless) with a 40GB iPod (60GB coming soon) and Apple Lossless (new feature on iTunes), you can rip at FULL CD QUALITY (half the file size of the CD file -- like .TIFF for music) and still be carrying around many CD's worth of music..... so the issue of sound quality is moot, really... it still trumps CD convenience.

Unless you are copying all the information present in the CD track you are not obtaining all the music as it was originally laid down. Any type of compression utility is going to remove the "AIR" from the music because it compresses all the null space. Once that's removed the three dimensional quality of the music is removed.

I've never disputed the fact that MP3 players can hold more information than a regular CD, I'm just saying that if we want car manufacturers to improve the quality of the sound systems installed in the cars then we should not be wanting to run inferior data through these improved systems - otherwise they're not going to bother providing better sound systems for the cars.

 

Apparently, you don't have an mp3 player...If copied correctly it's a negligible difference..

http://www.extremetech.com/art...0.asp

I suppose TIVO is lame as well?

 

Re: (matty429)

Tivo will continue to be lame until you can record 2 things at once (not using direct TV)!

Let's hope Version 3 fixes this..

 

Re: (matty429)

MP3s are fine for portable devices and car stereos. But they are not acceptable for a high quality and high resolution stereo system.

Same goes for Tivo and DirecTV and digital cable. They unfortunately use the digital format to compress many more channels into the same bandwidth, rather than using the technology to improve the picture quality. You may not notice it on a regular TV (that is if you don't know what digital compression artifacts look like), but they all look awful on a large high resolution HDTV display.

 

Once again...the benefits negate the difference....
You guys sound like people talking about the old days...

"Video games...Bah, I remember in THE OLD DAYS , we used to play with Dirt, ...And we loved it"....

 

Re: (Arkay)

Quote, originally posted by Arkay »

Unless you are copying all the information present in the CD track you are not obtaining all the music as it was originally laid down. Any type of compression utility is going to remove the "AIR" from the music because it compresses all the null space. Once that's removed the three dimensional quality of the music is removed.

You have no idea how compression works. There is no AIR. It is called perceptual encoding. When two similar frequencies coexist and if one is significantly lower in loudness, the loud one masks the quiet one when the ear hears it. So the lossy compression method, including MP3, throws the masked info away. It isn't throwing away the "blank" space as you suggest.

As for LOSSLESS compression that was mentioned, it is just that. Lossless, no information is lost - just like ZIPing a file. Apple's AAC, MS's WMA, and FLAC all have lossless CODECs in their standard that reduce the file size 50 or 60% the orignial size - when decompressed give identical copies to the original. With harddrives getting cheep, there is no longer any benifit to lossy compression IMO - which I think was the original point of SwedeFiend.

 

Re: (wantav50)

Quote, originally posted by wantav50 »

As for LOSSLESS compression that was mentioned, it is just that. Lossless, no information is lost - just like ZIPing a file. Apple's AAC, MS's WMA, and FLAC all have lossless CODECs in their standard that reduce the file size 50 or 60% the orignial size - when decompressed give identical copies to the original. With harddrives getting cheep, there is no longer any benifit to lossy compression IMO - which I think was the original point of SwedeFiend.

thanks wantav50! http://********************/smile/emthup.gif you get my point exactly. Arkay apparently didn't get that LOSSLESS is just that -- LOSSLESS! It is an idea only now gaining in popularity with storage costs going down, so I'll forgive him/her. Anyway, you can use a lossless to compress a file, then burn it to CD, re-compress it, ad infinitum, and your audio will remain the same, that's the whole point. What a pinch we'd all be in if our ZIP computer files lost their "AIR"... hehehe