[CUBE] W O W ! ! !

[a l a n t h o m p s o n]

I agree with what you say about the quality of FM transmission in 
theory, but in reality, I drive an '87 bimmer (e30 325), and have a 
completely 1987 stock system in it.  I can't tell the difference, or 
rather, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference in my car, but I'd 
love the aux input system anyway, for clarity without having to mess 
with the frequency setting every so often, and just basic cleanliness 
of the solution.  Ah well, my car is paid for, it runs well, and sounds 
adequate (the stereo).  I can't justify spending one penny more than I 
have with the FM transmitter, although I have been eye'ing the Transpod 
as well.

Tell me more about it, and how well it works, what frequency range it 
works for, and can you actually set a specific frequency rather than 
having to turn a knob to approximate one.

Thanks!

--alan

On Saturday, April 12, 2003, at 08:28 PM, Todd Masco wrote:

> Alan Thompson wrote:
>> I would love a solution like an aux input hardwire
> [...]
> I recommend this.
>
> Everybody should be warned that FM-transmitter solutions have a 
> substantially lower sound quality that the aux input hardware 
> solution.  I am lucky enough that my car comes with such an input - 
> but it would be much easier for me to use the FM transmitter, so I got 
> one from the local Apple store:  the "Transpod All-In-One Car 
> Solution."
>
> 	http://www.welovemacs.com/w0012002.html
>
> Switching back and forth between them made me cringe in horror at how 
> bad the FM solution is by comparison.  Since there's not much tricky 
> about FM transmission, I assume (perhaps incorrectly) that this is 
> inherent to FM transmission/reception.
>
> I know this won't matter to everybody, but just so ya know, that's my 
> experience...  mind you, I also encode my mp3s at 256 Kbps - higher 
> than is necessary, I'm sure, but I certainly know that 128 Kbps isn't 
> good enough for my ears.  Here's hoping for AAC on the iPod...
>
> 	-- Todd
>
>