Battery life question

[trippyfool]

I've been running Rockbox on my H120 for a couple years or so now, and I never really had the boost in battery life that some people claim. I just replaced my battery with one of those 2200 iPod batteries and changed the battery setting in rockbox, but it still doesn't seem like my battery life is any better. I haven't drained it down to empty, but it seems like the battery indicator drops about as fast as it did with the old battery. I usually have the volume between 80-90%, but if I've got it plugged into some speakers at work it is at 100%. I've got some cheapo Jensen earplug type headphones right now. Nearly all of my music is ripped at 192 kbps.

Is the battery indicator deceptive? Am I playing it too loud? Would better earphones help? Lower bitrates? Am I overreacting?

[Treehugger]

Ive never really seen any boost in battery preformance when replacing a battery or using rockbox, replacing the battery just seems to be a way of compensating for decreasing battery life. I use really variable bit rates and shure e3's though, but on average I have always had about 12 hours of battery life with continous shuffled playback at 256kbps. Personally, I think boosing the battery life of the h120 signifigantly is a bit of a myth, but maybe someone else has had a more fruitfull experience

[Tech_Cowboy]

The battery indicator may not be accurate. When you upgrade the battery on a RockBoxed player, you should let RockBox know about it. Go into the settings to specify your battery size (I believe it's General Settings > System > Battery Capacity).

TC

[andrewmel]

Bitrate will affect battery life. Lower bitrate files are smaller, so for the same amount of music playing time the harddrive must be accesses *less* frequently.

a

[HorstIriver]

Originally Posted by trippyfool

Is the battery indicator deceptive? Am I playing it too loud? Would better earphones help? Lower bitrates? Am I overreacting?

The hint to set the battery capacity to the correct value in Rockbox is one thing you can try. The loudness has only little influence on the power consumption. However, playing OGG files drains the battery much faster than MP3. It is because OGG files require much more computing power during playback, while MP3 needs much computer power during encoding, and playback is straightforward. The old design goal of MP3 was that playback should be possible on an Intel 486 DX2-66. If you plan to encode a large amount of music in the future, stick with Lame MP3. I have found no audible reason why OGG should be preferred. It is rather an ideological thing, like buying a MAC and running Windows underhand by an emulator
Horst