Garmin nuvi 1390 - "For the love of Jill"
Maybe not the best 4.3" Garmin, but Jill is there.
The nuvi 1390 is, said honestly, not a GPS I recommend because database searching is slow, touchscreen response isn't that great, updating maps via Garmin Express is really slow (USB 1.1 and not USB 2.0), and with modern map data it's absolutely mandatory to set the map detail to "Normal" or "Minimal", because if set to "More", map draw time slows down quite a bit.
Basically put, the 1390 is a product of its time as it was originally released in 2009 (as was the 1490 and 1690).
However, there are a few really nice things about the 1390.
Compared to other nuvi designs, this is one of the thinnest even when compared to other Garmin models of the same screen size. Garmin really did this one right.
Legibility is one of the best for a 4.3". The backlight is great but also the color choices are great too, as what's used is slightly "warmer" compared to other models.
And then there's Jill.
For those that used Garmin GPSes before 2010, you know Jill. She's probably the first Garmin TTS voice you ever heard. And the 1390 is what I believe to be the very last model before Jill was kicked to the curb and replaced with Samantha.
Jill is decidedly very computery in her tone. But out of all American TTS voices, she's still the best one to use.
Why is Jill the best? Simple answer. She's the easiest to understand.
Jill, as computery as she is, can be understood far better than Samantha. And even though there have been several versions of Samantha, it's still never lived up to Jill's pronunciation.
Can you download Jill?
Yes, but you can't use it on any modern Garmin. Jill will only work on older models like the 1390. Jill is a standard voice included on older models, so all you need to do is get one and she will be there.
If for some strange reason Jill isn't there, you can connect an older nuvi to Garmin Express, go to the "Tools & Content" area, then "Utilities", then "Optional Updates", expand "Language Files" and then check the box for "English." Download/install that and Jill will be included. Again, Jill only appears on older nuvi and StreetPilot models, otherwise you will get Samantha.
What makes Jill so good?
Again, it's the computery nature of her voice. The way she speaks is very deliberate and a bit over-pronounced - and that is exactly what you want when driving.
Modern TTS voices (on anything, be it Garmin GPS or smartphone) all sound too soft and friendly. Developers think this is what users want. This is wrong because the softer and friendlier a TTS voice is, the easier it can be ignored.
Garmin did an unbelievably fantastic job with Jill, but mainly by accident. They made the best possible most-human sounding TTS voice but were limited to 2009 technology. It's the combination of great effort with technical limitations that makes Jill so wonderful.
When driving, Jill cuts through traffic noise while at the same time not sound like she's yelling at you or trying to sound overly nicey-nicey. Jill is just right.
For any developers making TTS voices, I'd tell them to go get a Garmin 1390 or 1490, listen to Jill and make the voice sound like her. Jill is a TTS voice done right.
Alternative to Jill?
The modern "Zoe" in the Garmin DriveSmart 66, 76 and 86 is actually really nice. The nostalgia factor isn't there, but she sounds pleasant enough.
The one reason why you should buy a Casio A700W
All F91W type watches should be this good.
When you get to know Casio watches, there are a few you become intimately familiar with.
First is the ubiquitous F91W, the most popular watch in the world. After that, the F105W, which is the F91W with a slightly different case shape with the EL (ElectroLuminescent) night light for easy night viewing. After that, the A158, which is the "steel" version of the F91W, and then the A168, the "steel" version of the F105W.
All these watches work exactly the same with just slight variations between them.
Then there's the recently introduced A700W. Acts like an F91W, looks like an A158W, so what's the deal with this model?
Legibility. That is the best reason to get this watch. The second best reason is that it's only 6mm thick. That's not a typo. Ever tried a CA53W calculator watch, which is already ridiculously thin? This is even thinner than that, and it's amazing.
What makes the A700W so legible? Three things. The 6mm thinness, the mineral glass crystal (yes, real glass here and not acrylic,) and the amber night light.
There is basically zero LCD "wash" on the A700W. Lean the watch at any angle and it can still be read without the LCD segments becoming unreadable. The F91W is already amazing at this, and the A700W is even better.
The mineral glass crystal makes the display so clear it almost doesn't even look like it's there. I had no idea a Casio digital display could look this good.
Finally, the amber night light is absolutely perfect. Not too bright, not too dark, looks better than the blue/green EL light on other models, and obviously blows away the cheap green light of the F91W.
Any photo of this watch does it no justice whatsoever. This is something that has to be seen to appreciate fully. You've never seen an F91W type with a mineral glass crystal before, but once you do, this is as good as an F91W type gets.
I call this "F91W type" even though I know it's not the F91W. In fact, it's not even module 593. The module used is 3472, evidenced by the thinness, the night light and the fact the display reads SPL (for "split") instead of LAP when using the chronograph lap feature.
You'll notice the A700W does cost more (and by that I mean about $7 more than a comparable A168.) Worth it? Absolutely. You are paying for a better watch with distinctively better features and not just a variation on a theme.
Good on Casio for doing this. Super thin, super legible, best of the lot, no question about it.
Fretless bass for under $350 USD (way under!)
The rarely seen inexpensive fretless bass. It exists.
Take the Stagg SBF-40, which at the time I write this is not just under $350 but under $300. If you're in the market for a fretless, grab this one now.
What's the big deal with fretless bass?
Fretless electric bass is a weird animal in more ways than one.
First it should be said that if you intend to buy one of these, consider switching to flatwound strings. Not only will it make the fingerboard last longer, but more importantly get "the sound of fretless" by eliminating string drag noise. To my ear, a proper fretless bass sound is one where you hear no drag. This drag I speak of is the sound of your fret hand finger literally dragging on the string as you move it up and down the neck. With flats, there is no drag noise. Also remember that tapewound strings can also get "that sound" too.
Second, fretless bass is a sound that sampling has never been able to recreate accurately. With picked bass, sure, you can emulate that with a synthesizer easily. But fretless? No. You need the real thing. Samplers and synths can't (and will never) be able to recreate the sonic nuances of fretless bass play.
Third - and this is the part I find most interesting - I have no idea why there aren't more cheap fretless basses. One would think all the electric bass manufacturers would be churning out these things since they are cheaper to make due to the fact there are no frets on the neck. There's really no reason why companies that churn out cheap fretted basses by the thousands can't do the same for fretless models. For whatever reason, you just don't see cheap fretless options often. This being true, whenever you see a cheap fretless like the Stagg, you grab it.
The Stagg above is priced exactly as it should be for what it is. Under $300, individual string saddles with a lot of adjustment for easy intonation, easy controls and a design that has no neck dive.
Again, if you want a fretless and want it cheap, get this one. For most bassists or even the hobbyist player that wants to get into fretless for cheap, this is as good as it gets on the low end (ha ha, bad pun yeah I know).
Secret Casio CA-53W calculator watch diagnostic screen, and future watch buys
Nobody has ever shown the CA-53W diagnostic screen until now.
Years ago I actually figured out how to get the CA-53W to display its diagnostic screen, but then forgot how it was done. I wanted to know how to do this, so I searched online and ended up finding just one and only one guy on the internet who knew how to do it...
...sort of. I found this old web page published back in 2012 where the guy was able to get the diag screen to show, took photos to prove it, but then basically said, "Yeah, I don't know how I exactly got the watch to do this. I just kept pressing buttons and somehow made the diag screen show up."
This was not a satisfactory answer for me. I had to figure this out.
I knew that in order to make the screen appear, only the two side buttons are used. After messing around with it for a few minutes, I then got the idea to hold one button and press the other a few times, and ta-da, got it. I then repeated the process to make sure it wasn't just a fluke, got it to work every time, and that's when I grabbed my phone and recorded a video of it.
I'm 100% certain that I'm the first guy to show not only the CA-53W diagnostic screen but more importantly show how to get to it.
Future watch buys
As I'm writing this, I'm wearing a Casio F-91W. Specifically, the F91WM-1B with the gray/monochrome style colorway. It's small, thin, light, digital and without question has the best legibility out of every digital watch I own.
I've said before the F-91W might be the best wristwatch in the world, and my opinion hasn't changed. Whenever I buy other watches, I like them at first, but at some point I will go back to the F-91W or A158 (mine is the gold tone A158WEA).
The only watch I'm considering getting next for now might be the A700W for three reasons. It works just like the F91W, has a better night light and is even thinner at just 6mm. These reasons are enough to go ahead and get one even though it is functionally the same as the F91W.
Aside from that one specific Casio model, I'm not going to buy another watch for a while because what I intend to get next will not be cheap.
What I want to concentrate on next is an analog that's as close to maintenance-free as possible with ultra-legibility so it can be read at any angle. The easiest (and arguably best) way to get that is with a solar powered quartz dive watch. The solar battery will last for a very long time, and the quartz movement will keep time better than any mechanical movement without the need for it to be serviced.
Seiko rules the roost here, no question about it. But to get something proper, a minimum of about $250 needs to be spent. I've never spent that much on a watch in my life, but I know that a solar power Seiko quartz diver is the best of the lot. Built tough, has some of the best lume in the business, obviously has proper water resistance if it says "DIVER'S 200M" on the dial (certification is required to have that printed on there,) keeps great time... that's pretty much as good as it gets.
Is it as maintenance-free as solar digital? No, because you have to adjust the watch once a month so the date is correct, and once every time daylight savings changes - but that's it as it requires no maintenance otherwise. Wear it, beat it up, use the thing.
With that said, the Casio A700W - if I even bother to buy that - will be the last watch I get for a while. Then it's on to getting a Seiko when the time is right. I've owned a Seiko before but never one of their diver models, so that will be a first if I get one at some point.
AeroBand PocketGuitar review
Better than a travel guitar? Yes.
AeroBand reached out to me and asked if I was willing to try the PocketGuitar product out, so they sent me one for free to review. While they didn't pay me anything, you can consider this a sponsored article.
The video above shows me actually using PocketGuitar for the first time. It did work.
I was happy to see that PocketGuitar did work on the first try. The app worked and did not crash. The response of the sweeping motion of the PocketGuitar to simulate guitar strumming did work, and work fairly well.
PocketGuitar could be used for songwriting because it is very easy to switch back and forth between chords, including many that you have never seen before.
This is better than a travel guitar
I've seen travel guitars for sale in guitar stores for years, but I've never seen the appeal of them. However, I can see getting actual good use out of PocketGuitar when traveling.
My practical side tells me PocketGuitar is the better thing to take on a trip. I could use PocketGuitar on a flight or on a bus easily. And I can keep it 100% silent just by using ear buds or headphones.
Another good practical use of PocketGuitar is for learning new chords - although I wish the app actually showed the guitar tabs for each chord presented. Maybe it will in the future. But even without the tabs, the app is an excellent reference to look up chords very quickly and hear what they sound like.
I think the best selling point of PocketGuitar is for travel, simply because it is the absolute smallest way to get guitar-like play that literally fits in the pocket.
I meant it when I said I would prefer to use PocketGuitar over an actual travel guitar. Smaller, easier, and most importantly, it works.
Do I have any complaints?
Yes, but they are very minor.
The instruction manual needs to have QR codes printed or say "Go to www.aeroband.net/pages/app" to make it easier to find the AeroBand app.
The instruction manual should tell you to charge the PocketGuitar first before using it.
The app itself is very easy to figure out, but it could use a basic quick start guide. For example, in FreePlay mode, there could be a question mark icon (the ? symbol) the user could tap to see quick instructions.
Those are my only real complaints about PocketGuitar. Otherwise, it works exactly as it should, and the app was stable and operated normally.
Again, PocketGuitar did work on the first try as you can see in the video.
Would I recommend getting one of these? Yes. Great for travel and great for learning new chords with.