sound quality
Okay, after reading through the boards and uming and arring i've decided that i will stick with getting my 15GB 3G ipod, i was temped to cancel the order after realsing that it's virtually impossible and too much hassle to get a US one. But, im going to ride it out, im determined to get it too work the way i want, and if that means using xplay to counteract the european stupid french volume limit thats the way it's going to have to be.
One question though, i understand xplay does not alter the actual mp3, which i presume is good as otherwise it may really distort it, but what is the sound quality on the ipod 3gen like?
I've heard that the onboard EQ is a bit crap, and im concerned that even if i use my very good set of sony mdr-805 earbud headphones, without any kind of amp on the ipod backing them up, there not going to sound too good.
My point is that, at the moment on my sony MZ-N10, the sony earbud headphones sound fantastic with a fair bit of kick in them because i've really tinkered with the EQ on the machine, there's not distortion what so-ever. Yesterday i switched off the machines EQ and they sounded very flat. Im just a little concerned that this will occur on the ipod.
Is the ipod's EQ adjustable, or is it preset, can you fine tune it? Or im i just going to have to spend more money investing in another set of headphones that purely rely on there own amp rather than that of the ipod's?
[1496 byte] By [
rickster2k] at [2007-11-9 12:58:01]
# 1 Re: sound quality
rickster2k, I'm surprised people have not jumped on this thread.
I'll be upfront and say that I, too, am a minidisc user and that I decided to return my iPod after about 30 minutes of usage. Let me explain why.
The primary reason was the sound quality. I love the sound out of my Sony MZ-N505. You're right, the flat unadulterated sound out of the minidisc player is rather flat, but that's just the way the music actually comes out (which by the way, is the way the iPod sounds without EQ). I have two megbass settings on my unit. I typically use the first one, but I sometimes punch it up to the 2nd for hip-hop or r&b music. The 2nd level of megabass is enough to give you a headache after a while. It really kicks some serious arse. Like I said, the unEQ-iPod sound is pretty much like that of the minidisc without any type of tone control (i.e., rather flat and dull).
The EQ settings for bass booster, r&b, and hip-hop on the iPod all distort the music badly. Of course, this could be due to the particular mp3 files I had. However, the same files sounded fantastic on my minidisc player (with a direct conversion to ATRAC using NetMD simple burner). These were mp3s encoded between 128 and 192k.
I thought that perhaps the mp3s needed to be encoded a certain way to sound good on the iPod. I thought it too much trouble. Besides, I have an iRiver ChromeX mp3/cd player, and the very same mp3s sound great on that player (though not as good as the minidisc).
Have a look at this web blog that I found: http://www.poknow.com/blog/7/393 . Had me ROFL.
Now, as for those buttons, they drove me crazy. I like to hold the unit in my hand. I constantly switch tracks and browse. I kept accidentally hitting the buttons. It drove me crazy. Just brushing the unit would make it go to the next song. In 30 minutes of usage, I think I only managed to listen to one complete song without having to find my place again. However, that was a secondary issue to the sound. I probably could've gotten used to the buttons. My friend uses the HOLD switch constantly. That would drive me nuts.
I am amazed when I heard rave reviews of the sound quality of the iPod. I hear about "pulse-pounding" bass and I'm wondering what everyone else is talking about. My iPod had no bass. But don't believe me, get yourself to store and listen to the unit. Find out what they've got on the iPod, then bring the same track on your MD player. Listen to the difference and trust your own judgment.
Edit: just wanted to add that I used the Sony MDR EX70LP headphones with all my players. They are not the most sonically accurate headphones out there, but they do a great job with bass.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:15:51 >
# 2 Re: sound quality
Thankyou for taking the time out to respond to my post, and probably saving my 300 quid if not the hassle of returning the ipod.
It looks as if my suspicions have been confirmed, thankfully in enough time to get my current order canceled. Im doing a U-turn, yes, i can accept the EU volume restrictions, etc, but what i cannot accept is poor or flat sound, and if the EQ is going to have to be turned off without distorting my music then in my opinion the sound is going to be totally unacceptable for my purposes. So there it is, im sticking with the Sony MZ-N10 NetMD player; granted it doesn't have a hard-drive and the looks of the ipod, but it is light, has a long battery (one which is replaceable) and the sound is the best i am going to get; plenty of punch, rich sounds, im sorry but i just could not accept flat EQless music. At the end of the day i would rather carry around half a dozen more Md's and have great sound, than a hard-drive with flat bassless, poor sound.
Don't get me wrong present ipod owners; i think the ipod is still a fantastic product (im not even going to bother looking into getting the zen), it looks so tasty, and the whole 'hard drive carry all your music' thing is so very appealing, esp. for someone like me who has a lot of music, but the bottom line is that coupled with the eu restriction (which i could like with by getting xplay) the sound and lack of EQ is a major flaw on apple's part. Why even put in an EQ setting if all it does is make your music sound worse, come on, team up with a good acoustic company (pioneer, denon, sony, kenwood, etc) and get the sound issues resolved.
So there we have it. Maybe i'll get gen4 ipod, or even gen3 if they sort out in EQ, but i looks as if me and my MZ-N10 will be inseperable until something comes around and beats it on sound quality. If there's one thing sony are good at, that is sound engineering, apple need to take a leaf out of thier book on that.
# 3 Re: sound quality
rickster2k, I still suggest you listen to the iPod yourself for your own peace of mind. There are literally millions of people who will tell you the iPods sounds fantastic. I don't know why, but there are including tons of self-described audiophiles.
I like my music to have a deep sound, and maybe it's not "true to the source" material, but it sounds really good. A month after having returned the iPod, I borrowed my friends for a few minutes to convince myself I made the right decision. I thought, "Maybe I was being too harsh. Maybe it wasn't really that bad." I absolutely did make the right decision.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:17:50 >
# 4 Re: sound quality
I'd like to offer a dissenting opinion here, but first a disclaimer. I suspect that rickster2k is in the EU somewhere based on his concern over volume limitation, and rumor has is that the volume limiter also affects the sound, so maybe my comments don't apply there.
Anyway, I've been in MiniDisc since 1999, before the MP3 thing really got serious. I never really liked MP3's because Sony's ATRAC blows away the "standard" 128 kbps MP3 in terms of sound quality. I had little interest in solid-state MP3 players when they first came around, and while I thought the first iPods looked cool and all, I still wasn't inclined to switch over. What moved me over was the combination of AAC encoding, reasonable drive sizes, PDA features, and size of the 3rd gen iPods. While they aren't as good as ATRAC, 160 kbps AAC files encoded with QT's "best" setting are actually good enough for the places where I tend to use portable players--airplanes/airports, buses/taxis, mowing the lawn, etc.--noisy places. So I took the plunge and got an iPod.
Wow, do I ever NOT miss MD. Having 1000+ tracks on the iPod means that I don't have to have remembered to pack a specific disc if there's a particular song I want to hear later. I never have to dig through my bag on an airplane for a disc which I can't tell from another one in the dark. It's tons easier to make a mix via playlists in iTunes than it is to record one to MD. And so on and so forth.
Of course, that may be because I don't have a "NetMD" since those weren't on the market when I got into it. In fact, I don't have a portable player that even supports MDLP because they didn't exist back then, and even though all I want is a play-only player, I can't get one with a remote for less than $150, and I ain't blowing that for another player just to get a modest technology boost. But I can get firmware upgrades for my iPod. (Actually, I don't think I could use a NetMD anyway since I'm on a Mac.)
The iPod convenience more than makes up for the very marginal difference in sound quality. At least in the U.S., I give MD like five more years tops--it's a dying technology that even Sony only supports in a half-arse way here. Oh, and Sony's role as a member of the RIAA doesn't exactly put me in their corner, either.
Of course, despite all this, I'm still archiving all my old analog cassette tapes onto MD, go figure. It has its uses.
Oh, and iPods have a drastically higher coolness factor.
(Side note: I find a certain irony in someone who uses EX70s having complaints about sound quality; those things are like listening through mud. $12 Sennheiser MX400 buds sound better than those. Of course, people on head-fi have serious discussions about whether the Senns sound better than the "ultimate" Sony earbud, the E888, even though the E888's cost 4-5 times as much. But to each their own.)
# 5 Re: sound quality
SunByrne, you make some good points, and I'd like to respond to them.
I'll start with your last comment about the headphones. I've found that headphones are somewhat a matter of taste. Some people, including this reviewer on ipodlounge: http://ipodlounge.com/reviews_more.php?id=33_0_6_0_M love the EX70s, others hate 'em. Some people love those Sony E888 buds, but some people hate them. As I conceeded in my first post: "They are not the most sonically accurate headphones out there, but they do a great job with bass." In any case, I was listening through "mud" (as you put it) on both the iPod and my MD player, so the playing field was level there.
MD is a dying technology - no argument from me there. I wouldn't go out and buy an MD player now, I bought it in the past. (And by the way, you can definitely buy a mindisc player that also records for less than $150 with remote, but as I said, I wouldn't do it now.) I happen to use the NetMD features and love them. For where I listen to music, using MDLP4 and fitting 5 CDs worth of music onto one MD provides acceptable (though far from stellar) playback quality.
Boy, I'd love to have my entire music collection with me, which is why I was interested in the iPod to begin with. And you'll get no argument from me on the coolness factor. Nothing else comes close.
Most of your points, ranging from the death of MD to the coolness of the iPod are not disputed. However, the main thrust of my argument was the sound quality, and you only made a passing comment about the "marginal difference" in sound quality. Have you ever done a comparison of the sound? Without any type of EQ, I think an MD and an iPod with a well-encoded track sound very similar. But have you ever tested, a track encoded on your minidisc player with megabass on to a track on the iPod with or withouth EQ? If not, I urge you to try it out with various types of music. I'd like to see what you think.
Even more so than with the headphones, I believe sound "quality" to be a matter of taste. I want to be clear here and repeat what I wrote in my 2nd post: "I like my music to have a deep sound" even if it might not be "true to the source material." I've tried several sets of headphones on the iPod. I've tried those same headphones on the minidisc player (and my iRiver ChromeX) and they all sounded better to me. Because sound preference is so personal, I suggested to the original poster that he test out the iPod for himself.
I have a colleague who admits he uses his iPod basically because it's cool. In his opinion, my minidisc player sounds way better, but he wants to be cool. I want to be one of the cool kids too, but I'm not willing to sacrifice the sound quality for it. After all, isn't sound what a music player should be about?
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:19:53 >
# 6 Re: sound quality
Hmmm... As a Minidisc refugee I really regret continuing to buy MD gear after the iPod was released. I've had a variety of Minidiscs including the MZ-E10 and the iPod provides not only higher headphone socket output but certainly comparable if not superior quality. The major difference in output makes the choice of an iPod natural to me as I use relatively hard to drive headphones.
I didn't get any clearly discernible sound from my MZ-E10 when I plugged in the PXC250 in a travelling environment. The iPod drives them fine.
# 7 Re: sound quality
okay, i have had a chance to listen to both the ipod and the zen over the past few days and after making a few hard descions and doing a u-turn on my previous statement, i got the zen (sorry a cardinal sin for this board).
I tested both of them with a set of good sony headphones and found the sound quality of the zen was better (much more to my liking). The ipod was nice, lighter and smaller, but the sound was really flat with the EQ off, so i turned the EQ on, and not only was the volume too quiet (EU model), it started to really distort even on other settings. I tried the same with the zen and after tinkering with the EQ i managed to get my perfected sound - i still don't think the quaility is on par with my MD, but it is close, much closer than the ipod.
So there it is, i suppose i am a traitor for buying a zen; they are heavier and bulkier than the ipod (but i can live with that), but the sound quality for me is superior, plus there are a few extra benefits of a longer battery life, USB 2.0 and 5gb extra, but for me these things could have easily been sacraficed for the ipod, just not the sound quality.
Im happy with my zen, true its a little heavier than i would like, but considering i can fit my vast music onto it, i can compromise. Apple ipod's are very cool, but just not for me (for the time being anyway).
Thanks for everyone's help on the board, they help me find the best hard drive player for my needs.
# 8 Re: sound quality
rickster2k, good for you. Sound preference is a very personal thing and only you could determine for yourself which player you preferred. Since returning my iPod, I've had 2nd thoughts, but doing my 2nd listening test proved to me that I made the right choice. I'm still using my MD player, waiting til I find a player with sound more to my liking. I'd like it to be smaller than the Zen though. :)
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:22:59 >
# 9 Re: sound quality
true the zen is a lot bigger and heavier than the ipod, but it's no too bad, i can put it in my pockets, and although its heavy is something i can live with (although its a contrast to my md player which is sooo light :)). Acutally when you felt it its size is not too much of an issue. My whole stance on that anyway is that i make up for in weight what i would have done in extra MD's.
True, my MZ-N10 was fantastic, but i have a massive music collection and just having a increased choice of what is listen to, and everything in one player made getting a hard drive player a high priority on my 'wish list'
Besides, although the zen doesn't look any were near as nice as the ipod (although its not too bad) it spends most of it's life (so far) in my bag and pockets, and with its protective case on, you don't see much of it :)
# 10 Re: sound quality
If the sound quality on r&b music is not base enough, is it possible to set the EQ to a higher base response mode on the ipod?
# 11 Re: sound quality
Kelvin, if I understand you right:
The iPod doesn't have a really easy-to-use equalizer (IE, 3 or 5 bands, you control settings for each band individually) but instead has a bunch of presets. One of them is bass booster, so you can try that if you like. Main Menu->Settings->EQ
I agree with the posts above, though, that the iPod equalizer settings sound like crap. A few songs which really need extra bass or extra highs aside, the iPod is only listenable when you're listening to it without presets.
I would love it if Apple were to update the firmware with less muddy, less extreme equalizer settings. Honestly, my only real gripe with the iPod so far has been that it tires out my ears with its slightly harsh sound (good for rock, not so good for everything else).
FYI my setup is a US 15GB iPod with MP3s (128kbps-320, most are 192+) and Koss KSC-35's. I could hear the difference even with the crappy Apple buds, too.
# 12 Re: sound quality
Thanks for the quick reply, colonelbobo.
Well in my situation, my setup will be a 2nd gen 10gb iPod with either stock headphones or the sony ex71's. I listen to everything but I like it pact with at least a little base. (Such that is produced by Sony CD players). In your opinion, with the iPod EQ setting set to "base boost", will I be able to get some base kick from it?
thanks!
# 13 Re: sound quality
kelvin38, the iPod EQ settings for bass boost, hip-hop and r & b all distorted the sound terribly. I would not use those EQ settings at all. Listen to the iPod if possible before you commit to it. Listen to whatever tracks they have at the store and see if ANY of them have enough bass for you. Seems like your sound preference similar to mine. If so, I urge you to listen before you buy!
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:28:05 >
# 14 Re: sound quality
Anyone talking about sound quality and at the same time confessing to using EX71s shows how facile and stupid thi debate is. The iPod is a tad quiet, and isn't over-bassy. If you're the kind of person who has to have a massive sub woofer and drives along in the car with the windows shaking, go for a Zen. If you appreciate good high quality high fidelity sound, then go for an iPod.
# 15 Re: sound quality
I am using Shure E2's for ipod playback....Shures are in-ear canalphones that are made for musicians playing live, they reduce outside noice naturally, etc...really high quality, although nowehere near those etymotics...
...Anyway, ipod through these phones, w/o equalize, is alright....the spectrum is not fully defined.... My personal taste, at least.
i turn on the equalizer setting for treble boost, and sound just explodes, sounds crisp, clear, well defined, etc....Comparable to any portable CD player on the market.
I prefer higher treble, so that is just my reaction to the equalizer.
If you use crappy phones (like the included ones), sound will sound...shi.tty. However, if you get some high quality cans, or at least cans that sound good to you, you can judge accordingly.
For most people, the sound will be more than adequate, and actually sound quite good (accordingly, these are the same people who will use the ipod earbuds, so take that as you will).
# 16 Re: sound quality
Originally posted by dcx693
(And by the way, you can definitely buy a mindisc player that also records for less than $150 with remote, but as I said, I wouldn't do it now.)
Really? Where? I don't care about recording, but if I could get a portable player with remote that did MDLP (not from eBay) for around $100, that'd be way cool.
However, the main thrust of my argument was the sound quality, and you only made a passing comment about the "marginal difference" in sound quality. Have you ever done a comparison of the sound? Without any type of EQ, I think an MD and an iPod with a well-encoded track sound very similar. But have you ever tested, a track encoded on your minidisc player with megabass on to a track on the iPod with or withouth EQ? If not, I urge you to try it out with various types of music. I'd like to see what you think.
Aha! OK, I have a better sense of where you're coming from now. For me, music reproduction is about accuracy to the source. I generally don't like equalizers, becuase I think the producers/sound engineers who make the music have well-defined ideas about how it's supposed to sound, and I want my music to sound like that, so I almost never use EQ. (In fact, I rarely mess with even the tone controls on my home stuff.) So, I have done side-by-side comparisons between MD and my iPod, and I find the difference is there, but it's marginal--but that's not with EQ. If you're determined to have EQ, then perhaps things are different.
Even more so than with the headphones, I believe sound "quality" to be a matter of taste. I want to be clear here and repeat what I wrote in my 2nd post: "I like my music to have a deep sound" even if it might not be "true to the source material."
OK, so that's fine, and I respect your choices. My criterion is something more like "as true to the source material as possible" so you and I are bound to like different things because we have different criteria.
I just think it would be a mistake to rule out the iPod on the basis of sound quality in an across the board way.
I have a colleague who admits he uses his iPod basically because it's cool. In his opinion, my minidisc player sounds way better, but he wants to be cool. I want to be one of the cool kids too, but I'm not willing to sacrifice the sound quality for it. After all, isn't sound what a music player should be about?
Mostly but not entirely, at least for a portable player. For a portable, it should also be about convenience. Since I find the iPod reasonably close to MD on sound quality, and way ahead on convenience, I have to give the nod to the iPod over MD.
Good exchange, though, I hope this thread helps someone make their decision when considering both.
:)
# 17 Re: sound quality
SunByrne, you wrote:I just think it would be a mistake to rule out the iPod on the basis of sound quality in an across the board way.
I totally agree. I think a basic conclusion of our exchange is this: sound preference plays a big part in whether or not any device is perceived as sounding good. I think the iPod sounds true to the source, and in that respect, it sounds great. As for convenience, you won't get an argument from me there either. One iPod or one minidisc player with tons of extra minidiscs? No brainer.
Now, as to your questions. For a minidisc player that is under $150 with remote: http://www.planetminidisc.com/mz-n510ck.html. OK, so it barely makes it under at $149.99.
I wanted to make one comment though about having your sound reproduced so that it is "as true to the source material as possible". It's a great idea in theory, but just about impossible with headphones. Music isn't produced to be replayed on headphones. And going even beyond that, unless you had the exact equipment (or pretty close to it) that the producers of the music were using to listen to the music when they created it, you'll never get an exact match. That's not to say you can't get "close" to it, or that you shouldn't try to get "as close as possible". For me, at least when I'm playing back music on a portable, I just want the music to suit my preference. When I get back home to my stereo, I leave the tone settings defeated.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:32:03 >
# 18 Re: sound quality
Yes, I agree it's impossible in headphones to really get great fidelity--but as you say, as close as possible given other constraints (usually financial).
# 19 Re: sound quality
Originally posted by Jackonicko
Anyone talking about sound quality and at the same time confessing to using EX71s shows how facile and stupid thi debate is. The iPod is a tad quiet, and isn't over-bassy. If you're the kind of person who has to have a massive sub woofer and drives along in the car with the windows shaking, go for a Zen. If you appreciate good high quality high fidelity sound, then go for an iPod.
Yeah i've heard that ex71's make the ipod much better, but that still didn't convince me to get the ipod. See its not just all about bass (actually i don't like too much 'window shaking' bass as it drowns out the high-end stuff), but with the EQ off you not only loose the bass but also the high-and mid ranges, because everything is set to flat. The thing i do like about the zen, and which i really think apple should have added was a customisable EQ setting, granted the zen's is basic, but it did let me fine tune my ideal sound (and i could probably do it even more). The presets of both machines are pretty awful for my liking, either too much bass, or too little, more treble or less, ect, ect.
In my view if apple/creative could draw on the strengths of both machines then that would be fantastic, but thats pipe dream land!
# 20 Re: sound quality
rickster2k wrote:
In my view if apple/creative could draw on the strengths of both machines then that would be fantastic, but thats pipe dream land!
Maybe not. As much as it might have beaten upon in other threads for whatever reason, I think the iRiver iHP-100 might be the ticket. It's smaller than the Zen, just a bit bigger than the iPod. True, it "only" holds 10 gigs and might be priced higher than the 10 gig iPod, but if my other iRiver player is any indication, the sound out of it might just be what I'm looking for.
My "cheap" iRiver ChromeX mp3/CD player produces sound more to my liking than the iPod. In addition, iRiver has put out 3 firmware upgrades since I got the unit over a year ago. They've added some features that have actually been useful including 3 user-definable EQ settings. Plus, with each upgrade the track-to-track navigation times have dropped while battery life has remained stable. Plus, the unit is so customizable, there are so many options that you can set to customize the display, the playback modes, etc...
No one disputes the iPod will still be the design (probably the usability) leader, but iRiver impresses me with the functionality it provides even it in their low-end devices. I've never used their higher-end SlimX models, but I've heard only good things.
For me, I'll trade some coolness and design for sound the way I like it. Even with the 15 gig iPod now at Dell for $329 :). I'll hold out for something that I think might be better.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:35:11 >
# 21 Re: sound quality
For me, I'll trade some coolness and design for sound the way I like it. Even with the 15 gig iPod now at Dell for $329 :). I'll hold out for something that I think might be better.
My sentiments exactly! :)
# 22 Re: sound quality
You guys actually read my review/blog? Wow!!! I was so surprised when I saw my own link!
I'm so happy that I'm not alone... You won't believe how alone I was back in September... I swear I was the only person who thought that way...
Here's part two of my review... http://www.poknow.com/blog/18
I have recently started using my MD again with my E888's and my god... I think I cried...
It's been 10 months now... I think... I got used to the Ipod crap sound and listening to a Sony again... I didn't want to switch back... back to square one...
It's been another 3-4 weeks since I last listened to my MD... I think my ears deserve another treat...
PoKnow at 2007-11-15 14:37:17 >
# 23 Re: sound quality
PoKnow! Dude! I loved that blog! I did a Google search on "ipod bass" and yours was one of the first links that popped up. It made me feel soooo much better that I wasn't alone in thinking the iPod sound wasn't the be-all and end-all. (Again for people who are wondering about flaming me: I'm not saying the iPod is not sonically accurate, just that it doesn't produce the bass I want.)
A question on part II of your review: So when you hooked up the iPod to your stereo, did it produce sufficient bass?
My coworker (that I always write about) has resigned himself to the sound (just as you have) - and he's the one who really listens to hip-hop. He and I also have the same headphones you bought - the Sony MDR EX70.
The iPod is so beautiful. I feel the iPod envy anytime I see someone in the subway with one. Then I remember how bad my experience was. I think you said it best: "You know... It?s like a really really hot girl.. and you really really want to like her... but she's a cold ##### inside treats you like dirt... the sex isn't' good... but #### she looks hot and everyone who looks at you is envious... when you know #### well they're a bunch of suckers.. like you"
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:38:17 >
# 24 Re: sound quality
OK, so let me boil this down. This isn't about sound quality, it's about bass, yes? I also fall into the 'true to original' camp and I think the iPod does a very good job in comparison with the MZ-E10 and the MD-MT888. (from recordings made on an MDS-E10 and an MDS-JE770) Ability to EQ is another matter entirely and the Minidiscs take that by a mile.
# 25 Re: sound quality
yes, thedodgyguy, I'd say that's pretty much it.
# 26 Re: sound quality
Don't know about everyone else but I get great bass out of the iPod and the Grado RS-1. I never have to use the POS EQ. I don't dispute the EQ sucks. The quality is fine compared to anything else IMO.
# 27 Re: sound quality
Im not denying that the US ipod's sound quality is good, but im really refering to the EU model, im sure i would have bought an ipod if i didn't live in EU, but the model i tried just wasn't loud enough for me and a little flat sounding. Granted headphones make a massive difference, but my zen sounds fantastic to the ipod i tried, its just a real shame because i really wouldn't have minded getting the ipod. Although my zen is doing me fine at the moment, only complaint being that its a little on the heavy side when it's in my pockets.
At the end of the day i could have bought xplay to sort out the volume or EQ'ed it in something like cool edit, but its too much hassle and cost.
I'm just wating for apple to sort out those EQ problems and sound limitation, then i'll get one :)
# 28 Re: sound quality
thedodgyguy, yes, in a sense it's not about sound "quality" per se, but it's about the sound that comes out of the iPod. The quality of the the iPod sound is not in dispute, but it doesn't fit some peoples' preferences. All the users who have posted in this thread either love or would like to love their iPods. We're just sharing our thoughts. The bottom line is that we'd think this great device would be even better if it produced deeper bass. My advice is not at all to avoid the iPod. I just advise people to listen to it before they buy.
columbo, I did a quick search on those headphones and they don't appear to be widely available, at least not in the US. Where did you get them, and how much do they go for approximately?
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:43:21 >
# 29 Re: sound quality
I was an owner of 3 Sharp MD players. I chose Sharp players simply because because they produce great bass sound, without distorting the original music you're listening.
Then I switch to Nomad Jukebox, then switch to Nomad Jukebox 3. They sound great too, when applying custom EQ for the bass.
And now I switch to iPod. I totally agree with the original poster that iPod builtin EQ will just simply make the music worse. The only EQ I found that won't distort the sound is "Rock".
But after I lower all the volume level of my mp3 collections to 89% level thru. mp3gain, I can now fully enjoy my iPod with all EQ settings. It simply sounds great. No distortion at all.
I know that's a lot of work for volume leveling. But you only need to do it once. Plus you have normalize all your mp3.
I have purposely tried to test the sound quality of both njb3 and iPod, both with the best EQ setting that I've chosen for each of them, using Sony earbuds, Senn. PX-200, Senn. MX-500, and ER-4P. I can tell you that iPod can sound as good as njb3 through these headphones.
But iPod looks so cool, and so much more portable and fit in my pocket...
# 30 Re: sound quality
Wilfred, I had actually recently considered testing this out, just hadn't gotten together with my friend who still has his iPod. I thought the mp3 volume might be an issue, but then wondered why it wasn't an issue on other mp3 players like my ChromeX, and my Nomad II. It didn't make sense to me that they'd somehow produce a less-distorted sound from worse source material, but if it works, then perhaps I will be an iPod user after all!
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:45:23 >
# 31 Re: sound quality
Originally posted by dcx693
columbo, I did a quick search on those headphones and they don't appear to be widely available, at least not in the US. Where did you get them, and how much do they go for approximately?
The RS-1? They're made in the US! I ordered mine from a shop in Camden. There are lots of places selling Grado headphones and although not all may have the RS-1, all of them should be able to order it for you. The RS-1 usually sells for about ?700 in the UK and $700 in the US.
http://www.gradolabs.com/product_pages/rs1.htm
# 32 Re: sound quality
Originally posted by dcx693
Wilfred, I had actually recently considered testing this out, just hadn't gotten together with my friend who still has his iPod. I thought the mp3 volume might be an issue, but then wondered why it wasn't an issue on other mp3 players like my ChromeX, and my Nomad II. It didn't make sense to me that they'd somehow produce a less-distorted sound from worse source material, but if it works, then perhaps I will be an iPod user after all!
Yes, I agree this is an issue for iPod. But since most of the time I choose random play from thousands of songs, I need to perform volume normalization anyway, so this issue is not an issue for me.
Note that for njb3(and probably the same case of Zen), if you turn on SVM (Smart Volume Management) feature, you can't use the EQ feature nor so called EAX. So if you want both volume leveling and EQ in njb3/Zen, you still need to use mp3gain. Being also a Nomad user, I have complained for this several times in Creative newsgroup, but it seems the problem will still remain at the moment.
BTW, I have also tried driving my Grado SR-225 thr. iPod and njb3, without using headphone amplifier. njb3 seems too weak to drive this headphone, most bass are lost. For iPod, if I turn the volume a little bit higher, my Grado still gives me good sounding with reasonably good bass. I treat this as an extra bonus for iPod. :)
# 33 Re: sound quality
If that's the case you might have a defective NJB3. When I had the RS-1's, both the ipod and the NJB3, and the zen for that matter, drove them very, very well.
Don't forget the Grado line is only 32 ohms.
# 34 Re: sound quality
wilfredt wrote:
I totally agree with the original poster that iPod builtin EQ will just simply make the music worse. The only EQ I found that won't distort the sound is "Rock".
But after I lower all the volume level of my mp3 collections to 89% level thru. mp3gain, I can now fully enjoy my iPod with all EQ settings. It simply sounds great. No distortion at all.
I had my coworker try this on his iPod. It made a HUGE difference. 50 Cent now sounds like he's got some real bass going on! The normalized mp3s with r&b EQ sounded almost as good as my iRiver ChromeX. (The ChromeX itself is a step down in "quality" from my MD player though.)
Now I have to seriously consider if I want to buy the new iPod. The sound preference factor I can now live with. The question is: can I deal with those buttons? In my 30 minutes of real-world usage, I wanted to shoot myself after hitting them accidentally once every two minutes...but I'm going off the sound quality topic now.
One thing that still puzzles me is why the mp3gain made such a large difference. I understand that if if the input signal of the mp3 is too high, the EQ will clip those signals and distort the sound. However, why is it that my ChromeX and Nomad II (which also decode mp3 files) did not have an issue with the same files? My only conclusion is: the Apple decoder works differently and perhaps not as well, in the sense that perhaps the other devices compensate somehow for "bad" (overly high gain) mp3 files.
In any case, I urge anyone who has a problem with the iPod EQ to normalize their mp3 tracks with mp3gain. The difference is like night and day. Your tracks will not be as loud, but the iPod itself should be loud enough to compensate.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:49:19 >
# 35 Re: sound quality
columbo wrote:
The RS-1 usually sells for about ?700 in the UK and $700 in the US.
Holy cow dude. For that price, I'd hope they would deliver decent bass. And if I get these, I'm sure I'll be less of a target on the NYC subways rolling with over $1,000 in equipment.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:50:25 >
# 36 Re: sound quality
Thats really good news on mp3 gain. I was actually going to post today. The plot thickens for me; i gave up with the zen and returned it today, i really liked the sound quality and everything else, but it was far tooo heavy for my liking, after going from my mz-n10 to the zen it was such a difference, and as i carry any device in my pocket, it was like carrying a brick in there, shame, because i really liked it. Ah well back to the ipod then, and i must say after reading about mp3gain im really excited about getting one now (thankfully i never cancelled my ongoing order with a uk supplier, so now all i have to do is wait, but i think its going to be a long time as there are supply problems in the UK :()
So im defintely getting the 3g ipod now, got to get xplay to sort out the EU volume cap (already got decent headphones) and mp3 gain, then i should be sorted.
Only thing is the wait for my ipod is going to be a really pain!
# 37 Re: sound quality
rickster2k, I am also really on the verge of giving the iPod another try. This is all very twisty. I wonder though, with the "reduction" of volume in the mp3s, what that will do to battery life. When listening to my friend's iPod with the mp3s normalized to 89 db, the volume had to be up half way to even hear anything above the office background noise. I had to crank it to 75% to get it to be resonably "loud". Maybe I will wait for the iRiver unit! Argh!!!! Decisions!
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:52:30 >
# 38 Re: sound quality
By normalizing with mp3gain I'll get my pounding bass? I find this very hard to believe
But at the same time... I must say I'm VERY excited.
I will try this out for sure! If it works... you guys will never hear the end of it!
The volume thing does concern me though... I usually listen at 75%... I hope I don't have to max it out...
PoKnow at 2007-11-15 14:53:33 >
# 39 Re: sound quality
What a terrific thread! Thanks to all posting!
My problem is that I notice no differences when cycling through the EQ settings, and I have good ears -- when a cassette recorded in Dolby C is being played on Dolby B, I notice it immediately.
I'm recording in something called MP3Pro. Is that the cause? (This is via Music Match and a Dell 8500/XP Home laptop.)
And what are the advantages to MP3Pro?
Also, what is this "mp3again"? Is it possible that I could get the EQ settings to work if I lowered the volume to 89% as mentioned above.
# 40 Re: sound quality
So far all mp3gain is doing for me is cleaning up my mp3s... sound is cleaner...
but my bass isn't any better... if it is... not noticable anyways
PoKnow at 2007-11-15 14:55:33 >
# 41 Re: sound quality
Tried about 3 mp3s now... flipping back and forth
Ok... this is what I've found...
Over the last 10 months I have noitced that not only is the EQ bad... but I've noticed that the Ipods bass in general is slightly lower than your Sony MD's line out... slightly... not by much... but noticeable
Now having said that... what mp3gain does is it ends up trimming the treble... the sounds that hurts your ears when it's too loud...
So what does this mean? Because the treble that hurts your ears is now toned down... You'll end up turning it up louder... and it appears as though the bass is better...
That's what I think anyways... bass isn't any better... just that you can turn it up louder so the bass stands out a bit more...
Now I'm going to debat with myself whether it's worth my time to mp3gain my entire ipod for a small but good improvement
PoKnow at 2007-11-15 14:56:26 >
# 42 Re: sound quality
Originally posted by PoKnow
Now having said that... what mp3gain does is it ends up trimming the treble... the sounds that hurts your ears when it's too loud...
So what does this mean? Because the treble that hurts your ears is now toned down... You'll end up turning it up louder... and it appears as though the bass is better...
That's what I think anyways... bass isn't any better... just that you can turn it up louder so the bass stands out a bit more...
PoKnow, I think you have missed my point. mp3gain does not in anyway change the basic sound quality, not improving nor making it worse. If you read the doc. of mp3gain, I remember it said all it does is inserting some special mp3 header indicating the overall volume level of the mp3 should be. When any good mp3 player (including iPod, of course) read the header, it should play the file in the desired volume level.
I think what each iPod EQ setting does is simply amplifying each range of frequency notes to a certain level. But since most of our mp3 encoders by default will encode at about 95-98% volume, simply amplifying the frequency certainly will distort the music. (I am not an expert, but I guess making the volume over 100% is where distortion starts)
Now after leveling to 89% by mp3gain, AND AFTER APPLYING IPOD EQ SETTING, no more distortion will occur, and the EQ works as it originally designed. i.e. The iPod EQ does improve the music as it should now.
# 43 Re: sound quality
Originally posted by Piranhahaha
What a terrific thread! Thanks to all posting!
My problem is that I notice no differences when cycling through the EQ settings, and I have good ears -- when a cassette recorded in Dolby C is being played on Dolby B, I notice it immediately.
I'm recording in something called MP3Pro. Is that the cause? (This is via Music Match and a Dell 8500/XP Home laptop.)
And what are the advantages to MP3Pro?
Also, what is this "mp3again"? Is it possible that I could get the EQ settings to work if I lowered the volume to 89% as mentioned above.
mp3gain is a free software to normalize your mp3 files volume.
mp3 pro is another lossy sound file format which claims to have much better quality at lower bit rates as compared to mp3. In other words, you can have more mp3 files in a given storage, with similar sound quality. But it only works if the player supports it.
iPod does not support mp3 pro format, so all it does is simply playing the 'ordinary' mp3 part of your mp3 pro file. So if you encode it at 64k mp3 pro, you are probably listening at 64k mp3 quality, not the advertised better quality of mp3pro itself. Relatively low quality mp3, of couse, can't make any big difference by applying EQ settings.
Another possible reason may be due to your headphone. Try using a better headphone other than that comes with iPod. (No, I am not saying it is a bad headphone, but just there are many better one). A cheap but good choice may be Sennhieser MX500/MX400. PX-200 will be much better, and how about...
# 44 Re: sound quality
PoKnow wrote:By normalizing with mp3gain I'll get my pounding bass? I find this very hard to believe.
Well, no. Sorry, mp3gain or not, I would never, ever describe any sound coming out of the iPod as pounding.
Today I tested a few tracks on my friend's iPod versus my iRiver ChromeX. Admittedly, all were 50 Cent tracks because that's all that we had in common. He had the original and the re-gained tracks available. I recall that when I first did this test a while ago, the un-EQed, un-re-gained iPod tracks sounded horribly flat compared to the ChromeX. And when I applied EQ to those tracks, they distorted terribly.
I don't think it's simply a matter of the treble range being toned down. The bass on the 50 Cent tracks used to really be distored, and they no longer are. It definitely has something to do with the loudness of your tracks.
Today, the EQed re-gained tracks on the iPod sounded almost as good as on the ChromeX. Again, not nearly as good as the MD, but "good enough" in my estimation. (My MD is currently in for service :( but according to Sony is on the way home :) ). My friend definitely thought so as well. He was thanking me profusely because he was previously very dissatisfied with the sound.
Unfortunately, we didn't get to test out a variety of music, since he didn't get to re-gain much more than that. He and I were very impressed with the difference. He's going to try upping the volume from 89 a bit higher to see where the balance "tips". For understandable reasons, he'd like to use less volume if possible since the iPod's 8 hour battery life was achieved with volume at 50% of max.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 14:59:29 >
# 45 Re: sound quality
Just curious about something though. Why is it that the iPod "needs" to have tracks at around 89 dB whereas my ChromeX and Nomad II do not? I realize the EQ mechanism must be different, but why is it that these other two players can apply tone control to an mp3 file and produce a non-distorted sound while the iPod cannot?
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 15:00:40 >
# 46 Re: sound quality
Originally posted by dcx693
Just curious about something though. Why is it that the iPod "needs" to have tracks at around 89 dB whereas my ChromeX and Nomad II do not? I realize the EQ mechanism must be different, but why is it that these other two players can apply tone control to an mp3 file and produce a non-distorted sound while the iPod cannot?
My first guess is due to lack of "preamp" implemented in iPod. If you open winamp's equalizer, on the left side you will see a "PREAMP" scroller, which in effect, can be used to either amplify or decrease the EQ setting as a whole. I guess other hardware music player will first descrease the whole wave form to appropriate level, before actually applying the EQ amplifying. This will then avoid the distortion from happening.
Correct me if I am wrong.
# 47 Re: sound quality
Originally posted by dcx693
Just curious about something though. Why is it that the iPod "needs" to have tracks at around 89 dB whereas my ChromeX and Nomad II do not? I realize the EQ mechanism must be different, but why is it that these other two players can apply tone control to an mp3 file and produce a non-distorted sound while the iPod cannot?
I can answer this. 89 db is not set in stone. It is typical for the levels of eq used in the the ipods preset rock and r&b. I have a few tracks that will clip even normalized t o 89dbs and many that won't clip if normalized higher to say 91db.
The problem with DSP eq is that very few implementations do it correctly. The ipod suffers the same problem as many other portable devices that have implemented DSP incorrectly. The first portable device to implement DSP was the Sony D-555 discman back in '91.
What is actually happening is that after the mp3 is decoded into a raw PCM format to be fed to the dacs, the DSP is applied. If there are samples that come close to 65535 (assuming 16 bit, but it maybe something lower) which would be the maximum, any math applied to increase this value by a certain db or percentage will cause it to clip right at the integer max. If you look at a sign wave that is generated by the raw samples, if the peaks of this sign wave get amplified beyond the maximum limit, they'll be clipped at maximum. The result is a squared off waveform.
Most portable devices use an analog eq applied to the music *after* it goes t hrough the dac and do not suffer numerical clipping.
It's perfectly possible to do DSP correctly, but it requires a dac that has wider inputs than the that of the source data. For instance, a dac that takes 16 bit samples should be more than sufficient for a decoder that produces 12 bit samples. That would allow a sample that is already maxed out in volume to be increased 16 times before it clips.
sorka at 2007-11-15 15:02:39 >
# 48 Re: sound quality
oic. That's sound interesting.
According to your description, it means the main problem is due to the dac chip. Then does it mean Apple can't fix this problem by upgrading the firmware?
# 49 Re: sound quality
Originally posted by wilfredt
oic. That's sound interesting.
According to your description, it means the main problem is due to the dac chip. Then does it mean Apple can't fix this problem by upgrading the firmware?
Not necessarily. There are a few ways they could still fix this problem. They could provide a means of transparant volume normalization by using a combination of the amp volume and the mp3 file gain. The decoder has a gain input that determines the range of decoded samples. This value is stored in the mp3 file is fed into the decoder and the sample is decoded at different volumes before it gets to the dac. Apple has demonstrated they can override this by setting a gain in itunes for each song that is not stored in the mp3 file itself, but rather the database.
The simple solution would be to adjust this gain value dynamically as the volume control is increase or decreased with a different starting base depending on the eq curve selected(apple would have to determine the right gaine for each eq). The scenario would be as follows. Start with the volume all the way down and the mp3 gain at some value that is low enough to guarantee no numerical clipping after decoding but before the dac no matter which eq curve you apply. As the volume is turned up, first increase the amp volume until it reaches maximum. After that, if the volume is turned up higher, the mp3 gain value is increased. The sacrifice here is some signal to noise because the amp is increased in output with the decoded volume low.
The user would never know this is occuring. They'd see the bar graph fill in and hear the volume go up. At some point, the gain value to the decoder would be increased because the amp was already maxed out, but they user would not know when this switch occured.
The clever thing to do would be to do the above, but in addition, dynamically adjust the eq so that it is attenuated the higher you turn up the volume.
Even better would be all of the above, but attenuate the eq based on the desired volume AND the decoded sample volume so that clipping is avoided even if it means diminishing the strength of the eq. However increasing the amp volume first to maximum as the ipod user turns out the volume and then increasing the gain into the mp3 decoder will allow very loud volumes with lots of base without distortion. This last scenario is probably not likely though since it would require software to look at volume of each decoded sample and do some sort of windowed type averaging.
sorka at 2007-11-15 15:04:43 >
# 50 Re: sound quality
Been reading these threads with vigor. I'm a jogger and a runner. On epinions, been reading reviews on slimx350 with some who say it skips while running or jogging. Those who have this or the chrome X or the ipod. Do any of these units skip while running?
mm
macmac at 2007-11-15 15:05:44 >
# 51 Re: sound quality
All this sounds very promising, someone will have to find out on mp3 gain when the sound starts to distort.
Surely apple could realise this and create some kind of firmware the reduces the distortion, as it would save us from having to alter every mp3 file.
Personally im not bothered about how loud i have to set it, if the battery life drops down then so bit it, its just something ill have to put up with, i'd rather have better sound and 6 hours battery.
Has anyone tried using xplay's volume increase after mp3 gain, or is this going to screw up the sound again. Because im in the UK, im going to have to use xplay anyway to get rid of the EU volume restriction, but if it means having the player up to a high volume then so be it.
# 52 Re: sound quality
wilfredt wrote:
My first guess is due to lack of "preamp" implemented in iPod. If you open winamp's equalizer, on the left side you will see a "PREAMP" scroller, which in effect, can be used to either amplify or decrease the EQ setting as a whole. I guess other hardware music player will first descrease the whole wave form to appropriate level, before actually applying the EQ amplifying. This will then avoid the distortion from happening
That would seem strange to me because my mp3 tracks that are like 95 dB sound just that loud. So that if my ChromeX is lowering the level, then applying EQ, then it would have to raise the overall volume again. I wouldn't expect such a complex operation in a "budget" player, but you never know...
sorka wrote:
Most portable devices use an analog eq applied to the music *after* it goes t hrough the dac and do not suffer numerical clipping.
That may be true. My MD player specifically states "digital megabass", maybe it's not totally an accurate description. Then again, it uses ATRAC and not mp3.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 15:07:44 >
# 53 Re: sound quality
Thought this was interesting enough to post:
I recalled that when using my ChromeX that the default setting is for the EQ effect to decrease as the volume output of the player increases. This is not the same as the "gain" of the file itself, but the volume level that the track is being replayed at. However, the player has an option to turn of this setting and keep the EQ effect even at max volume. I've never found the ChromeX to distort the sound even with the option turned off.
Here's a blurb from the iRiver web site:
Q. Why does the EQ effect decreases when the volume increases more than 15~17?
A. The EQ effect applies to both AUDIO CD and MP3/WMA. It is designed that the effect decreases as the volume increases, in order to prevent the distortion of sound by restricting the volume level of a specific frequency not to exceed the tolerance level.
Could this be a related issue? It's not the same as the iPod issue because I found that when applying EQ on the iPod, the bass would distort even at low volume replay levels.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 15:08:42 >
# 54 Re: sound quality
One more thought: what, if anything, does this mean for AAC files? Does the iPod decode them the same way? Do they also experience EQ distortion? Need some help here before I decide to buy yet another iPod.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 15:09:44 >
# 55 Re: sound quality
im not bothered about AAC because im using Mp3
# 56 Re: sound quality
Originally posted by rickster2k
im not bothered about AAC because im using Mp3
I'm using mp3 also, rickster2k, I was just wondering.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 15:11:44 >
# 57 Re: sound quality
I heard that AAC is supposed to be the new WMA, not that it really bothers me cause i've only got a pc.
Cheers dcx693 for trying that mp3gain out on your mates ipod (was at a 3rd gen?), its really reassuing to know that with a bit of tinkering you can make your ipod sound good.
Come on apple, make my ipod quicker (on the order status its currently 'being assembled' , coz i want it now! :)
# 58 Re: sound quality
Yes, my buddie's ipod is a 3G. I haven't talked to him today, don't know if he got a chance to try upping the volume on those tracks from 89 up.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 15:13:50 >
# 59 Re: sound quality
What's the XPlay volume cap removal process then? I didn't think it was possible on 3G iPods?
If it is, I'd be extremely interested to try it... That's one of the things left to do on my new 30giger, that and get some Etymotic earphones, unfortunately, the E5's are just too much.
# 60 Re: sound quality
Wow... this is nuts... "Bass Increase" actually works! It's still not good enough to drive my E888s... which i would prefer to use... but it does wonders for my Ex70s
Wow! Normalizing does wonders for EQ! When I was initally testing it EQ was off... Thanks for the explaination guys!
Still not the best but i dont' even care... much better bass and i didn't have to spend any more money on this... great!
PoKnow at 2007-11-15 15:15:46 >
# 61 Re: sound quality
PoKnow, I'm so glad this worked for you! I love the f***ing Internet. I got the idea of normalizing the mp3s from someone else before Wilfred posted his results, but he really got me moving on it. And I'm very glad that you now have some respectable bass.
One question though: what is the sound like on the E888s? I'm guessing not enough bass. If the bass is "adequate" on the Ex70s then it can only be less so on most other headphones.
Oh - and are you going to update your blog now? :)
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 15:16:56 >
# 62 Re: sound quality
E888s bass is worse than the EX70s without EQ... so yah no bass... not even a little
It's really too bad... the E888s sound so much better and cleaner when you have the right equipment to drive those things... bass is so much more solid... and treble is crisp...
and as for the blog? I'm thinking about it... would probably be good to spred the news... this is a huge news!
PoKnow at 2007-11-15 15:17:52 >
# 63 Re: sound quality
Originally posted by dcx693
Could this be a related issue? It's not the same as the iPod issue because I found that when applying EQ on the iPod, the bass would distort even at low volume replay levels.
It's exactly the same issue. Distortion occurs regardless of what the amp volume is set to. It occurs before it ever gets to the dac because the digital eq clips the values that are to be converted to an analog wave form.
sorka at 2007-11-15 15:18:57 >
# 64 Re: sound quality
I think that most of this sound issue has much to do with normalization and being too familiar with one source, ie. minidiscs. As a former Sony S2 minidisc user myself, I have to admit grudgingly that the sound quality on the MD is better than not only my new iPod but perhaps also better than my titanium Yamaha CD-player that's served me so well for nearly five years. The fact is that I too prefer deep bass, not subwoofer, hardcore gangster hip-op bass, but certainly some lows with a bit of rumble, and I also like crisp highs from the percussion and guitar, and Sony's Mega Bass feature is perfect for this preference, and I've just gotten so used to it.
When I listen to songs on my Pod that I've never heard on my MD, they sound terrific, but when going through familiar tracks, I just miss the "definition," "bass," and "crispness" of the MD. To remedy this, I will simply sell my MD and listen exclusively to my iPod and MP3 CD-player in my car (which, BTW sounds better than my MD with certain, bass heavy songs). Over time I will acclimatize to this and disdain the MD sound.
Also, I notice no distortion on my iPod with the volume at 70-80% and with either Rock or Loudness EQ settings, but maybe that's because I encode all my MP3s at 320kps.
Cheers.
# 65 Re: sound quality
BTW, I've so far only used my Gamma digital studio monitor headphones, so the lack of distortion noticed might be because of them. I've not tried the Apple earphones yet.
# 66 Re: sound quality
I think bertuzzi hit the nail on the head; we have been conditoned to this deep bass sound from previous equipment, and we've set a standard, for us the un-altered ipod sound with no EQ on the apple headphones is like a downgrade, those who say the sound is fine may have not had MD players or the like.
Anyway, im getting my ipod and looking forward to it. my md player is getting sold, so ill get use to the ipod sound eventually, although this normalisation process sounds like i does wonders for the ipod sound.
# 67 Re: sound quality
Yeah, my MD player puts out clean kick-arse bass even at "level 1", at "level 2" it's just unreal. I've mostly been listening to level 1 at this point, but even at that level, the bass is cleaner and more powerful than on the iPod. I'll have to normalize my mp3s and get used to the sound if I want to get one.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 15:23:02 >
# 68 Re: sound quality
apple must be laughing their butts off...
we are all (myself included) willing to dump a better sounding (whether we have grown accustomed to it or not is irrelevant... bottom line... we feel that it sounds better) piece of equipment for an Ipod where we can't stand the sound...
Sell or kick aside the better sounding technology... and pay an arm and a leg for the ipod...
and then say... I'll just have to get used to it by going cold turkey... I just won't listen to anything better and I'll get used to it...
Hah... funny isn't it... why are we doing this? and continue to do so? I ask that question everytime I turn my Ipod on...
I swear apple must have used subliminal advertising... we can't resist...
PoKnow at 2007-11-15 15:23:56 >
# 69 Re: sound quality
I think the reason people do it is because there is more to a portable music device then its sound quality. Portable audio is always about tradeoffs, how much space you have, how good it sounds, how long the battery lasts. If you want something that sounds amazing, chances are you aren't going to be able to carry around 7,500 songs at once and get great battery life.
If you are still willing to use your iPod, it obviously doesn't bother you that much. If sound quality was a deal breaker, wouldn't you just go back to minidiscs?
BigIzz at 2007-11-15 15:25:03 >
# 70 Re: sound quality
PoKnow, I think many users are (understandably) seduced by the great design of the iPod. Design and good looks are important, just put two females (or guys, cars, or computers, etc...) together and see which one people gravitate to. In the absence of any more info, you'd probably go for the more "attractive" choice. In the presence of more info, you need to weigh your options.
The iPod is not a "bad" sounding music player. By almost all accounts I've read, people have considered the sound to be excellent. Apple designs for the general public, and as I've been reminded: we MD users are not the general public.
If you've never compared the sound of an iPod to the sound of the MD side-by-side, you wouldn't know the difference. For people used to the minidisc sound, is having quantity (more music in one package) more important than "quality" (the deep bass we love?). Sometimes (like in your case) it is. I'd say Apple is doing a great job promoting it.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 15:25:58 >
# 71 Re: sound quality
This sounds like the "Which sounds better, the Zen of the Ipod" debates of the past, but a lot more civil. I have a Sharp 722MK and a Zen, and to me, both of them sound better than the Ipod, but not by any gigantian leap. All three are really within a stones throw of each other, enough (if you're not an audiophile) to not really have this be a factor.
However, I only quantify the MD if you use a home deck for recording from an optical source.
As far as bass, it all depends on the type of bass you enjoy. But this in itself is a lot more subjective and "setup" dependant than anything else. You have to consider the headphones you're using with all of these units. I can get a totally different bass reproduction from my Ety's as I could from The Senn PX100's, or the Sony CD3000's for that matter.
Of course throw a portable amp on the setup and that changes everything. ;)
Just some food for thought.
# 72 Re: sound quality
Funny to hear so many people talking about better sound when it's clear that they are flab-bass-holics. Get yourself some proper ear kit and you'll realise that the iPod sounds as good as MD, if not better. I hate the fact that EQ doesn't work properly, I hope they fix that. I don't use EQ that much normally so it doesn't bother me as much as some of you with crappy headgear.
# 73 Re: sound quality
columbo, we are not talking about sound "quality" in terms of the sound output of the iPod matching the original source material, at least I am not. On that subject, I don't have a problem with the iPod sound output. We are talking about bass output. Some people, including me, have a preference for stronger bass output than the iPod is capable of.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but whether someone uses something up to your standard or something "crappy" as you put it, if the iPod with EQ distorts for one set of headgear, it will distort for all. It's a function of the iPod, not the headphones.
You say you hate that the EQ doesn't work properly. Are you having the same issues as the rest of us in this thread? Have you tried what we've suggested?
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 15:29:00 >
# 74 Re: sound quality
get some bass-heavy headphones like sony v6... bever dt770... koss portapro... or, buy a zen :p
# 75 Re: sound quality
Originally posted by utexasizzle
get some bass-heavy headphones like sony v6... bever dt770... koss portapro... or, buy a zen :p
The V6's are not bass heavy, they are just perfectly flat from 5 to 30000 Hz and they're perfectly nuetral too which is why they are my choice at $70 over headphones that cost ten times that.
sorka at 2007-11-15 15:31:00 >
# 76 Re: sound quality
Did somebody do a real objective measurement using tone generator, oscilloscope and other equipment? I agree that many of us just do subjective opinion based on bass boost.
MOCKBA at 2007-11-15 15:32:09 >
# 77 Re: sound quality
For those interested, my coworker and I tried out four different music tracks containing various amounts of bass and set them at various dB levels using mp3gain to test out the EQ distortion.
Here are the tracks I used: U2: With or Without You,
Moby: Porcelain, Tal Bachman: Darker Side of Blue, Coldplay: In My Place.
The only track with EQ distortion (when used with the R & B EQ - which sounded the best to me) was the Moby at 98 dB. All other tracks were at 94-96, and sounded fine or at least acceptable. From that very unscientific test, I'd say gaining your tracks at 94-96 is possible. 89 would be the safest bet, but if I had an iPod, I'd rather not have to rachet my volume up any higher since it burns the battery more.
I will do some more tests with bassy music including some hip-hop and also some classical. Stay tuned.
dcx693 at 2007-11-15 15:33:05 >
# 78 Re: sound quality
Okay here we go...
Got the ipod this afternoon, impatiently waited for a full charge and then transfered 'Lee Coombs - Perfecto Breaks' onto it (very bass heavy mix cd), after i had 1st, mp3 gained it to 89% and then used xplay to adjust the volume to +100 due to the EU volume restiction:
Pleasantly suprised, first off i used my sony mdr-E805 earbud headphones (same ones i use on my md player) and set the EQ to flat (standard setting), track very flat and tinny, didn't really like the sound of this, after a few mins of tinkering i found the R&B setting, wow, much better, bass in the background, crisp treble, very impressed, although the bass wasn't as heavy as it was on my md player with these headphones, by no means was it lacking in bass.
Then tried it with my sony MDR-G52, over ear cans, much, much better than the earbuds, on R&B, very bassy, clean sound, plenty of warm rich treble, very, very good. Prettgood for headphones that only cost me 20 quid.
In conclusion from my short test i am very pleased with the ipod sound, much better than i had thought it would be, it must have been using mp3 gain and the R&B EQ setting because i can honestly say that the Zen i returned sounded no better, maybe a little more muffled than the ipod. Unfortunatley the earbuds don't sound as bassy as my MD player, but by no means flat, its a shame apple didn't have a customisable EQ because i could have probably adjusted this and made then sound spot on (for me the treble just needed lowering to bring out the bottom end a bit more, as i felt the treble was starting to drown out the bass).
As for distortion: none. With the EQ on R&B and having it up pretty loud i couldn't hear any distortion at all, volume was xplay adjustment was not even half way up and it was loud enough for me, with xplay setting on normal the volume was up much more, probably about 90 per cent (EU volume cap), still no distortion.
Cheers to everyone who helped me with the sound issues, i believe that the reason i have a perfect sounding ipod is due to 3 reasons. 1. Mp3gained my tracks to 89 per cent, 2. got a decent set of headphones (the apple ones in the box were not good) 3. found the best EQ setting, for me this was R&B.
