iAudio X5 vs iRiver H320: brief summary

Posted on my blog.
http://phonephile.blogspot.com/2005/...iver-h320.html


"All things said, I really did expect more somehow out of the iAudio. It's good, but the fact that it doesn't comprehensively outclass an outgoing product does raise some concern."

Interesting read....Thanks. I kept hearing that the build quality on the X5 was WAY superior. My H140 has incredible build quality...and the H320 is supposedly only a half notch down from that. Apparently, you're not in that (X5) camp.

I'm also surprised to hear that the sound was so similar/close.

If your impressions are anything like mine would be, than I would completely disregard the X5 as an H140 upgrade (which has been in the back of my mind).

Actually, although the H300 doesn't use alloys in the housing, how it is screwed together and the design attention to detail is superior to the H100 too. The H100 has more operational compromises than the H300/X5 (although it obviously has some other advantages to offset that), so it is an upgrade path. However it might be a very minor upgrade path in terms of what you want from it.

WOW! Really great review! I thought of switching to a X5 from my H340. But now I'm not so sure about it anymore. The bass response at very low frequencies is most important to me as I'm listening to a lot of chillout music like LTJ Bukem, Amon Tobin and Nitin Sawhney.

What do you mean by using the words "the X5 LOOKS a lot thinner than the H320". I thought the X5 actually is much thinner, isn't it.

Do more reviews like that. It's so hard to get valuable information about DAPs.

Quote:



Just for the hell of it, would you be comparing it to the ipod photo as well?

Would like to know your thoughts on that.

I was bored so read this article - which I have no interest in.

But I was distracted by the X5 v HD5 article.....any cracking buttons?

Seems to be a good blog, have now bookmarked it

Quote:




You know, I've been thinking abount the worth of doing this. I could, but any hint of favourable comparison of the Over-Ubiquitous Bar Of Soap on any point would be set upon by the iRiver uber-geeks (iRiver owner > English dictionary excerpt: "Hello, how are you doing?" > "Rockbox, rockbox rockbox rockbox rockbox?"), iAudio geeks-who-think-they're-stylish, not to mention alternative-sheep Sonyholics while the Creative contingent would mumble "well at least ours sounds better than anything else"


I suppose I'm tired of "discussing" this with people who're speaking from a position of aggressively biased ignorance. That sounds more exasperated than I am about it, but it can get a bit old sometimes.


On the other hand, actually there is a lot I can say good and bad as a comparison. The X5 is the ideal machine to compare with in many ways. I might do it. Or I might not. I need to get the Camera Connector though before I do. If I do.

Quote:



No, disrespect, Bangraman, but you seem to classify a lot of peoples' opinions regarding audio equipment as "uneducated" or "ignorant" just because they can't run all the technical analyses that you appear to revel in. Don't get me wrong, I dislike fanboy-ism intently, but it would seem arrogant to dismiss someone's judgement regarding how they like their music to sound. In addition, when someone confronts you with a technical argument (for example, the post from "an engineer" in your "HD5's little secret blog") you resort to the argument that the rest of us use, namely "I go with my ears first". Please do not take this post as a flame or any denigration of your usually informed viewpoint. Perhaps it may be seen as a discussion, but without any hint of agressively biased ignorance.

Well the Cowon X5 still appears to be the better player even in this a little less X5 cheering review. Especially in those fields that matter to me the most the two candidates par (sound) or the X5 is way ahead (battery, playlists on the go).

Quote:




Yeah... that post intrigued me as well. The thing is, 'going with the ears' is not just a retort. Putting it another way, e.g. people spend upwards of four figures on interconnects to get similar / less than the changes that the HD5 introduces to the sound at 'pseudo-flat' compared to a flat source. The curve is repeatable, and there is no other reason for it to be there than for a purposeful reason, if you see what I mean. Engineer's post is not fully considered.


The post is not about dismissing how people prefer their music to sound. Don't get it? It is that by colouring the flat sound, objective comparison between players is necessarily more clouded. This in itself is not a major issue but when the HD5 measures worse in terms of SNR (and in fact is audibly less faithful), etc than competing players it could be viewed as an attempt to muddy up the water to make up for an inadequate codec/dac fabric (I believe with the new Sony's it's all on a single chip). Now, if it is audibly less faithful, why is it considered to have very good sound quality. Because, and this is where I might be a little arrogant if I may , many people who're testing these for publication don't know what to look for when sound quality is mentioned. Flavour is a variable thing. Quality is much more of a constant.


Going back to the Engineer, many people may be essentially correct in technical terms. They may know more than me about the minutiae of such measurements... certainly I need a lot of help with that. But many people who spout facts on the net don't experience... yet they're convinced they're right. That "gets my goat" more than anything else to be honest with you. That I actually listen to stuff first, but also mix it up with some degree of control instead of fitting my experiences around theories is not arrogant, I think... let me know if you feel otherwise. I'll work on my future methodology. However if that means sitting in front of RMAA all day, count me out

Quote:




As I put on dapreview, the main reason I'm less than ecstatic about the X5 is that in terms of being an audio player, it's undergone almost no evolution since the M3... a player with plenty of room for improvement. Of course it has a screen now, but that's a little different.


And that wouldn't have detracted from the X5 had the newly added features been better considered. In the case of the Photo features, the features are usable but rather slow, and sometimes won't read pictures. The H320 threw up less errors in letting me see the pictures, although of course I couldn't zoom into the images on the H. And the video is very murky and unresolved. Placed side by side with the H320, the difference is major... everyone I showed both to said they would take the H320's clarity over the X5's slightly enhanced motion. OTG is however a much better proposition. It works a lot better than the H320 with the things that I tried it with.


It is 'good enough' an improvement, of course especially for people who want the additional functions. But looking at it from a previously M3 owner's perspective, I feel that a lot more could have been done in terms of the basic firmware for audio playback too.

bangraman, what methods do you use in order to determine sound quality? I.E, what artefacts do you listen out for, and how are they distinguished as flaws in quality? i sell mp3 players to get my cash, this kind of info would be usefull.
thanks

Quote:



Heh,

what?

I wish either company would push for a little advertising like apple whores the ipod. might get some third party products going on the awesome iaudio products. Glad both companies are getting recognition though.

Interesting read bangraman!

After my karma went wacky on me (it's still functional...for the time being) i'm looking at a H120 or a H140, but its gonna cost me. I've heard a H120 before and i thought it sound great, i guess i like my music colored, like i do with the karma

Keep up the great work and i definitely appreciate you posting your impressions and reviews...i'm gonna go dig around your site for more.