Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › iPod Nano 7G opinions
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iPod Nano 7G opinions - Page 2

post #16 of 50

Phones are subsidized  since they are typically sold with contracts. A new iphone without a contract is probably at least $600. The Samsung Galaxy Player 3.6 is under $150 though and has a card slot. It has wifi, bluetooth, and GPS.

post #17 of 50

I myself was getting used to the very well-designed 6G nano, in which I got the 16GB version in silver over a year ago, and paired it up with my FiiO E5 silver amp with a FiiO L3 connecting the two and my trusty cling-wrap-modded Sony MDR-EX90SL IEM's and also my Sony MDR-V700DJ with an abbreviated (shortened) cord, as well as my MDR-NC50s.

 

I used to tell others even here on Head-Fi when I first heard of, did my research on and later obtained my nano 6G that my all-new Head-Fi-style setup was all pre-planned and it all started from the neck-up:

 

iPod nano 6G -> FiiO L3 -> FiiO E5 -> Sony MDR-EX90SL/V700DJ/NC50/other phones/cans/IEM's with short cords

This is me when I use my current iPod nano 6G setup previously described above: L3000.gif

 

This is me and other Head-Fi users who found out that the new Lightning connector Apple came out with will not work with nor support all of the iPod gear they spent $$$ on: mad.gif

 

.....any questions???

 

I was (and still am) proud to use my iPod nano and amp combo on my shirt collar and it was very convenient for me compared to my old equipment which was like a couple of bricks in my hands and din't work with most of the iPod accesories or most accessories for that matter.

 

I am very disappointed with Apple's decision to come out with that proprietary 19-pin Lightning connector, which will not support either line-out or most other items, like headphone amps, clock radios, the massive lineup of iPod-compatible car decks and other accessories like it that people like you and I have bought over the past 10 years that the (now) old 30-pin connector on previous iPods used to hook up to.

 

In fact Apple is screwing over its own loyal customer base by also not offering any kind of legitimate solution rather than just their wanting to shut down the third-party aftermarket that had been so loyal and dedicated, and now, just like what Nintendo did when Atari and other third-party companies came out with games and gear for the NES system back in the late 1980's-early 90s, Apple wouldn't be above trying to gouge third-party companies like Griffin, Sony, Kenwood and others out of a hefty amount of $$$ just to get licensed to make gear that will work with their new proprietary Lightning connector.

post #18 of 50

Have lots of iPods. Many different models and gens. Wife loves her Macbook. Personally the ONLY thing I think Apple has going for it is the UI and that's pretty much gone for me (as an athlete) with the demise of the click wheel. Can't be trying to look at some dinky ***** screen while I'm trying to work out. I'll just use my Clip+ more and more and watch Apple slowly alienate it's fan base I guess. Noticing less and less iPods and iPhones at the gym these days whatever that portends.

post #19 of 50

With this garbage that Apple is now trying to pull off, I just might actually go back to good-old MiniDisc and the superior sound quality of ATRAC/ATRAC3/ATRAC3plus using my legacy (pre-Hi-MD) MiniDisc Walkmen and home and car decks and for my mass storage or other portable music needs go to my 20GB NW-HD5 ATRAC Network Walkman with my arsenal (notice I didn't say manchester united or chelsea, folks, GO GUNNERS!!!) of gear and accessories I either bought for it or currently use with it, such as my RM-MC40ELK remotes and my cling-wrap-modded MDR-EX90SL IEM's, along with a whole slew of USER-REPLACEABLE batteries that have up to 40 hours of life on a single charge!!!

post #20 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by JK1 View Post

Phones are subsidized  since they are typically sold with contracts. A new iphone without a contract is probably at least $600. The Samsung Galaxy Player 3.6 is under $150 though and has a card slot. It has wifi, bluetooth, and GPS.

 

Try looking up what Virgin Mobile is. (Hint: no contracts.) I paid $179 for a very decent Android phone up front, then $35 a month with no commitment beyond one month at a time. Apple is ripping off its iPod customers, it's as simple as that.

post #21 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by JK1 View Post

Phones are subsidized  since they are typically sold with contracts. A new iphone without a contract is probably at least $600. The Samsung Galaxy Player 3.6 is under $150 though and has a card slot. It has wifi, bluetooth, and GPS.

 

The 3.6 also has the worst screen of the Galaxy players, not just in size, but quality of display. The 4.0, 4.2, or 5.0 would be better.

post #22 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achmedisdead View Post

 

The 3.6 also has the worst screen of the Galaxy players, not just in size, but quality of display. The 4.0, 4.2, or 5.0 would be better.

In addition to being much more expensive though, the larger Galaxy Players seem much less convenient as players for those who don't want video due to the larger size. I would really like to see a Galaxy Player 2.4" or 2.8" that is priced under $100.


Edited by JK1 - 9/25/12 at 8:15am
post #23 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by JK1 View Post

In addition to being much more expensive though, the larger Galaxy Players seem much less convenient as players for those who don't want video due to the larger size. I would really like to see a Galaxy Player 2.4" or 2.8" that is priced under $100.

There's very little chance of that happening. Even Apple finally gave into the demands of the public and upsized the old 3.5" screen of the iPhone and Touch to a 4" screen. And there's more than video involved on these players....games, the aforementioned GPS, etc.

post #24 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achmedisdead View Post

There's very little chance of that happening. Even Apple finally gave into the demands of the public and upsized the old 3.5" screen of the iPhone and Touch to a 4" screen. And there's more than video involved on these players....games, the aforementioned GPS, etc.

Many adults aren't interested in games. GPS might be useful. How do you get street data for the GPS? Is it through WIFI, or can you also download plenty of street data ahead of time?

post #25 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by JK1 View Post

Many adults aren't interested in games. GPS might be useful. How do you get street data for the GPS? Is it through WIFI, or can you also download plenty of street data ahead of time?

I couldn't tell you, to be honest....it's not something I've ever had occasion to use. I do think there are Google maps with downloadable data though.

post #26 of 50

I am interested in downloadable map data that integrates with the GPS function though.

post #27 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by JK1 View Post

I am interested in downloadable map data that integrates with the GPS function though.

I would imagine that it would integrate, as long as the GPS was enabled....maybe ask one of the SGP owners over at ABI? There aren't many owners of them in this forum. 

post #28 of 50
Back on topic you 2,... rolleyes.gifwink.giftongue.gif
post #29 of 50

I bought the iPod nano 7th edition last week. Personally, I was attracted by his design, the FM radio and the touch. 

Where it was in my hand, the first impression was good. The usability was wonderful, albums, tracks can be easily selected ... and in a while. Also FM radio have a good frequency scan. Touch screen was not as sensitive as the iPhone one's, but it is ok. 

Lightning connector is, for some aspects, better than old 30 pin connector. For example, drag and drop of an entire album on AAC 256 kb from iTunes takes less than 5 seconds. 

But, another story is sound quality.

I spent 2 hours comparing iPod nano 7th edition with the iPhone 3Gs, by using the following headphones:  akg 450 (portable) and akg 240 and listening the following albums: 21 (Adele), Discovery (Daft Punk), The division bell (Pink Floyd), converted by lame to 320 kbps MP3 from flac.

The first impression was that iPhone 3GS sound more than one step better. 

The sound was much more clear and detailed in 3G than in Nano. Also instruments were more defined. In both high frequencies was quite good but the Nano sound less clear and was a little bit crispy. But Nano's mid-high range really disappointed me. This range of frequency sound so confused, like compressed and it was difficult to clearly understand instruments playing in this range. Bass range was pronounced in 3G and quite lower in Nano's, especially with AKG 450.

Another important feeling was that 3G sound more warm, while Nano's sound like something artificial. 

The best played album for Nano was Discovery, and following listening with other Albums confirm me that impression: Nano is rather better in electronic music.

These impressions were similar for both headphones. 

Also I tried to connect Fiio E11 to headphone out and the feeling was quite similar.

At this scene we must add that 3G has a quite good line out, while nano haven't one. You must buy an adapter that it is supposed to play worse than the headphone out. 

So, If you like sound quality, I pod nano 7th generation is not the player you'd like to buy. 

Hope to be helpful.

    

   

post #30 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asuriel View Post

I bought the iPod nano 7th edition last week. Personally, I was attracted by his design, the FM radio and the touch. 

Where it was in my hand, the first impression was good. The usability was wonderful, albums, tracks can be easily selected ... and in a while. Also FM radio have a good frequency scan. Touch screen was not as sensitive as the iPhone one's, but it is ok. 

Lightning connector is, for some aspects, better than old 30 pin connector. For example, drag and drop of an entire album on AAC 256 kb from iTunes takes less than 5 seconds. 

But, another story is sound quality.

I spent 2 hours comparing iPod nano 7th edition with the iPhone 3Gs, by using the following headphones:  akg 450 (portable) and akg 240 and listening the following albums: 21 (Adele), Discovery (Daft Punk), The division bell (Pink Floyd), converted by lame to 320 kbps MP3 from flac.

The first impression was that iPhone 3GS sound more than one step better. 

The sound was much more clear and detailed in 3G than in Nano. Also instruments were more defined. In both high frequencies was quite good but the Nano sound less clear and was a little bit crispy. But Nano's mid-high range really disappointed me. This range of frequency sound so confused, like compressed and it was difficult to clearly understand instruments playing in this range. Bass range was pronounced in 3G and quite lower in Nano's, especially with AKG 450.

Another important feeling was that 3G sound more warm, while Nano's sound like something artificial. 

The best played album for Nano was Discovery, and following listening with other Albums confirm me that impression: Nano is rather better in electronic music.

These impressions were similar for both headphones. 

Also I tried to connect Fiio E11 to headphone out and the feeling was quite similar.

At this scene we must add that 3G has a quite good line out, while nano haven't one. You must buy an adapter that it is supposed to play worse than the headphone out. 

So, If you like sound quality, I pod nano 7th generation is not the player you'd like to buy. 

Hope to be helpful.

    

   

Yours is the first negative opinion of the player's sound that I have heard.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › iPod Nano 7G opinions