[goodvibes]

Quote:

 
 
come on...

You come on. I said for me. Lucky for you if not.

 I'm still an analog/HiDef kinda guy and was into HiEnd audio before CDs appeared and never drank the Koolaid that many here grew up on. Never bought a CD until I couldn't access a performance in vinyl. For perspective, I've since owned some ridiculously expensive CDPs trying to squeeze the most from the format. Get a good enough setup and you'd hear the same. Most don't need it that good and more power to them.
 
I'm referring to properly ripped CDs then converted. I'm also a fan of high rate CBR vs VBR. I listen for myself and have done the comparisons many times to double check. Most have never heard a better source than digital through a mediocre player or PC. That's not what one should compare to if speaking in absolutes but that's a different discussion so I'm out but gain a bit more experience before mocking an informed post even if you don't agree.
 
 

 

[Rabbit]

Certainly spent some time with tips. I learned that the comply and the rubber tips are great, and the silicon tips are awful for me.
 
At this point, I am getting ready to return them, and pick up something that you guys have recommended or a lower end Shure, to see what they sound like. I also realize that iPod's are not the best audio players; I like the apps, to be honest.
 
I'll give a little more listening today to a solo horn playing (since that is what I play), and I will make a final decision.
 
I really appreciate the help (to repeat).

 

[kiteki]

 
Quote:

Certainly spent some time with tips. I learned that the comply and the rubber tips are great, and the silicon tips are awful for me.
 
At this point, I am getting ready to return them, and pick up something that you guys have recommended or a lower end Shure, to see what they sound like. I also realize that iPod's are not the best audio players; I like the apps, to be honest.
 
I'll give a little more listening today to a solo horn playing (since that is what I play), and I will make a final decision.
 
I really appreciate the help (to repeat).

Try the Shure SE210 if you don't mind weak bass, and go for the Shure SE425 if you want a good sounding all-rounder.
 
If you want excellent timbre of instruments like a Horn, you might be interested in trying out a Final Audio, like the FI-BA-A1.
 
 

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

Can you use a synonym to coherent please?
 
I don't fully understand.

 
Well, by coherent I mean that parts of sound don't seem like they are oddly detached from the rest of the sound. Sure, a headphone with great separation can portray each sound within a clearly defined space, distinct from that of all other sounds, but if it sounds coherent you can still get a feel for the whole performance happening at the same time - you can form a coherent, clear image of the performance in your mind. The saxophone player is there, the bass player is here and the vocalist is over there and they all play together right here, right now in this small room or a large concert hall and together create the music. But when the sound is incoherent, the image of the performance breaks up into parts that simply do not attach together realistically in space and/or time and/or character. You may hear a saxophone player, and the bass player and the vocalist clearly, but you don't feel like they are playing together in one place, at one time and with a certain common sense of style that suits the particular music. You feel as though each of them plays on his/her own in a separate environment from the rest, and then the images of them playing are put together carelessly all over the place, so you can't tell where the vocalist really is or where the bass player is. They are all just "stranded on their separate islands." When this happens, the emotions and the flow of the composition suffers because there is no unity, no single reference point, no clear rules and pace for all the instruments in the composition to follow resulting in something that, well, just doesn't sound very good.

 

[ubercaffeinated]

I hope you are listening to alac/flac rips when you say everything sounds the same

 

[joshuamercer]

Half your problem is that the audio processor on the gen4 iPod is pretty terrible for dynamics and separation.
 
Do you have an iphone, or any other DAP?

 

[Rabbit]

Nope, just the iPod. I hear the iPod is not the best, but the other features are convenient to have. At most, I may be willing to get an amp sometime down the road, but a switch will probably not be happening soon.

 

[joshuamercer]

I don't think an amp will make a difference in quality unless you get one that uses the line-out (charging dock) connector.  It you run an amp from your headphone out you've still got the issue of the ipod's onboard audio processor.
 
Just something to think about. 

 

[goodvibes]

gen3 Ipod touch is better with stock player. Try downloading EQU and use that as the player for your gen4. No need to EQ, it's just preferable in that unit. Cliff has found the same.

 

[Justinicus]

Quote:

... And, finally, no disrespect intended, but the headphone out on an early iPod is not the last word in sound quality; if you can, try some other players....

Seconded.  This was a huge problem back in the early days of MP3 players.  My old Archos "jukebox" sounded awful.  iRiver sounded pretty good.  No-name cd-player-based MP3 player from China was a train wreck.  iPod 5th Gen (iPod Video, as it was commonly known) was listenable.  Lots of hard drive noise though, on top of the thin sound.  I didn't realize how spoiled I've been by my two iPhones (3G and 4) -- they sound fantastic compared to my 5th Gen.  Can't tell you how the 4th and 5th generations compare because the 5th was my introduction to iPods, but I have to assume they didn't take a step back in quality when they introduced video.
 
 
 

 

[Eric_C]

Just want to reiterate that when I asked about bitrate, it was also to determine if Rabbit had ripped direct from CDs/purchased from a legit source, or downloaded from unknown sources (eg torrents). I have a friend whose first high end IEM was the UM3X and she thoroughly loved them; I found her listening to rubbish rips from torrent sources. She didn't quite understand how much she was missing out on until I played her one of the same songs on my iPod, which was ripped from the CD at lossless.

Also, recording quality. Unless you know it was recorded and mastered well, a song could very well be limited here.

 

[knubbe]

Quote:

Maybe you are just sensitive to crossovers in IEMs, like me. I personally haven't heard the W4, but I did own W3 and I found them AWFUL. They basically sounded totally incoherent to my ears, although it did take me some time to realize that. There were pieces of music scattered around like pieces of jigsaw puzzle, but they were all over the place and did not form a coherent picture of the sound at all. I would take a $50 single driver UE Super.fi 3 over W3 any day.

That's not even close to what he's saying you fool.

 

[kiteki]

 
Quote:

Just want to reiterate that when I asked about bitrate, it was also to determine if Rabbit had ripped direct from CDs/purchased from a legit source, or downloaded from unknown sources (eg torrents). I have a friend whose first high end IEM was the UM3X and she thoroughly loved them; I found her listening to rubbish rips from torrent sources. She didn't quite understand how much she was missing out on until I played her one of the same songs on my iPod, which was ripped from the CD at lossless.

Also, recording quality. Unless you know it was recorded and mastered well, a song could very well be limited here.

Sigh... I see what you're saying but it doesn't take a high-end headphone to be able to hear those differences!  Actually it's very difficult to differentiate low quality and low bitrate rips with the Audio Technica ATH-CK10 and that is a $270 IEM, the CK10 will make bad stuff sound good, and that can be a very useful quality to some people, it depends on what you're after!
 
 
 

 

[a_recording]

Honestly I do agree with Kiteki, if OP doesn't feel like there was a huge difference going from Apple earbuds to the W4, he is not going to see a huge difference moving up from 256 to 320 or lossless, or moving up from an fourth generation iPod touch (which isn't a terrible source) to other PMP, or choosing different tips. All those are somewhat subtle upgrades (except of course in the case where your tips literally do not fit and do not seal with your ears.)
 
Recording quality can make a big difference of course, and I'd suggest that the OP listen to some other stuff - but I doubt everything the OP is listening to sounds awful.
 
I would find it hard to believe if the OP didn't notice *any* difference at all if he did A/Bing from the earbuds to the W4's, but considering the amount of money the W4's cost I could imagine being underwhelmed by the difference.
 
Put it this way; I sometimes have the opposite situation of occasionally wearing the Apple earbuds and thinking they aren't all that bad. They are made by Fostex after all, and apart from a sluggish sound and lack of dynamics, I don't think they are dramatically skewed with mid-bass bloat or any other shocking deficiencies. 
 
Now something with a really distinct sound signature, like the SM3's or a high end dynamic, or CK10's - that might be a more noticeable difference not just in technicalities but in terms of a different sound, and maybe the OP might appreciate that more.
 
What I'd suggest is rather than spending tons of cash getting other high end models in a quest for something good, just get some cheaper ones with distinct signatures and work out what you like most, and then get something better that shares the same signature. Even finding out that you find a particular sound awful is going to be helpful, because at least there is an appreciable (negative) difference there.

 

[a_recording]

Quote:

Seconded.  This was a huge problem back in the early days of MP3 players.  My old Archos "jukebox" sounded awful.  iRiver sounded pretty good.  No-name cd-player-based MP3 player from China was a train wreck.  iPod 5th Gen (iPod Video, as it was commonly known) was listenable.  Lots of hard drive noise though, on top of the thin sound.  I didn't realize how spoiled I've been by my two iPhones (3G and 4) -- they sound fantastic compared to my 5th Gen.  Can't tell you how the 4th and 5th generations compare because the 5th was my introduction to iPods, but I have to assume they didn't take a step back in quality when they introduced video.
 
 
 

The iPod Touch 4g is in the same generation as the iPhone 3GS/ iPhone 4 btw. The equivalent generation for an iPod classic (what you are talking about ) is sometimes called the 7g iPod classic.