4th Generation Ipod audio quality???

[Spankypoo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by penbat Looking at Jeremy Horwitz's power users review on Ipod Lounge. he says that any 4G sound improvement seems very minor

With all respect due to Jeremy (he's put together a very useful site), I don't believe he has very useful ears for these things.

I toss the following grains of salt into the discussion:

He had the following to say when reviewing the MX500s:
The Good: Best value-priced pick for iPod replacement headphones for the price, nice integrated volume control, fit, look and case.
The Bad: No need to buy them until your iPod pack-ins die and can't be replaced under warranty; very similar to Apple's product.

So, no mention of sound quality? And no need to buy 'em until your Apple buds are out of warranty? Ehh. Glad somebody else can get some happiness out of the Apple buds!

Ignorance is bliss, and it's cheaper!

And in fact, in that review also had this to say about the MXs vs. the Apple buds: "These two pairs of headphones sound virtually identical to one another"

Again: rock on, J!

Lindrone said the 4g sounds noticeably better - he's probably in a better position to say so.

Mort

 

[br--]

I would just like to say that I am quite impressed with this review. What I found particularly interesting was that it takes less time to copy the data to the cache and that the sound quality has been improved.

 

[mirage]

Would anyone happen to know how the 4th gen's audio quality compare with Creative's latest Zen Touch?

 

[KellDammit]

flame away, but in all honesty, i find the g4 to sound too harsh and sibilant for my tastes (shure e5/lossless/EQ OFF), especially at moderate to loud volume. taking a bright source, and making it brighter was just NOT a good idea...
in particular, "s"'s seem overly exaggerated or 'hot' (as compared to the perceived relative levels of the rest of the spectrum) and it find it very distracting to the point of annoyance...
using it with sony 7506's exhibits a pronounced lack of bass and seems to aggrevate the top end problem even further.
i'll have to try out my e2's...as their more subdued top end might offset the new "improvements". now, the exact same file out of my pc, mac (yes, i have both, and love both) or g3 ipod headphone out sounds much better...smooth, and more evenly balanced with either the e5's or 7506's (bass is back!). no eq on ipod, itunes or systems.
anyone else agree? or do i just have a bum unit? i was fully expecting to be pleased by the new better sound...so much so that i had reripped a bunch of stuff as apple lossless to take advantage...but that was so bright/harsh i just couldn't bear it...so, back to 192k aac, which is STILL a bit much...gotta use the treble reducer eq.
is it just me?

btw, nice review, lindrone

kell

also, incidentally, i encoded a song over 7m long lossless, and i get buffer drop-out at the same time, every time in that piece (right towards the end).
you can feel the disk spin up as it happens...

 

[rextrade]

Just got the 4G and the sound quality does seem slightly better than the 3G, but I can't tell if that's because I'm just excited to have a new toy. Unfortunately, the reason for me getting the 4G was that I destroyed my 3G, so I can't do a side by side comparison. But, the bass seems fuller and the high end a little more brilliant, and if using the eq, the bass doesn't distort as much (yeah, I know, eq is "bad").

[edit] By the way, I'm using e5's, unamped, and ety 4s's with and XP7. AAC 224-320, and in some cases Apple lossless.

 

[lindrone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KellDammit flame away, but in all honesty, i find the g4 to sound too harsh and sibilant for my tastes (shure e5/lossless/EQ OFF), especially at moderate to loud volume. taking a bright source, and making it brighter was just NOT a good idea...

Everyone's taste is different, so what some think is an improvement might indeed be "brightness" for others. There's no reason to be flamed for this, I think what you said are pretty much on the spot. Most people appreciate the extra brightness, because iPod has always been a little more "sedated" before. For some other people, the 3G could still be more preferable. The only problem is 3G is eventually going to be phased out (after they get through all the refurb sales.. hmm..).

 

[chumley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lindrone Everyone's taste is different, so what some think is an improvement might indeed be "brightness" for others. There's no reason to be flamed for this, I think what you said are pretty much on the spot. Most people appreciate the extra brightness, because iPod has always been a little more "sedated" before. For some other people, the 3G could still be more preferable. The only problem is 3G is eventually going to be phased out (after they get through all the refurb sales.. hmm..).

Are you referring to Headphone Out, or Line out?

If the former, yeah, I agree. If the latter, no. L/O from the 4G (with the Sik), is the best, least 'colored' output I've heard from a portable yet, IMO.

 

[lindrone]

Specifically referring to the headphone output.

BTW, if you haven't read my review, I do like the 4G's headphone output more than 3G's.

I don't think the difference between 3G and 4G's line-out is that much, if any at all. Even the 3G was known to have a extremely flat line-out signal that's competitive with many desktop CD players around the $400 range. I think the 4G's improvement on that part is marginal... but only because there's really not much room left to grow from the 3G's line-out quality.

 

[chumley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lindrone Specifically referring to the headphone output. BTW, if you haven't read my review, I do like the 4G's headphone output more than 3G's. I don't think the difference between 3G and 4G's line-out is that much, if any at all. Even the 3G was known to have a extremely flat line-out signal that's competitive with many desktop CD players around the $400 range. I think the 4G's improvement on that part is marginal... but only because there's really not much room left to grow from the 3G's line-out quality.

I have. You review's a great bookend to the IPL review... although I find the knowledgeable tech/audiophile's frame of reference in your review more relevent...

Yeah, my 3G's L/O and my 4G's L/O are much more similar than they are different; somewhat akin to the diff between my old, sold HD600's and my new HD 650's... perhaps not that strong a difference, but different in similar ways if that makes any sense...

 

[plainsong]

I a/b'd my 3rd gen 4th gen last night, and there is a difference through both headphone and line out. Using ms-1's and ety 4p's, the 4th gen ipod is more forward, a tad more mid-bass although it's still the basic ipod sound. In comparison, the 3rd gen ipod is more laid back. So far I'm liking this minor sound tweak especially for portable use.

edit - Reading what Lindrone was saying about competing with a desktop system, I don't know. It depends on what you mean by competing. Yes the sound from the ipod is musical and yes you can immerse yourself in it and enjoy it. I consider it a very high quality although I know the apple-bashers will jump all over me for saying that.

However, comparing Kingston Wall Trilogy III track 4-5 in Apple lossless on the ipod amped with the headsave mint vibe with dt531's, and the same tracks with the nad/perreaux... it's just no contest. The home combo has depth (and I mean depth) and impact, and a cleanness to the sound that the ipod just can't produce. The ipod can give you a feeling of it, but the home setup should actually deliver it.

I know this isn't too scientific given the amp differences, but I believe in pairing portable with portable and home with home. It's more realistic that way. A Perreaux is sort-of heavy to lug around in your bag.

 

[lindrone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong However, comparing Kingston Wall Trilogy III track 4-5 in Apple lossless on the ipod amped with the headsave mint vibe with dt531's, and the same tracks with the nad/perreaux... it's just no contest. The home combo has depth (and I mean depth) and impact, and a cleanness to the sound that the ipod just can't produce. The ipod can give you a feeling of it, but the home setup should actually deliver it.

Well, I think the amp does make a big difference here. I had the Nad 541i before, I don't know how much difference there are between the Nad 541i and Nad 542 in terms of performance. However, I know that I like my modded CE775 more than the 541i. There's more fluidity and detail in the CE775 over the 541i.

So the tests consisted of using my CE775 with the HR-2, and the iPod w/ lossless files & HR-2. Given the same amp & headphone, the only difference being the source... it's hard to tell the difference between the iPod and the CE775. Yes, in the end, after careful testing and being really critical, CE775 has a little more detail and little more refinement, but not the difference between day and night.

Of course, the point is not carrying the iPod around with a HR-2 around wherever I go. However, I think one, if using lossless files, can possibly consider using the iPod to build a good mid or entry level home system around it, instead of opting for a more traditional route of standalone CD players.

iPod's line-out has also been tested by Stereophile before... the frequency response is astoundingly flat and accurate. Even Stereophile succumbed to the fact that iPod might be good enough to compete against many CD players in its price range.

Anyway, you should give it a shot and see how you feel about it. Let us know if you think what the differences are

 

[Jahn]

i'm glad the ipod line out of my 3G is tested favorably against the 4G line out, since that's the way I'll be using it. I feel better about it thanks!

 

[JohnnyLightOn]

I am saving up for the Sensa 2X-S to go with my Gen 3 40GB iPod. What would be a good, relatively inexpensive amp I could use between the line out and the Sensas? I don't have the funds to get both the Sensas and a good amp yet.

Or, would it be worth using it only from the headphone out for now and saving up another $750 for a good amp? This will be for fixed, home use.

 

[lindrone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyLightOn I am saving up for the Sensa 2X-S to go with my Gen 3 40GB iPod. What would be a good, relatively inexpensive amp I could use between the line out and the Sensas? I don't have the funds to get both the Sensas and a good amp yet. Or, would it be worth using it only from the headphone out for now and saving up another $750 for a good amp? This will be for fixed, home use.

I'm probably going to acquire a lower class amp in the next few weeks or so... So I can test exactly how much amping really affect the 2X-S, and at what point does the saturation of improvement occurs. I mean, there's a good improvement with HR-2 driving my 2X-S, but I don't have a lower class amp to compare it to. 2X-S is very, very consistent with its sound signature, and it's also very easy to drive as well. So I have to wonder if you can use a lower class amp and still get very satisfying results.

In the meanwhile, if you do get a 2X-S, I wouldn't be mindful of using it only out of the headphone output. I don't use any sort of amp with my 4g iPod on a day to day basis. I do use the 2X-S quite a bit when I listen to music at home, plugged into my HR-2 (and in most ways, have substituted my usage for CD3000 now).

 

[plainsong]

The nad really taught me to be a member of team source first. Even with the crappy project headamp, this C542 delivered a sound the size of which I'd never heard from headphones. That experience taught me how much source really does matter. But I'll see if I can find a mini-rca somewhere around here and tell you what I think of the ipod/Perreaux.

But I agree that absolutely the ipod could be a good way to get off the ground. It's far less painless than trying your luck on ebay with old pcdp's, and now with lossless and all sorts of line out options, it can really deliver some sonic goodness.