[estreeter]

elfary, I agree with you, but nothing will change the opinion of kostalex and others like him. I still find it interesting that there is this *intense* degree of analytical thought applied to the various iPod/iPhone models when there are, IMO, significantly better DAPs available in terms of (stock) SQ. What you won't find elsewhere is 160GB of storage for the asking price of the Classic, and you wont find the same number of options in terms of docking cradles/LODs/transports to extend your listening experience. I resisted the 800lb gorilla of DAPs for several years after buying my 1G Touch, and I probably wouldnt have bought the Classic if I had taken heed of some of the posts here, but I'm happy that I got great VFM, even if it never leaves the house.

 

[kostalex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by estreeter /img/forum/go_quote.gif but nothing will change the opinion of kostalex and others like him

What is a boor. It is time to open my ignore list, never tried it before.

 

[kostalex]

Oops, does not work. I thought I would not see estreeter posts anymore.

 

[pez]

Quote:

Originally Posted by estreeter /img/forum/go_quote.gif elfary, I agree with you, but nothing will change the opinion of kostalex and others like him. I still find it interesting that there is this *intense* degree of analytical thought applied to the various iPod/iPhone models when there are, IMO, significantly better DAPs available in terms of (stock) SQ. What you won't find elsewhere is 160GB of storage for the asking price of the Classic, and you wont find the same number of options in terms of docking cradles/LODs/transports to extend your listening experience. I resisted the 800lb gorilla of DAPs for several years after buying my 1G Touch, and I probably wouldnt have bought the Classic if I had taken heed of some of the posts here, but I'm happy that I got great VFM, even if it never leaves the house.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kostalex /img/forum/go_quote.gif Oops, does not work. I thought I would not see estreeter posts anymore.

Both of you seem not to be mature enough to handle this argument civilly. You both have your opinions, remember that. No one can change it.

 

[kostalex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pez /img/forum/go_quote.gif Both of you seem not to be mature enough to handle this argument civilly.

Welcome join our "immature" club. The basic membership requirement is to judge the persons and their qualities instead of gear and topic. You just passed the test.

 

[ckturtle]

kostalex, I appreciated the information you had provided.

 

[ckturtle]

I just wanted to add that after a week of constant burn-in my '09 Classic is now coming around.

And...I know this might sound odd, but I'd like to reiterate that by adjusting the brightness level on my '09 Classic the tonal qualities are also affected. Give it a try...

 

[kostalex]

Could you descibe these changes in details?

 

[ckturtle]

What is noticeable to me is that there is less texture to the vocals whenever the screen brightness has been increased. It also works inverseley too.

It could be my imagination, but I don't think so. It just sounds unusual at first blush. But, that's what I'm noticing.

I hope others hear it too, or maybe, it's just time I start turning my audio equipment in.

 

[pez]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kostalex /img/forum/go_quote.gif Welcome join our "immature" club. The basic membership requirement is to judge the persons and their qualities instead of gear and topic. You just passed the test.

Actually if you weren't busy bickering and being immature, you would've read that I've made most of my posts informational. I'm not judging you, I'm telling you what everyone else is most likely thinking as they read through that non-sense.

 

[kostalex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pez /img/forum/go_quote.gif Actually if you weren't busy bickering and being immature, you would've read that I've made most of my posts informational.

I told about your last post. Actually if you weren't busy bickering and being immature, you would've read that I've used "just passed the test".

Quote:

Originally Posted by pez /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm not judging you, I'm telling you what everyone else is most likely thinking as they read through that non-sense.

Whoa, you are telling for everyone else. This deserves premium membership.

 

[pez]

On topic. It seems the only difference I can tell so far between the Classic and my NWZ-A726 is that the Sony is a tad warmer.

 

[kostalex]

OK. I rate this 09 Classic slightly above the Clip and Fuze in terms of SQ, while 08 Classic gave up to these little babies.

 

[elfary]

So after many thread pages more or less we are all realising that something has changed inside the classic from 2008 to 2009. I believe that the audio chip has to be the same that the one inside the iPhone 3GS. The change can not be just in the amplifier section since the sound signature prevails when you listen through the Line Out bypassing the internal amp.

In these mass marketing days it still puzzles me that Apple did not even say a word about the improvement on the fidelity of the iPod Classic 2009.Furthermore when looking the outside you think that the device is absolutely abandoned by Apple when actually some resources into the internals' tweaking have been put up.It looks like they do not want to cash in. Curious really.

 

[kostalex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ckturtle /img/forum/go_quote.gif What is noticeable to me is that there is less texture to the vocals whenever the screen brightness has been increased. It also works inverseley too. It could be my imagination, but I don't think so. It just sounds unusual at first blush. But, that's what I'm noticing. I hope others hear it too, or maybe, it's just time I start turning my audio equipment in.

I feel too lazy to check, sorry.