[autonomous]

iPod is not a fad, nor is any other MP-3 player. They are a trend.

 

[shigzeo]

Yes, I really enjoy the Turbine because less hiss escapes into the wild, but they are not enough to tame the thing. The s639 does sound clinical - by digital, I mean the incredible low end accuracy. I came from analogue, and vastly prefer digital because of details which come out in the bass region.

If you mean clinical, yes the S639 is clinical and the iPod touch is too, to a certain degree. I think it just comes from the fact that there is nothing added to the touch. Warmth is in the Sony and hiss, reminding me of very good cassette tape players. Without the hiss, it would probably be my favourite portable DAP. But the hiss really ruins it as I have to use external amps with it.

Basshead - the X has gimmicks - almost as many as the iPod touch has - it's just that they aren't as well implemented. If you want no gimmicks, you need a stick player which only does audio. Even the 845 with S-master is full of gimmick. Let's face it, there are no audio-only players on the market except a handful of do-nothings like the iPod shuffle.

 

[HONEYBOY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif The gap isn't as bad as other players for sure - that at least is good. I generally use the volume of my 828 (and the same for the X) at 4-6 max depending on earphones. If with Monster Turbine Pro, then about 8-10 tops. Basshead, I appreciate that you love the X, but you are listening with your brain more than with your ears. It sounds good, but it isn't by any means perfect. I will be pickig up the 845 next month in Japan as proof that I love Sony, but mate, volume matched with an iPod touch (and I mean within about 0.5 of a decibel), there is nothing which the X does which the touch doesn't unless it is sheer beefiness in the low end. If we were to take the iPod to town for having horrid EQ and for having too high volume between levels, I can agree, but both are excellent in actual SQ (real, tangible SQ as put forth by limits of 16 bit audio), not both have different appeals. Gapless isn't a gimmick: it has been present since the dawn of recording. If that is a gimmick mate, then recording, mastering, professionalism in audio reproduction is a gimmick.

Shigzeo, I agree that the X isn't perfect and does have its faults like any other player. Nevertheless, I hope I don't come across as being cocky, as that really isn't my intention. However, I think you may just want to have a more lengthy audition of the X. Having owned both these DAPs for several months now (touch 2G over a year) the improvement the X offers over the touch 2G is very noticeable to me with just about any song I choose.

I find the X to offer a more organic/natural sound presentation with slightly better clarity and transparency. The X also has in my opinion much better treble extension and treble detail as well as a more detailed, smooth, refined and nuanced midrange and a faster more robust bass, along with a more convincing sense of "air/space" around/between instruments. The touch 2G arguably has the bigger sound-stage but I find that it doesn't resolve this "space" as well as the X and is less 3D. This may explain my theory as to why the X has slightly better instrument separation than the touch 2G. Its almost as if it carves out that "space" between the instruments leaving the boundary lines of instruments a bit more apparent. This alongside the cleaner transient response of the X allows it to not be congested like the touch 2G when things get busy. I suspect a lot of folks shall be thinking, what is it with this boy and his obsession with space? Is he an Astronaut or something?

Perhaps he should change his name form honeyboy to spaceboy haha. Anyways, I find that once one is able to discern this "space" ummmm "air" it adds a breath of fresh "air" to the music. This is the first DAP that has made this so apparent to me. The X is a good bit warmer than the touch 2G and I guess some folks will say that its coloured because of this warmth. Nonetheless, there is something about it that just sounds right/natural!! There are some things between them that are subtle and some more noticeable but to my ears the overall "enjoyment factor" the X has over the touch 2G is quite a jump.

 

[shigzeo]

The X is a very refined player, but I won't be buying one - too expensive. The 845 which uses the same amp will be mine in about 3 weeks. I have spent long enough with the X to realise I want it, but I think again that SQ is being mis represented. The Touch 2G isn't amazing, but it isn't well below the Sony for a lot of listening, and for some earphones, is simply miles above. If the X or A845 had no hiss, it would be my run-to DAP for a variety of dynamic earphones. For BA earphones, however, both the touch and the Sony suffer the same problems: roll off, suck out, etc.. In some ways, they perform very similarly and the sound differences (which shouldn't be evident because of any portable class A, AB, D amp) have to do with two things: applied EQ, and levels of harmonic distortion. Sony are geniuses are guiding the market - they have been for years and it shows. I love Sony, I love their sound, but it isn't reference quality. That isn't to say the iPod touch is, but it is closer to it.

I subscribe to Sony's philosophy (minus the hiss), but I think it has to be evaluated that it is engineered for audiophiles, not for musicians and its sound cannot serve as reference for outboard stuff. On the go, I get hella moist about the Sony's fun, engaging sound, but when I want to focus on the sound of the instruments, on their texture and placement within the music - when I want to get a better picture of how a headphone performs, the touch is better.

The warmth comes from the Sony's preference of about 1 decibel from anything below 100Hz - it isn't an intrinsic property of the amp. The S-master has nothing to do with organic sound. It does have a great 3D image, but that is mostly smacked together by the enforced dynamics of the applied EQ.

I love the sound, but it isn't sound quality I like, it is the quality (meaning character) of the sound which I appreciate.

 

[midoo1990]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassheadd /img/forum/go_quote.gif I didnt say gapless audio is a gimmick, the entire ipod functionality is a gimmick, being able to play kiddy games etc. The X1000 still destroys any overrated ipod to date. Its such a night and day difference its not even comparable. Ipods sound flat and lack bass and power, the sound is just too generic for my tastes. Like I said before, ipod users wont know what real sound is until they try another brand player and get off their high horse cause ipods are nothing but a fad.

There are two possible explanations to this post:1-either you are an apple hater
2-or you are a sony fanboy
seriously iPod doesn't have bass?did you have a dud unit or something?and Sony players doesn't destroy iPod in sq,I audiotened every Sony player and I own psp and one word to describe their sound:digital.they doesn't sound real to me,I haven't tried the X yet but if it is anything like the other lower end sony players,then it is digitalized.I know it isn't because I trust some headfiers opinions here like sooz,Honeyboy and shigzeo but I still can't jusify paying that much for an mp3,it's very expensive.it's $600 in my country and cusoms will kill me if I import it and it is only slighltly better than the touch so I don't need it.I am not an apple fanboy but try o be constructive instead of this meaningless hatred to apple.

 

[HONEYBOY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by midoo1990 /img/forum/go_quote.gif There are two possible explanations to this post:1-either you are an apple hater 2-or you are a sony fanboy seriously iPod doesn't have bass?did you have a dud unit or something?and Sony players doesn't destroy iPod in sq,I audiotened every Sony player and I own psp and one word to describe their sound:digital.they doesn't sound real to me,I haven't tried the X yet but if it is anything like the other lower end sony players,then it is digitalized.I know it isn't because I trust some headfiers opinions here like sooz,Honeyboy and shigzeo but I still can't jusify paying that much for an mp3,it's very expensive.it's $600 in my country and cusoms will kill me if I import it and it is only slighltly better than the touch so I don't need it.I am not an apple fanboy but try o be constructive instead of this meaningless hatred to apple.

midoo1990 yes, the X doesn't have that digital haze in the music like its predecessors. $600 for the X in your country wow! That's passed ridiculous.

 

[shigzeo]

It is 400$ here for the smallest version and probably pretty close to 600$ for the top. A lot of stuff is marked way up here which is a shame.

The X isn't digital in the same way; as I put it, digital to me means precise and detailed. The S639 is more 'digital' for the reason that Sony put less of its signtature into the sound: it has only about a 0,5 dB bump to 100Hz whereas the other players have more.

No matter, I'll have the A845 soon enough.

 

[Szadzik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by midoo1990 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I haven't tried the X yet but if it is anything like the other lower end sony players,then it is digitalized.I.

Well, if you have not tried it, then...

Lower end? X1000 is lower end?

 

[Sparky191]

Personally I like more precise for some music. Warm for others.

 

[soozieq]

I'm not an Apple hater either. I mean, I used my Touch for a long while. But compared side by side with my X, it has a thick haze that really stands out to me after so many months with the X. What the Touch does better is width of soundstage but the X is more 3D and involving, so it's down to what sound someone prefers and not what is supposedly 'technically' better. Just enjoy the music

 

[shigzeo]

Well, I have/am ordering the A845 now as the X really really sings with the FAD 1601 which is quite possibly my favouritest of stupid stupid earphones in the world. Such poor design regarding pragmatics, but such good good sound with a bit of EQ.

 

[Sparky191]

What is digital haze when its at home?

 

[midoo1990]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Szadzik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, if you have not tried it, then... Lower end? X1000 is lower end?

Did you even read my post?I think you got it all wrong....

 

[Sparky191]

I think he means, you said "like the other lower end sony..." Which implies the X is also a lower end. There was no need to comment on it as its obvious thats not what you meant.

Its pretty clear the X is better regarded than most other MP3 players Sony or Apple. How much better depends on the individual, some say a lot some say just a bit.

The iPods sound different, but not bad unless your are talking about older iPods, which tbh people usually are when they post along those lines, or are non specific about model or generation iPod they are referring to.

 

[midoo1990]

Better or not,Sony are ripoffs or at least the retailers.an mp3 for $600 I expect it to be flawless and made of gold, and contains some important features like other competitors like support of flac and support wider video codecs like avi.not to mention it's sq.no matter what everybody say,Sony always put a high price tag on their products and I have alot of Sony products that doesn't deserve their premium price tag.The British and Americans prices are good,but what about the rest of the world?why charge so damn high?I remember seeing in one of the Sony shop here in my country that the 729 or something like that was retailing for $400!this is a ripoff and no wonder no one here buy any Sony Walkman or mp3 players.