[dilpal]

^ or you have to try these both first.

 

[b0ck3n]

Like I said, it's not flat and you like the colouration, end of story.

 

[tinseljim]

Quote:

 nokia n91 smash iphone in sq,
http://blog.gsmarena.com/nokia-where-is-the-next-nokia-n91/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N91

first of all this is an iPhone 4 SQ forum and your post compares the n91 to an iPhone 3GS.
 
second of all the wikipedia article links to out of date forums on the subject - hardly critical proof that it 'smashes' the iPhone 4 sq. 
 
third of all it's not flat so it doesn't matter anyway - as b0ck3n said!
 
trying to be nice about this...truly. 
 
 

 

[dilpal]

why here most people at head fi are giving  their judgement alone on frequency curve without listening both the devices. For example if flat  frequency curve alone is deciding factor then sansa clip has to be best sounding device which is not actually.

 

[b0ck3n]

It's ridiculous to state that one DAP smashes another regardless. They can only go wrong really by either coloring the sound or introducing distortion. A perfectly flat DAP that doesn't distort is a perfectly good DAP - and the Sansa Clip+ is indeed such a DAP.
 
You are obviously free to enjoy colored frequency response in a DAP as much as you want, but generally it's not a great idea to add a component that affects the sound of a headphone outside of your control. Get the cheaper and much more flexible Sansa Clip+ and EQ it to mimick the FR plot of your Nokia there, and it'll probably sound even better as there is less gadgets in a Clip that add noise to the signal.
 
Quote:

why here most people at head fi are giving  their judgement alone on frequency curve without listening both the devices. For example if flat  frequency curve alone is deciding factor then sansa clip has to be best sounding device which is not actually.

 

[skeptic]

Quote:

 nokia n91 smash iphone in sq,
http://blog.gsmarena.com/nokia-where-is-the-next-nokia-n91/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N91

Neither of the links you've provided supports your conclusion...
 
As others have already pointed out, the first shows FR curves demonstrating that the N91 is worse than older gen iphones.
 
The second, a wiki article, makes unsupported claims about the N91 while citing (see FN5) to gsmarena measurements of the N97.  Look at the numbers.  Basically gsmarena concludes that the Nokia measures pretty well, given its price, as compared to the best in class options at that time, but it still has way higher distortion and stereo cross-talk than a 3g iphone.  No thanks.

 

[dilpal]

ok, i admit it is bit too much to state that one dap smashes other in sq. But i am just suggesting to give it a try before making conclusion on alone FR curve and some numbers.

 

[Zuqi]

Just got my iphone 4 yesterday, during my short audition, I was surprisingly found the SQ of iphone 4 is better than ipod classic!

 

[rasmushorn]

I have to agree with the folks who mentioned the hiss from the headphone out.
I had never heard the hiss before with my ER-4S but last weekend I played with the new Beyerdynamic MMX101ie and when I used them there was a constant hiss in the background.
 

 

[jbarbier]

Quote:

Just got my iphone 4 yesterday, during my short audition, I was surprisingly found the SQ of iphone 4 is better than ipod classic!

i find that it's the best sounding ipod/iphone i have ever heard.  the bass isn't as rolled off as some of the others have been in the past.  the sound also seems a lot more "black."  i bought it mainly as a phone, but it's not a bad DAP at all.  in fact, the stereo separation is pretty impressive with very little hiss.  i used er4-p/s, grado sr60, 80 and 225, shure e2c, koss portapros and ksc75.  they sounded decent with every pair.  even the sr225 and er4 with s adapter -- both which are a bit tougher to drive.  

 

[Goulou]

+1 the iPhone 4 sounds great!! ! 

 

 

[b0ck3n]

For anyone interested, here are iPhone 4 RMAA measurements.
 
As is usually the case with BA IEMs, the Triple Fis have a non-linear impedance curve, which coupled with the output impedance of the iPhone 4, skews the frequency response of the iPhone. Shouldn't be much of an issue with non-BA headphones, and the issue is completely removed by adding a <1 Ohm output impedance amp to the chain.

 

[yuriv]

You need to supply more context by showing the frequency response of a device with a very low output impedance, like a FiiO E7. You'll see that Markus Kraus's measurements all have a high-frequency rolloff. That means that the actual frequency response of the iPhone 4 is a bit flatter than the one you see in the graph--only a 1 dB variation throughout the audible spectrum after adjustment.
 
That's actually pretty good performance for a portable player. The Triple.fi 10 is a very demanding load--25 ohms at DC, 64.5 ohms at 1kHz, and a punishing 6.7 ohms at 10k according to this site: http://www.laaudiofile.com/ue_triple_fi_10.html . Almost everything else out there will get a much flatter electrical response. I measured the output impedance of the iPhone 4 a while ago and I got around 0.9 ohms. goldenears.net and sonove.angry.jp have similar figures--around 1 ohm.  If you do the math (assuming that the TF10's impedance is close to purely resistive at 1k and 10k), then you'll get close to a 1 dB variation, which is in agreement with the measurement in that link, provided that you adjust for the measuring system's high-frequency dip.
 
The only mass-market MP3 players I know of that can beat the iPhone 4's output impedance are the Sansa Clip, Clip+, and Fuze. I like the Sansas for that, but the iPhone 4 still does a few things better. I like the direction Apple is going with Zout:
 
18 ohms - MacBook Pro 2006
5.5 ohms @ 1k- iPod Video
2 ohms - iPhone 3GS (sonove.angry.jp)
2 ohms - iPod Nano 6th Gen (sonove.angry.jp)
1.4 ohms - iPad (goldenears.net gets 1.3 ohms)
0.9 ohms - iPhone 4
0.9 ohms - iPad 2
0.6 ohms - MacBook Pro 2011
 
Well, sort of. The iPod Classic still has 5 ohms and the 4th generation iPod Touch has higher output Z than the iPhone 4. It's a step backwards.
 
BTW, I wish MK would tell us more about how he conducted those RMAA tests. What equipment did he use? What absolute levels did he use for testing? What other test conditions should we be aware of?

 

[elfary]

Quote:

You need to supply more context: You have to show the frequency response of a device with a very low output impedance, like a FiiO E7. You'll see that Markus Kraus's measurements all have a high-frequency rolloff. That means that the actual frequency response of the iPhone 4 is a bit flatter than the one you see in the graph--only a 1 dB variation throughout the audible spectrum after adjustment.
 
That's actually pretty good performance for a portable player. The Triple.fi 10 is a very demanding load--25 ohms at DC, 64.5 ohms at 1kHz, and a punishing 6.7 ohms at 10k according to this site: http://www.laaudiofile.com/ue_triple_fi_10.html . Almost everything else out there will get a much flatter electrical response. I measured the output impedance of the iPhone 4 a while ago and I'm got around 0.9 ohms. goldenears.net and sonove.angry.jp have similar figures--around 1 ohm.  If you do the math (assuming that the TF10's impedance is close to purely resistive at 1k and 10k), then you'll get close to a 1 dB variation, which is in agreement with the measurement in that link, provided that you adjust for the measuring system's high-frequency dip.
 
The only mass-market MP3 players I know of that can beat the iPhone 4's output impedance are the Sansa Clip, Clip+, and Fuze. I like the Sansas for that, but the iPhone 4 still does a few things better. I like the direction Apple is going with Zout:
 
18 ohms - MacBook Pro 2006
5.5 ohms @ 1k- iPod Video
2 ohms - iPhone 3GS (sonove.angry.jp)
2 ohms - iPod Nano 6th Gen (sonove.angry.jp)
1.4 ohms - iPad (goldenears.net gets 1.3 ohms)
0.9 ohms - iPhone 4
0.9 ohms - iPad 2
0.6 ohms - MacBook Pro 2011
 
Well, sort of. The iPod Classic still has 5 ohms and the 4th generation iPod Touch 4th has higher output Z than the iPhone 4. It's a step backwards.
 
BTW, I wish MK would tell us more about how he conducted those RMAA tests. What equipment did he use? What absolute levels did he use for testing? What other test conditions should we be aware of?

You can add that the current 2010 (4G) iPod Touch has a disappointing output impedance 7.2 Ohms (http://www.kenrockwell.com/apple/ipod-touch-4g.htm). This is the same impedance measured by Nwavguy for the 3G Touch.
 
Thus in my view the best Apple handhelds for BA iem's are the iPhones, then the current iPod Classic and the Touch would be the worse (Being quite good that is).

 

[b0ck3n]

You're right, here's a link to all RMAA measurements taken by Markus Kraus. That should put the iPhone 4 measurements into context. I had no idea the iPhone 4 was as low as 0.9, that certainly says something about the Triple Fis and their wild impedance curve.
 
Judging by Markus Kraus' measurements the Nano 6G outperforms the Classic, which really isn't any better than the Touch 4G.