[lustaficko]

I've been putting some research into the iPod classic lately and perhaps discovered some interesting ideas. It seems that the 80gig Classic is problem riddled and sounds noticeably worse then the 5.5g. 90% of the threads on the apple discussions site are all about the 80gig version. Now, reports from here and on the discussions board about the 160gig Classic make it seem outstanding (well, compared to the previous iPods and the 80gig classic in terms of lag and sound quality

). I wonder if there is something physically different between the two... or maybe the 80gigs were just put together wrong? I'm not sure.

EDIT: found a thread that showed that the 160gigs had problems too. I guess it's still pretty hit or miss as of now.

 

[~Kaotic~]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lustaficko I've been putting some research into the iPod classic lately and perhaps discovered some interesting ideas. It seems that the 80gig Classic is problem riddled and sounds noticeably worse then the 5.5g.

that's because more people bought the 80gig version instead of the 160gig version.

 

[HughMBeing82]

I'm anticipating the arrival of my 80 GB any day now. Thanks for that comforting thought.

 

[fiftiesdean]

i'm not having these issues with my 80 GB. I also agree that more probably bought the 80 vs the 160.

 

[bigshot]

The only difference between the two might be the amount of RAM. I know the 5.5G iPods were different. Are these too? (RAM would affect the snappiness of the interface, not sound quality.)

See ya
Steve

 

[YoungClayB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif The only difference between the two might be the amount of RAM. I know the 5.5G iPods were different. Are these too? (RAM would affect the snappiness of the interface, not sound quality.) See ya Steve

This is an interesting topic. I am going to put up a poll so that we can formalize this speculation a little. If the 160 GB really has more RAM, I might return my 80GB...these sluggish menus are a killer.

 

[lustaficko]

Thanks for the input Steve.

 

[dumbears]

Many RAM means many cache or buffer for a song. I've no idea of the new iPods, but 5th gen. 30G may skip in playing a long music in wave format while 60G doesn't. This is the reason I replaced my 30G with 60G within 2 weeks.

 

[BigStig]

I've had my 80GB Classic for about a week now. I really like it. Out of the box, with firmware 1.0.0, Cover flow and menus that dealt with graphics were choppy. Other non graphic operations (artists, playlists, etc) were just as snappy as my old 5G & 1G Nano.

After the 1.0.1 update, operations with graphics, such as Cover Flow or Album searches are *almost* as quick as my iPods. It's fast enough that the tiny lag/delay is not a very noticable, and everything is working great.

Sound quality is great, both from headphone jack with PX100's and line out via DLO Bling Bling + PA2V2 + HD650's.

The only thing that I dislike about the Classic is that Apple messed around with the video output and video & album art no longer work with my DLO Homedock. I knew this going into it, and will just continue to use the 5G for video via the dock.

 

[Sparky191]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lustaficko /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've been putting some research into the iPod classic lately and perhaps discovered some interesting ideas. It seems that the 80gig Classic is problem riddled and sounds noticeably worse then the 5.5g. EDIT: found a thread that showed that the 160gigs had problems too. I guess it's still pretty hit or miss as of now.

Can you list these problems?
Do you have any stats or links or tests to back this up?

 

[lustaficko]

Nothing that I can personally back up. Most of what this thread is based on is problems and complaints that consistently came up on the apple discussion site.

A Google search of "Apple Discussions" will display it as the first result. Click the "iPod Classic" link and just look around in there.

 

[ingwe]

With my 160, on occasion (fairly rare, but enough to notice), the sound will pause for a few seconds, then resume where it left off.

 

[mirumu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ingwe /img/forum/go_quote.gif With my 160, on occasion (fairly rare, but enough to notice), the sound will pause for a few seconds, then resume where it left off.

I've had that happen once. Someone had asked people to test with the EQ on to see if that affected the skipping some have run into and it was during the time I've had the EQ on that the issue you described happened to me.

 

[88Chris]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mirumu /img/forum/go_quote.gif Someone had asked people to test with the EQ on to see if that affected the skipping some have run into and it was during the time I've had the EQ on that the issue you described happened to me.

that was me. i guess i'll wait a month or so before buying a classic.

 

[tonybelding]

I'd like to relate my experience with the Classic. . . but go easy on me, I'm new and ignorant here.

This is only the second iPod for me. I got a silver 80 GB Classic intended as a replacement for my old 1st gen iPod, which incidentally is still running on its original battery.

Isn't it amazing how these things have improved? The Classic is half as thick, plays well over twice as long per charge, and holds 16 times as much on its hard drive. However. . . I do prefer the old scroll wheel that actually turns. Sometimes the touch-wheel doesn't respond immediately. I've also noticed the little delays and sluggishness in the Classic's interface, though it's not too bad.

After using the Classic for a couple of days, I found myself feeling oddly dissatisfied with it, but it took a while to pin down exactly why. It just didn't sound as good with my ER6i earbuds. It sounded weak somehow. The bass seemed particularly weak. I set the EQ to "bass booster" which made it sound a bit less weak, but soft and muddy.

I rooted around in my closet and found a small battery-powered amplifier, which is called a "Pocket Amplifier 1". I've had it for several years, but never found much use for it until now. When I put it between the Classic and the ER6i, the music came to life! It sounded strong and clear -- pretty much the way it had always sounded with my 1st gen iPod.

The only conclusion I could reach is that the amplifier circuit in the Classic is considerably weaker than the one in the 1st gen iPod. The old iPod had enough "juice" to drive the ER6i pretty well, but the Classic needs help.

Have Apple been making the amplifier a little weaker in each successive iPod generation, hoping we wouldn't notice?

I finally dug out the earbuds that Apple packed with the Classic. They sound surprisingly good, considering what they are. They may be cheap, but at least they were well matched to the device they were bundled with.

I'm still thinking about where I go from here. Turns out the old iPod with the ER6i was a pretty good combo, and maybe I didn't appreciate what I had. The Classic + PA1 + ER6i sounds great, but the PA1 itself is as big as my old iPod, so it sort of negates the advantage of getting a slimmer iPod. Even after I velcro them together, it's still a bit awkward.