[squid_shank]

Quote:

i have the latest gen classic and must admit i am very pleased with the sound, my ety's are quite revealing and I find nothing to complain about with the sound at all. not distortion, no hiss, just a nice involving sound, There seems to be no difference in sound quality between it and my 2nd gen itouch, in fact if anything it may be a little more dynamic than the touch, but hardly worth commenting on!
 
i do use my ipod with an amp and Lod though so that may make a difference. I use no eq. Just lossless. If i use anything less than lossless i find the music lacking in feeling and energy, the player then does indeed sound listless.
 
Are you lossless or using compressed files?

virtually everything in my library is above 192, most of it is v0. so i don't think bitrate is the issue
 

 

[yliu]

Whathifi.com gave the 6th gen iPod Classic a five star review.
They say the sound is improved from the older generations: "Compared to its predecessor, the new Classic is taut, tight and punchy, with lots of musical verve and lots more energy and drive.", "The last-generation iPod was a little richer sounding, but in a direct A/B comparison with this new player, it also suffers from some wooliness and lack of definition in the lower midrange and upper bass." What Hi-Fi.com
 
and I guess the 120GB version and the new 160 GB version has the exact same except the hard drive, so they should sound the same too.
 
http://www.whathifi.com/Review/Apple-iPod-Classic-120GB/

 

[shigzeo]

Quote:

I just ordered the newest ipod classic since there were rumors that it would be discontinued soon and because I wanted a large capacity player, which seems to be a dying breed these days. However, the audio quality is completely lacking. Even compared to my iphone and my old beat up sansa clip that I use in the gym (which sounds amazing), the ipod falls flat. I'm using w3s. Is there any way to make these sound better, perhaps with an inexpensive amp of some sort? Thanks

You know, there is no fixing Apple's sound. An amp, a perfect EQ - even perfect inner components and audiophile marketing wouldn't fix their mess. What they make (and I have no idea how they take components that are used in many other portables) sounds horrid compared to the rest of the market. The truth is obvious: they simply don't know sound. Of course their EQ is horrid, but come on, it goes waaaay deeper than that: at the electron level, things go backwards - turtleneck backwards.
 
I walk down the street and hear nasty ibuds blasting out of stupid people's ears, and even sometimes see nice earphones stuck to nasty iPods. I want to shake the person and say: wake up! You need to get ANYTHING BUT IPOD! Apple suck so bad! They are all just DRM, crackling EQ, completely weak codecs, and other stuffs. Really, I hate how certain 'respected' users here claim that Apple's sound is actually 'good', or 'neutral'. I really hate when people 'prove' their arguments by metrics such as levels of hiss, or adherence to the source signal.
 
It isn't about the signal, dammit. God, how stupid is that. A player doesn't sound good by reproducing the signal as it was recorded. No. It sounds good by being melodic, by making you hear stuff you never heard before, by being addictive. That is good sound, not sustained resolution, not good stereo separation, not the faithful reproduction of the original recording - that's just stitious poppycock that denies any and all audiophile leanings.
 
Apple suck and so do Apple fans. Neither of you know anything about music, about sound, or about decency.
 
I'm with the OP, but I suggest selling the iPod, or to save another person from its dull clutches, bury it or smash it. Buy a Cowon - they're supposed to sound good. Or a Sony, their adverts always mention sound quality. Or, I'd suggest investing in the HiFiMan or HiSound - they are glorious.

 

[ianmedium]

Quote:

You know, there is no fixing Apple's sound. An amp, a perfect EQ - even perfect inner components and audiophile marketing wouldn't fix their mess. What they make (and I have no idea how they take components that are used in many other portables) sounds horrid compared to the rest of the market. The truth is obvious: they simply don't know sound. Of course their EQ is horrid, but come on, it goes waaaay deeper than that: at the electron level, things go backwards - turtleneck backwards.
 
I walk down the street and hear nasty ibuds blasting out of stupid people's ears, and even sometimes see nice earphones stuck to nasty iPods. I want to shake the person and say: wake up! You need to get ANYTHING BUT IPOD! Apple suck so bad! They are all just DRM, crackling EQ, completely weak codecs, and other stuffs. Really, I hate how certain 'respected' users here claim that Apple's sound is actually 'good', or 'neutral'. I really hate when people 'prove' their arguments by metrics such as levels of hiss, or adherence to the source signal.
 
It isn't about the signal, dammit. God, how stupid is that. A player doesn't sound good by reproducing the signal as it was recorded. No. It sounds good by being melodic, by making you hear stuff you never heard before, by being addictive. That is good sound, not sustained resolution, not good stereo separation, not the faithful reproduction of the original recording - that's just stitious poppycock that denies any and all audiophile leanings.
 
Apple suck and so do Apple fans. Neither of you know anything about music, about sound, or about decency.
 
I'm with the OP, but I suggest selling the iPod, or to save another person from its dull clutches, bury it or smash it. Buy a Cowon - they're supposed to sound good. Or a Sony, their adverts always mention sound quality. Or, I'd suggest investing in the HiFiMan or HiSound - they are glorious.

I am sorry but this is utter rubbish!
 
You say buy a cowon, "they are supposed to sound good". Your statement implies you have never heard one so how can you have us take your opinions seriously. Do you have a HIFIMan or Hi sound? If not how can you recommend them when you have no idea what they sound like? Have you actually heard an Ipod?
 
  Don't tell people to purchase things unless you have actually heard them. It's like me saying, buy a Lamborghini, they are great..I have no idea as I have never driven one, just read others reviews and like all reviews they have to be part of a balanced process which includes trying things before buying if possible!
 
You say you walk down the street and hear "nasty ibuds blasting out of stupid peoples ears". Listen, you go near someone listening to HD800's and they will sound ruddy awful from outside!
 
 
 
Your comments are meaningless!
 

 

[shigzeo]

I think that HF doesn't realise it, but it subscribes to marketing more than the average Joe ever will. We hear stuff like what I wrote above (@ianmedium, check the link in my signature entitled TouchMyApps) and just believe it. I have seen it over and over: Sony advertises best sound. I buy the Sony and am completely in love with it because it has HD processing... whatever that is. 
 
Cowon used to market their stuff iAudiophile and there is the even more blatant Studio, AMP3 from HiSound, both of which are marketed as professional audiophile players... whatever those are.
 
The truth is that audiophiles stoop to the lowest common of denominators: market-snatching buzzwords. 
 
Apple haven't targeted audiophiles though their sound quality could easily bowl them over. The problem is that a lot of so-called audiophiles also subscribe to the notion that a popular item cannot be any good - at least as it goes with audio. So, they make excuses for all their players, even forgiving horrid things like Hiss, lack of gapless, lack of ID3 tag support, weak (really weak) headphone output performance.
 
They rock on when they hear of a player with a line out and assuem it must be good. Most, however, are not. So they get off instead saying that iPod has a reedy, thin sound with tinny highs and lax lows when in fact, the iPod preserves the original wave very well - better in fact, than 95% of the players on the market.
 
The only thing I can really criticise Apple for is its reluctance to admit user-customisable EQ settings. 

 

[ianmedium]

Quote:

I think that HF doesn't realise it, but it subscribes to marketing more than the average Joe ever will. We hear stuff like what I wrote above (@ianmedium, check the link in my signature entitled TouchMyApps) and just believe it. I have seen it over and over: Sony advertises best sound. I buy the Sony and am completely in love with it because it has HD processing... whatever that is. 
 
Cowon used to market their stuff iAudiophile and there is the even more blatant Studio, AMP3 from HiSound, both of which are marketed as professional audiophile players... whatever those are.
 
The truth is that audiophiles stoop to the lowest common of denominators: market-snatching buzzwords. 
 
Apple haven't targeted audiophiles though their sound quality could easily bowl them over. The problem is that a lot of so-called audiophiles also subscribe to the notion that a popular item cannot be any good - at least as it goes with audio. So, they make excuses for all their players, even forgiving horrid things like Hiss, lack of gapless, lack of ID3 tag support, weak (really weak) headphone output performance.
 
They rock on when they hear of a player with a line out and assuem it must be good. Most, however, are not. So they get off instead saying that iPod has a reedy, thin sound with tinny highs and lax lows when in fact, the iPod preserves the original wave very well - better in fact, than 95% of the players on the market.
 
The only thing I can really criticise Apple for is its reluctance to admit user-customisable EQ settings. 

Thanks for explaining, I will check out your link.
All the best.
Ian

 

[Hero Kid]

Quote:

You know, there is no fixing Apple's sound. An amp, a perfect EQ - even perfect inner components and audiophile marketing wouldn't fix their mess. What they make (and I have no idea how they take components that are used in many other portables) sounds horrid compared to the rest of the market. The truth is obvious: they simply don't know sound. Of course their EQ is horrid, but come on, it goes waaaay deeper than that: at the electron level, things go backwards - turtleneck backwards.
 
I walk down the street and hear nasty ibuds blasting out of stupid people's ears, and even sometimes see nice earphones stuck to nasty iPods. I want to shake the person and say: wake up! You need to get ANYTHING BUT IPOD! Apple suck so bad! They are all just DRM, crackling EQ, completely weak codecs, and other stuffs. Really, I hate how certain 'respected' users here claim that Apple's sound is actually 'good', or 'neutral'. I really hate when people 'prove' their arguments by metrics such as levels of hiss, or adherence to the source signal.
 
It isn't about the signal, dammit. God, how stupid is that. A player doesn't sound good by reproducing the signal as it was recorded. No. It sounds good by being melodic, by making you hear stuff you never heard before, by being addictive. That is good sound, not sustained resolution, not good stereo separation, not the faithful reproduction of the original recording - that's just stitious poppycock that denies any and all audiophile leanings.
 
Apple suck and so do Apple fans. Neither of you know anything about music, about sound, or about decency.
 
I'm with the OP, but I suggest selling the iPod, or to save another person from its dull clutches, bury it or smash it. Buy a Cowon - they're supposed to sound good. Or a Sony, their adverts always mention sound quality. Or, I'd suggest investing in the HiFiMan or HiSound - they are glorious.

Fantastic post.
 
However you still haven't clarified whether you have heard a 6th g iPod, Cowon, HiFiMan or HiSound.
I never pinned you as someone who would push the HiFiMan due to its basic firmware, etc, so I was quite shocked to hear (read) you say that they are "glorious".
 
So please, for the record, have you heard the players you mentioned in your above post?

 

[oyster]

If the ipod preserves original wave very well , how come all the ipods touch, shuffle, nano, classic sound different.

 

[goodvibes]

So do my Sansa players but my Ipod touch is the most accurate and actually pretty amazing via line or dig out.

 

[shigzeo]

I was to a certain percent (about 99%) being completely facetious. I did come from the anythingbutipod camp - for years I was an MD person (still love them), and then made my way to Cowon and Meizu and iRiver, hating Apple desperately. In 2007, I had the chance to hear an iPod touch 1G - what is described as a horrible player. I had hiss (too much for me, though less than my Sony players), but overall, separated instruments better than my D2. I never used the EQ or SFX of the Cowon D2 and was always upset by its sound.
 
Eventually, rather than continuing eating up the party line - which was how I really began to hate Apple - I decided to see how Apple products stand up to the competition. In all honesty, I was surprised. The EQ has always sucked, but apart from that - and because I didn't use it - I began reorganising my priorities. I wanted gapless playback, low levels of hiss, good stereo separation and good navigation so that I could hear my music as I wanted. 
 
The iPod touch 1G sort of sucked: no volume controls, the hiss was too much, but otherwise, it was a fine player. Right now, I use my iPod touch 2G more than all of my other players unless it is the HiSound AMP3 (and that just to 'burn in' headphones for the believers). I understand the unlove - sort of. Apple's sound is very linear. There isn't added warmth - in fact, there is nothing added. In terms of playing the music as it exists on the original recording, Apple's players are in the very top percentile. 
 
So when I write  along post condemning Apple, it is with my hands stuffed in my pockets and my lungs full of the tastiest opium. 
 
While I borrow very nice players and like them each for different reasons, there isn't a player better for the large volume of overall quality of sound. Few players even support gapless, a feature of recordings for what... at least 50 years? The crusade against Apple here by some members of HF and at other places is at the heart run at core against Apple's domination of the market, especially in the USA. HF is a USA website. In other countries, Apple iPod may be popular, but no where near it is in the USA. 
 
There, you think they are evil because they 'market' their products where others don't. The truth is that everyone markets it. Apple, however, doesn't doff truth in advertising its products. It doesn't say they run HD music, or round out jagged edges. In my condemning post above, it is obvious that the comments are based on nothing but hearsay. That, as it is, is very true to most Apple haters. 
 
Now, if you hate them because of lock-in, that is fine. But you also better not own a Zune - as Zune is far more locked in than Apple. Sony only recently cleaned up its game - for which I am thankful. But they still run advertising campaigns based on the SQ of their products that don't hold water. They sound good, but not better than others. What they do have is good EQ and the now famous thick Sony sound, but they don't do anything that is written in the advertisements. Sound and electronics don't work like that. There isn't magic behind one maker's product. 
 
Now as to what I have heard - and please remember that my comment above was 98% facetious - I have not heard the HiFiman, but apart from it, I either own, borrow, or have sold all the players I mentioned. I am a geek, no doubt. And after owning all of these, I recommend the iPod touch 2G and on above all the rest - for music playback and enjoyment and overall performance. That said, I understand if someone wants RB - I'd love it too on the iPod touch 2G on. I'd love the iPod to output as low Ω as the Fuze and Clip, but I'm glad otherwise that it doesn't hiss as much as either one and isn't grainy like the Fuze, or as impossible to control. The clip is excellent for the price, the Fuze is a blight on Sansa's own anti-Apple advertising campaign. HiSound's players from AMP3 to Studio (I have owned or borrowed each one for at least one month each) have some good qualities: simplicity, no frills, and (at least as far as the AMP3 and the STudio are concerned), looks. But they hiss sooooo badly AND lack gapless, and crash, and have very poor performance with earphones - very poor.
 
The S:Flo (T51) I own also and really like most of what I hear. It hisses a bit too much for me, but its low Ω performance is even better than the Fuze while not sounding even a whit grainy. But it rolls off the top end - something I noticed in the first few minutes of listening to it with my DT880. 
 
So when I appear to come down on Apple, read between the lines: if the arguments are based on hearsay, then guess: they are probably just that and a tongue-in-cheek attack at the dumbest and most often-fought arguments in the anti-Apple camp.
 
Hate them if you will, but hate them for real reasons. Hate them for iTunes lock in, for lack of EQ. Even hate them because 'hipsters' own them or someting - though that makes no sense at all. But coming down on Apple for so-caleld "Sound Quality" or what is understood to be 'sound quality' from the vast majority of 'AA audiophiles' is about as silly as possible. If you don't like the cold realism in Apple's players, that is fine, but it has nothing to do with sound quality, as for all intensive purposes, the recording will be most faithfullly played among all mass market players from an Apple player, or if you have the right headphones, from a Cowon or Zune. 
 
Quote:

Fantastic post.
 
However you still haven't clarified whether you have heard a 6th g iPod, Cowon, HiFiMan or HiSound.
I never pinned you as someone who would push the HiFiMan due to its basic firmware, etc, so I was quite shocked to hear (read) you say that they are "glorious".
 
So please, for the record, have you heard the players you mentioned in your above post?

 

[cooperpwc]

I agree that Apple makes good MP3 players. The iPhone 3GS is very good. However, I was disappointed with the Classic 7G. The detail is there but it sounded thin and 2-dimensional compared to the iPhone 3GS. It was a meaningful difference. I took it back.

 

[Bennyboy71]

What Hi-Fi is one of the worst magazines on the market, with a total bias towards Apple.  Their reviews for PMPs are absolute nonsense.  Plus, they say the Klipsch Image X10s are the best iems you can buy for the money!  They are about as commercially mainstream in their views as it gets.
 
Quote:

Whathifi.com gave the 6th gen iPod Classic a five star review.
They say the sound is improved from the older generations: "Compared to its predecessor, the new Classic is taut, tight and punchy, with lots of musical verve and lots more energy and drive.", "The last-generation iPod was a little richer sounding, but in a direct A/B comparison with this new player, it also suffers from some wooliness and lack of definition in the lower midrange and upper bass." What Hi-Fi.com
 
and I guess the 120GB version and the new 160 GB version has the exact same except the hard drive, so they should sound the same too.
 
http://www.whathifi.com/Review/Apple-iPod-Classic-120GB/

 

[ianmedium]

Quote:

What Hi-Fi is one of the worst magazines on the market, with a total bias towards Apple.  Their reviews for PMPs are absolute nonsense.  Plus, they say the Klipsch Image X10s are the best iems you can buy for the money!  They are about as commercially mainstream in their views as it gets.
 

 

Since moving from the UK I have forgotten about What HIFI. Could not agree more with you, I call them the Maxim of HIFI magazines!
 
If you want great reviews I personally favor HiFi News, HiFi world and HiFi plus as bench mark magazines in the world for balanced informative reviews. My favorite and one I have read since a boy (waaay back in the 1970's!) is HiFi news.
 
I would not use what HiFi to wipe me bum with!
 

 

[cooperpwc]

Quote:

 
I would not use what HiFi to wipe me bum with!
 

I believe that you lived in the UK. Classic British wordage! 

 

 

 

[ImitationOfLife]

It's definitely not that bad. This thread title is a gross exaggeration.
 
It's about average sound quality. I want to try another portable media player to compare, but no other player (that I know of) has as much space as the iPod Classic, which is a shame.