[dcmidnight]

One thing I noticed on my video ipod is a bit of a background hiss which does not go away when listening to mp3s that were ripped at a higher rate - so it seems to be rate independent. This compeltely disappears using the sound attenuator included with the super.fi 3s I bought or an amp.

I've seen this reported in a number of different threads and wondered if the classic in anyway corrects this?

 

[StanRex]

I have to say I'm a bit dissapointed by my 160g classic.

I received it two days ago and only used it for a few hours but here s how I feel atm

bass is ok

mids are ok

highs are weird. I get the feeling that it's not "precise". It feels blurred as if it saturated a bit compared to the sound I had from my Cowon D2.

I'd like to say that I'm far from being an audiophile, but I still hear it easily. Could be because I'm using good iems (shure e500).

Anyway, I really hope that I can make it sound better. Maybe through the use of an amp. But I'd like to be sure that it could improve the sound before buying one.

ps : I'm using alac so it can t be the files

edit : nvm, I cleaned my e500 (there was some dirt inside them) and changed the tip to triflanges and it seems to have improved things

 

[lonereaction]

Quote:

Originally Posted by StanRex /img/forum/go_quote.gif nvm, I cleaned my e500 (there was some dirt inside them) and changed the tip to triflanges and it seems to have improved things

That's nice to hear!

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mirumu /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you're applying compression then you're wasting the extra dynamic range 24-bit offers anyway.

You HAVE to apply compression if you are going to record vocals. EVERY recording studio has compressors. In fact, that's one of the areas where the big bucks are spent, along with really good mike pres, and microphones.

Compression is a tool that is a regular part of the sound mixer's toolbox. I know audiophiles don't like it, but applying compression to one particular element within a mix is entirely different than applying it to the whole mix. You want dynamics AND clarity.

The dynamics you are talking about for listening to a symphony in your living room falls well within the specs for redbook. (Unless you're playing Ride of the Valkyries like they did in Apocalypse Now!)

See ya
Steve

 

[DLeeWebb]

Quote:

Originally Posted by StanRex /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have to say I'm a bit dissapointed by my 160g classic. I received it two days ago and only used it for a few hours but here s how I feel atm bass is ok mids are ok highs are weird. I get the feeling that it's not "precise". It feels blurred as if it saturated a bit compared to the sound I had from my Cowon D2. I'd like to say that I'm far from being an audiophile, but I still hear it easily. Could be because I'm using good iems (shure e500). Anyway, I really hope that I can make it sound better. Maybe through the use of an amp. But I'd like to be sure that it could improve the sound before buying one. ps : I'm using alac so it can t be the files edit : nvm, I cleaned my e500 (there was some dirt inside them) and changed the tip to triflanges and it seems to have improved things

After reading the various threads floating around here I'm more confused than ever as to whether I should by a 160GB Classic. I was going to buy one immediately after I got my $100 iPhone credit, but I'm not so sure anymore. It seems as though it comes down to personal taste. Some are saying it's light years better, others are saying it sucks compared to the 5.5G and to the iMod. Is there anything like a consensus forming out there as far as the Classic having inferior audio quality? Is there a chance that Apple may consider going back to the Wolfsen DAC? Are there any predictions regarding a 160GB or better iTouch?

 

[IPodPJ]

Hi DLee,
Well, I sold my iPod 5th gen. I think the overall sound quality of the Classic is much better, more open (see my posts in this thread). Not to mention it has a much bigger hard drive. I think the 160GB, even though double the size of the 80 GB, might be too much to spend on iPod sound quality in general. For $249, the 80GB gets it just right. It is a perfect price for the capability of the unit and its hard drive size. My audio library is 60GB of 95% lossless files. And I could probably fill it up to 74.21GB (the max amount you can put on the 80GB Classic) with the rest of my CDs. Of course, the music I have in here now is the music I want, so I won't be adding the other stuff in my CD collection any time soon. So that leaves me with 15GB to fill with new music which will take me at least a year to do. By that time, they will have a new iPod out at the same price point of $249 with a 120GB or 160GB hard drive (and I'm sure the max model will be 240GB or something near that). Technology roughly doubles in speed and capacity every two years, sometimes faster. So if you only have enough music to fill the 80GB Classic, then just get the 80GB. No point buying a bigger one when they will just improve the models every year. At least thats my take on it. You will be able to sell your iPod that you buy this year for half of what you paid for it next year. So for $125, you are getting good mileage out of it for the year.

 

[DLeeWebb]

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hi DLee, Well, I sold my iPod 5th gen. I think the overall sound quality of the Classic is much better, more open (see my posts in this thread). Not to mention it has a much bigger hard drive. I think the 160GB, even though double the size of the 80 GB, might be too much to spend on iPod sound quality in general. For $249, the 80GB gets it just right. It is a perfect price for the capability of the unit and its hard drive size. My audio library is 60GB of 95% lossless files. And I could probably fill it up to 74GB (the max amount you can put on the 80GB Classic) with the rest of my CDs. Of course, the music I have in here now is the music I want, so I won't be adding the other stuff in my CD collection any time soon. So that leaves me with 15GB to fill with new music which will take me at least a year to do. By that time, they will have a new iPod out at the same price point of $249 with a 120GB or 160GB hard drive (and I'm sure the max model will be 240GB or something near that). Technology roughly doubles in speed and capacity every two years, sometimes faster. So if you only have enough music to fill the 80GB Classic, then just get the 80GB. No point buying a bigger one when they will just improve the models every year. At least thats my take on it. You will be able to sell your iPod that you buy this year for half of what you paid for it next year. So for $125, you are getting good mileage out of it for the year.

PJ, thanks for your response. Sensible advice indeed. I already have a 5.5G 80GB iPod. I have about 50GB worth of music on it at the moment. So I have awhile until I need to get another model. I guess that I'll wait and see what develops...

 

[bigshot]

I got a 160 gig with my iPhone credit and I couldn't be happier. This is the best iPod I own (and I have six). I think the chip in the classic is the same Wolfson DAC as the others, just rebranded. It sounds exactly the same.

One note... I don't use cover art, so sluggishness hasn't been an issue for me.

See ya
Steve

 

[IPodPJ]

What? It sounds nothing like the 5th gen. <insert witty insult here>

And the DAC is not made by Wolfson. Wolfson even admitted that Apple used another manufacturer for the Classic and the Touch.

The brightness level is incredible, I have it set to 47%.

And the click wheel on first impressions was bad, and it still is. It definitely implements something different than the 5g used.

 

[Milk and Coffee]

IMO with firmware 1.02 the clickwheel becomes is very good in terms of response. No difference to any 5.5G unit so far...
Even the sluggishness in menus seems to be improved

 

[abitdeef]

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif What? It sounds nothing like the 5th gen. <insert witty insult here> And the DAC is not made by Wolfson. Wolfson even admitted that Apple used another manufacturer for the Classic and the Touch. The brightness level is incredible, I have it set to 47%. And the click wheel on first impressions was bad, and it still is. It definitely implements something different than the 5g used.

well the apple branded part(codec) in the new nano is still a wolfson part. Also the touch uses a wolfson codec, so I would expect that the classic does also.

http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...032_page_2.htm

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...al_photos.html

 

[mirumu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif What? It sounds nothing like the 5th gen. <insert witty insult here>

It sounds nothing like the 4G either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif And the DAC is not made by Wolfson. Wolfson even admitted that Apple used another manufacturer for the Classic and the Touch.

I'm sure all Wolfson said was "No comment". People have kept saying it was a Cirrus Logic part with absolutely zero evidence. The only brand marked on the chip is Apple. Unless they tell us or the company that designed it tells us we have no way of knowing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif And the click wheel on first impressions was bad, and it still is. It definitely implements something different than the 5g used.

It's rumored that Apple went back to Synaptics touch pads for the Classic. The 5G/5.5G model pads were supposedly made directly by Apple. This is based on news articles though just like the DAC info so it could all very well be wrong.

 

[Blaine]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mirumu /img/forum/go_quote.gif It sounds nothing like the 4G either. I'm sure all Wolfson said was "No comment". People have kept saying it was a Cirrus Logic part with absolutely zero evidence. The only brand marked on the chip is Apple. Unless they tell us or the company that designed it tells us we have no way of knowing.

Not for the first time on these forums, you are talking total rubbish.

From the Scotsman:

Wolfson sales on track as it plays down iPod blow
HAMISH RUTHERFORD

"WOLFSON Microelectronics has received a minor set-back after its components were left out of a new Apple iPod model.

The semiconductor maker, spun out of Edinburgh University, has grown into one of Scotland's leading technology companies after winning a raft of contracts to supply chips for the likes of the XBox games console and Sony's PSP unit.

But Apple remains its largest customer, accounting for 20 per cent of total sales with its audio chips in almost all of the millions of iPods in use worldwide.

This week photographs have been posted of a disassembled iPod Classic, revealing it has no Wolfson audio chip, using chips from American rival Cirrus Logic.

Analysts were divided over the significance of Wolfson's omission from the iPod Classic, a revamped version of the old format with up to 160Gb of memory. While they acknowledged it was unlikely to be one of Wolfson's major sellers, Apple's dual sourcing strategy could reduce the firm's sales or cut margins moving forward.

Dan Ridsdale at Landsbanki said the iPod classic appeared to be "a last hoorah" for the old format, and Wolfson had lost out to a cheaper Cirrus product as Apple attempted to maximise margins. The bigger-selling Apple products in the future - the iPhone and a new touch screen iPod - both have Wolfson chips.

Ridsdale said: "They would rather be in it [the iPod classic] than not, and it does show that they can't take their position with Apple for granted."

A spokesman for Wolfson said the firm was unable to comment on the actions of Apple. However, it is understood it has no plans to downgrade its sales expectations, expected to be a record $63-$68 million (£31m-£33.4m). Wolfson's shares have more than halved in value since a year ago, after a worldwide slowdown in the sale of consumer products."

 

[mirumu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif You HAVE to apply compression if you are going to record vocals. EVERY recording studio has compressors. In fact, that's one of the areas where the big bucks are spent, along with really good mike pres, and microphones. Compression is a tool that is a regular part of the sound mixer's toolbox. I know audiophiles don't like it, but applying compression to one particular element within a mix is entirely different than applying it to the whole mix. You want dynamics AND clarity.

I'm well aware of why compression is used and it's benefits but I still don't have to agree with it's use.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif The dynamics you are talking about for listening to a symphony in your living room falls well within the specs for redbook. (Unless you're playing Ride of the Valkyries like they did in Apocalypse Now!)

Well within the specs for redbook? Redbook is just a basic technical standards document that says nothing about musical capabilities. What you're really saying is that you think a depth of 16-bits is enough to capture all the dynamics we can hear in a living room situation. That's fine and it's a reasonable opinion to hold. It's a stretch to consider it an absolute truth though.

 

[Barry]

Blane - thanks for posting that article. Despite your intentions, I am not sure that it is the last word on the subject. They have accepted somebody's (not clear whose) assertion that the chip is Cirrus. It may be; I certainly don't know.

I don't know if they fact checked that assertion. For example, I would have liked to see a quote from Wolfson, Apple or Cirrus about the chip. Wolfson only said that it had no comment on Apple's action and did not verify the sourcing of the chip.

I have dealt with enough reporters to understand that they vary in quality and a verified quote does much to add to the credibility of a story.

Are you aware of another article that has quotes from the source?

Thanks

Barry