muckshot
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2005
- Posts
- 396
- Likes
- 11
Hey, anyone know if you can zoom in/out of pics on the Ipod 5G?
Just Got My G5 Ipod!
- Thread starter CookieFactory
- Start date
rbilsbor
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2004
- Posts
- 43
- Likes
- 0
What a tease.
donunus
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2004
- Posts
- 9,250
- Likes
- 164
ME TOO!!! SOUND QUALITY?????!!!!!
irvin59
100+ Head-Fier
Quote:
That's what I want too. I was thinking that it's a smart move by apple to raise the issue of the shuffle sq gold standard-maybe hoping no-one will compare it to iaudio, iriver etc.. and if the videopod wins you buy that-if it loses you buy a shuffle.
| Originally Posted by Jmmmmm Comparison with the shuffllllllllllllllllllllllllllle. How's it sounddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd?!! |
That's what I want too. I was thinking that it's a smart move by apple to raise the issue of the shuffle sq gold standard-maybe hoping no-one will compare it to iaudio, iriver etc.. and if the videopod wins you buy that-if it loses you buy a shuffle.
donunus
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2004
- Posts
- 9,250
- Likes
- 164
Oh, and also try it with preset standard fast standard or extreme VBR files to check for skipping
CookieFactory
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2005
- Posts
- 1,193
- Likes
- 10
lol alright guys, I don't want to make any snap judgements but from what I've listened to so far, the SQ is on par with the shuffle and *maybe* a little better. It's a bit hard to exactly match volumes, but I did my best and I cannot guarantee any difference btw the Shuffle and the 5G are not due to volume differences. That being said...
The bass difference btw the 5G and the Photo is not night and day (well, perhaps a head-fi night and day!) but it is noticable. I always felt the photo had a fuzz around the sound, and the Shuffle sounds "etched" out. The 5G is a lot like the Shuffle in this regard.
The overall bass in comparison with the Shuffle might be very, very slightly less. I've only been able to tell the difference on a couple songs (for example: Loreena Mckennitt - The Bonny Swans opening bass sequence).
Although I love the SQ of the Shuffle (especially in comparison with my old Photo) it does sound a tiny bit "closed in" in comparison. The 5G seems to keep the wide open sound, while also capturing the Shuffle's "etched," sound and bass.
All this has been through the headphone out. I'll do some listening with the lineout today.
The bass difference btw the 5G and the Photo is not night and day (well, perhaps a head-fi night and day!) but it is noticable. I always felt the photo had a fuzz around the sound, and the Shuffle sounds "etched" out. The 5G is a lot like the Shuffle in this regard.
The overall bass in comparison with the Shuffle might be very, very slightly less. I've only been able to tell the difference on a couple songs (for example: Loreena Mckennitt - The Bonny Swans opening bass sequence).
Although I love the SQ of the Shuffle (especially in comparison with my old Photo) it does sound a tiny bit "closed in" in comparison. The 5G seems to keep the wide open sound, while also capturing the Shuffle's "etched," sound and bass.
All this has been through the headphone out. I'll do some listening with the lineout today.
CookieFactory
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2005
- Posts
- 1,193
- Likes
- 10
Quote:
All my songs are either Lame cbr 320, APS, or APExtreme. I've noticed no skipping at all. I've noticed the Shuffle has some problem with this on a few rare instances though.
| Originally Posted by donunus Oh, and also try it with preset standard fast standard or extreme VBR files to check for skipping
|
All my songs are either Lame cbr 320, APS, or APExtreme. I've noticed no skipping at all. I've noticed the Shuffle has some problem with this on a few rare instances though.
mitchjordan
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2005
- Posts
- 114
- Likes
- 10
Quote:
The lineout is on the dock, whilst the headphone out is obviously on the player, right?
| Originally Posted by CookieFactory All this has been through the headphone out. I'll do some listening with the lineout today. |
The lineout is on the dock, whilst the headphone out is obviously on the player, right?
blessingx
HeadFest '07 Graphic Designer
Supplier of fine logos! His visions of Head-Fi
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2003
- Posts
- 13,179
- Likes
- 28
Quote:
... or with a Sik or SendStation adapter on the player.
| Originally Posted by mitchjordan The lineout is on the dock, whilst the headphone out is obviously on the player, right? |
... or with a Sik or SendStation adapter on the player.
haroldpark
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- May 12, 2005
- Posts
- 34
- Likes
- 0
gapless in mp3? AAC? ALAC? anything?
sno1man
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2003
- Posts
- 1,378
- Likes
- 12
After using my white 3OGB video for a day with the same source files (224 AAC) as on my nano and shuffle, the shuffle is still the top for sound quality.
The new ipod is a definite improvement over the old photo (more bass primarily) and the eq is a bit better (less distortion). But i would say the sound is equal to the nano except possibly at very high volumes where the ipod may have a slight edge in headroom.
This is all unamped with Ety ER4p, shure e4c and superfi 5 pro.
I don't see the point in using an amp in what should be a highly portable configuration.
I'm actually quite disappointed as I was hoping for much better sound. As it is, I may take my video back....
The new ipod is a definite improvement over the old photo (more bass primarily) and the eq is a bit better (less distortion). But i would say the sound is equal to the nano except possibly at very high volumes where the ipod may have a slight edge in headroom.
This is all unamped with Ety ER4p, shure e4c and superfi 5 pro.
I don't see the point in using an amp in what should be a highly portable configuration.
I'm actually quite disappointed as I was hoping for much better sound. As it is, I may take my video back....
JMcMasterJ
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Posts
- 818
- Likes
- 15
Quote:
I know this is bad news to most, but it is actually good news to me.
Now I don't have to spend more money to buy one.
| Originally Posted by sno1man After using my white 3OGB video for a day with the same source files (224 AAC) as on my nano and shuffle, the shuffle is still the top for sound quality. The new ipod is a definite improvement over the old photo (more bass primarily) and the eq is a bit better (less distortion). But i would say the sound is equal to the nano except possibly at very high volumes where the ipod may have a slight edge in headroom. This is all unamped with Ety ER4p, shure e4c and superfi 5 pro. I don't see the point in using an amp in what should be a highly portable configuration. I'm actually quite disappointed as I was hoping for much better sound. As it is, I may take my video back.... |
I know this is bad news to most, but it is actually good news to me.
CookieFactory
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2005
- Posts
- 1,193
- Likes
- 10
Quote:
Hey, do you also notice static hiss through the headphone out wth the E4C when on pause? Try pausing it, and then unplugging the headphones and listening for a "blackness" transition.
| Originally Posted by sno1man After using my white 3OGB video for a day with the same source files (224 AAC) as on my nano and shuffle, the shuffle is still the top for sound quality. The new ipod is a definite improvement over the old photo (more bass primarily) and the eq is a bit better (less distortion). But i would say the sound is equal to the nano except possibly at very high volumes where the ipod may have a slight edge in headroom. This is all unamped with Ety ER4p, shure e4c and superfi 5 pro. I don't see the point in using an amp in what should be a highly portable configuration. I'm actually quite disappointed as I was hoping for much better sound. As it is, I may take my video back.... |
Hey, do you also notice static hiss through the headphone out wth the E4C when on pause? Try pausing it, and then unplugging the headphones and listening for a "blackness" transition.
Quote:
Blah. Maybe I should just forget it then.
| Originally Posted by sno1man After using my white 3OGB video for a day with the same source files (224 AAC) as on my nano and shuffle, the shuffle is still the top for sound quality. The new ipod is a definite improvement over the old photo (more bass primarily) and the eq is a bit better (less distortion). But i would say the sound is equal to the nano except possibly at very high volumes where the ipod may have a slight edge in headroom. This is all unamped with Ety ER4p, shure e4c and superfi 5 pro. I don't see the point in using an amp in what should be a highly portable configuration. I'm actually quite disappointed as I was hoping for much better sound. As it is, I may take my video back.... |
Blah. Maybe I should just forget it then.
kloan
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2004
- Posts
- 1,166
- Likes
- 13
Just had a look at the specs.. uses the same portalplayer chip as the nano, and a different wolfson chip.. but i suspect it sounds the same as the nano..
now im not in such a hurry to get one.. and i think my nano is actually getting 'burned-in' because i swear it's sounding a little better.. not much, but a little.. still have to keep it on the 'flat' eq though..
now im not in such a hurry to get one.. and i think my nano is actually getting 'burned-in' because i swear it's sounding a little better.. not much, but a little.. still have to keep it on the 'flat' eq though..
Users who are viewing this thread
