[desmoface]

Hey kids, just thought I'd compare the sq of my new nano to my old panasonic sl-mp35.

I use the bass booster on the pcdp and the "rock" setting on the nano. I know that it's not a true apples to apples comparo, but these are the settings I use to get the sound "I" want..so this is an attempt to get the best sound (to my old ears) out of each unit..

I have to preface this by saying that these are just my opinions and I have totally untrained ears that are probably way past their prime...

Songs I used for comparison are:
Crystal Method: Tweekend, Roll It Up, Name Of The Game, Busy Child, Vapor Trail, and High Roller..

Beck: Album: Sea Change..pretty much all the songs.

No particular reason for using these songs, just so happened that I had them on a cd so it was convenient..They are all in mp3 format, mostly 128kbps.

The nano has noticable distortion on the bass end of the spectrum, especially on the Crystal Method stuff..But, the high end is better than the pcdp..mostly because of the inclusion of the nano's built in eq...

Turning off the eq helps aleviate most of the distortion on the nano, but still not as clean and tight as the pcdp..Also, I lose the high end sparkle that I like.

I think the pcdp wins this contest..although, given it's size, the nano does a pretty good job..Must be a way to fix the distortion on the nano's low end, as it's not there on the pcdp. I used the same mp3's for the nano and the pcdp, so I know it's not a problem with the mp3's.

I bet the software could be tweaked to clean up the distortion..sounds like an old cassette recording that was oversaturated/record levels were set a bit too high. Maybe Apple will address this with a software update?

That said, on stuff like the laid back Beck songs, the nano does great mostly due to the lack of bass..but the nano sounds good...still, I love the tight low end of the pcdp..

Ok, there's my humble opinion..I will probably still reach for the nano most of the time just because it's so convenient and it has almost 1,000 songs on it..but for the times when I really want to enjoy the music and get the most out of me bloody sr-60's, I'll grab the pcdp..

Steve

 

[EFN]

It's a bit unfair to compare those two with different type of source. You should have at least use iTunes AAC VBR or 256 on your NANO and nothing below 128kbps. Your PCDP is running uncompressed lossless so the gap is massive.

 

[desmoface]

Hi EFN...agreed...I really don't know a lot about the technical aspects of the formats..the songs that got put on the nano are the same actual mp3's burned to cd for the pcdp...

I know nothing about uncompressed or compressed...just commenting on the sound coming out of the cans...I figure it's a compromise..sq for size...The nano does sound good..don't get me wrong..

Steve

 

[EFN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by desmoface Hi EFN...agreed...I really don't know a lot about the technical aspects of the formats..the songs that got put on the nano are the same actual mp3's burned to cd for the pcdp... I know nothing about uncompressed or compressed...just commenting on the sound coming out of the cans...I figure it's a compromise..sq for size...The nano does sound good..don't get me wrong.. Steve

No worries, if MP3 is your game, Google for "LAME Encoders" and you will get the best that can be expected from MP3. But since you have iPod, the readily available iTunes M4A is fairly excellent for ripping your CDs - go for 192kbps or VBR and compare again - you will be hard pressed to find the difference.

 

[Mr Do]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EFN It's a bit unfair to compare those two with different type of source. You should have at least use iTunes AAC VBR or 256 on your NANO and nothing below 128kbps. Your PCDP is running uncompressed lossless so the gap is massive.

Couldn't agree more. To be safe just rip a few tracks to a wav file so you don't cause another debate and let us know what you think. When your blown away by the defirence use AAC VBR or 256 mp3 and keep it a secret.... HA. HA.

Later.
Do!

 

[desmoface]

Hey gang..I will have to give that a try..I'm not posting to bash the nano, I think it sounds really good..Thanks again.

Steve

 

[Digitalbath3737]

A little advice...before you go ripping your cd collection to 256kbs aac, do yourself a favor. Download foobar2000 and do a blind abx test. Try ripping a few songs using lame mp3. Try out the V2 an V1 switches. That way you'll have the bitrate that right to YOUR ears. As I have said many times before a blind abx test will save you time, space and battery life. Blindly listening to others is not a great idea. Remember it's your ears.

Also to get rid of the distortion using the rock eq on the iPod the standard solution is to mp3 gain your mp3s. Great for use with playlist since all your music will be around the same level...instead of having one song uber high and having to adjust the volume after every other song.

This is a guide for ripping cds with EAC and you'll also find links to get the LAME codecs
Here's a link to mp3 gain
Here's a link to download foobar

You'll be happy with your mp3's

 

[donunus]

using the eq on the nano might still require mp3gain to get rid of the clipping

 

[JohnRich]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EFN It's a bit unfair to compare those two with different type of source. You should have at least use iTunes AAC VBR or 256 on your NANO and nothing below 128kbps. Your PCDP is running uncompressed lossless so the gap is massive.

There isn't anything unfair about the comparison as the source was the same MP3 files on both devices. His PCDP is, in this case, playing MP3s that are on a CD.

 

[Mr Do]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnRich There isn't anything unfair about the comparison as the source was the same MP3 files on both devices. His PCDP is, in this case, playing MP3s that are on a CD.

Good point.
Never noticed he was using the same mp3's for both.

Do!

 

[biohazard_nz]

In my experience when i use any EQ on my dads ipod nano there is a lot of distortion present. I think this is because most songs are recorded too loudly, because when i play quieter songs there is less distortion.

I prefer a flat EQ anyway or just a 4 dp boost in the 50-100Hz region.
In my experience the ipod nano sounded nice with my Senn HD201

 

[desmoface]

Hi JohnRich, I probably didn't articulate that too clearly..you did say it better LOL..Thanks for the reply.

Steve

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnRich There isn't anything unfair about the comparison as the source was the same MP3 files on both devices. His PCDP is, in this case, playing MP3s that are on a CD.

 

[desmoface]

Hey gang, thanks again for all the replies...I will have to check out some of those links that were posted.

This thread was in no way designed to trash the nano..I thouroughly enjoy it and it sounds great...I just thought that some would be interested in my very non-scientific comparison.

Thanks again.

Steve

 

[TAF94]

Thanks for the comparison. I'd like to see somebody to do a comparison of the nano and a sony d-ne920.

 

[donunus]

With my brief encounter with a 1st gen nano against my sony dne-800, the nano felt a little less dry sounding. Of course, I didnt have time to do long tests though.