Nano with expensive headphone?

[lee0539]

Does it really make a big difference if the nano doesn't have good output? since its output isn't that great, the amount of difference between different headphones like, e4c,super.fi pro5, um2, er4p, etc would be not as great as using a good source with amp. Or does the headphone still make as much difference, just that amp with good source just sounds better.

 

[luuk]

I think it will make a difference if you buy, let's say, the shure e2c or the shure u4c. You only don't exploit the possibilities to the max.
a portable amp (like a cmoy or porta corda etc.) will improve the sq much in such a case.
I don't speak from experience, I speak from what I've read.

 

[catscratch]

The headphone is the single most important component. The source will only make a bigger difference if the source material is really, really terrible - like 128 bit mp3's played on an SB Audigy. Assuming you encode in 192 or above, you will notice improvement with higher-end phones.

Moreover, the sound signature among the IEM's you listed varies greatly. Having owned pretty much all of them, I can say that the sound signature variation among these IEM's is greater than among full-size headphones, for instance, HD650, DT880, or RS-1. On top of that, the sound signature of one IEM can vary greatly depending on what tips you use. The UM2 is the best example of this - it sounds like one headphone with the Comply tips and another headphone entirely with modified Ety triflanges. On top of that, with the same tip, a canalphone can sound differently at different times depending on the quality of the seal that you get. This isn't as evident with the likes of the UM2 and E5c, since getting a good seal with these is easier, but the ER-4P and E4c are extremely seal-dependant, and require a lot of fairly precise insertion to sound right. The difference between a good seal and a not-so-good seal can be greater than the difference between the same file played on one player and another.

I also think that the quality of the file is more influential on overall sound quality than the choice of DAP, assuming that the DAP is in the top tier of sound quality overall, and you're not using an ancient 256mb flash player with a 10 kHz treble cutoff. The difference between a DAP and a good standalone source, however, is very pronounced, but still less so than the difference between one headphone and another.

Ultra-revealing headphones do change the nature of the game somewhat. A Stax system, for instance, is as revealing as a headphone gets, and it has a certain "minimum requirement" as far as source components go. When you're above that minimum requirement, then different sources present different sonic flavors, but the difference isn't as extreme as switching to, let's say, a dynamic headphone out of the same source. But once you fall below the minimum requirement, the Stax will sound absolutely horrendous - telling you just how bad your source really is. This is true for most very revealing headphones.

So... in the end, everything matters.

But headphones matter more... unless you're a Stax person... then you're screwed... or more precisely, your wallet is!

Edit: hard to drive phones also change the game a lot. Here, you have an amplification requirement. If you're above it, then the difference in sound signature between one solid-state amp and another isn't as pronounced as the difference between one headphone and another, though the difference between tube and solid-state amps can be. If you fall below the amplifictation requirement, however, then your headphone will let you know really fast! The soundstage in most cases will collapse and dynamic range will suffer terribly.

 

[blessingx]

All iPods have some of the strongest output on DAPs, so driving phones (at least compared to other DAPs) isn't an issue. I won't label it "not so great". Amps of course help in many cases for most combos (except the most efficient phones). Now on to your preferences on sound I can't say. Will say there's many members here using of variety of earphones with the iPods, so at least some feel the pod is worthy.

 

[DougGreenberg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lee0539 Does it really make a big difference if the nano doesn't have good output? since its output isn't that great, the amount of difference between different headphones like, e4c,super.fi pro5, um2, er4p, etc would be not as great as using a good source with amp. Or does the headphone still make as much difference, just that amp with good source just sounds better.

I have used a Nano both with the mediocre white earbuds it comes with and with my much-better Etymotic ER-4P's. The ER-4P's sound MUCH better. In this situation, I don't think a headphone amp makes much difference. The amp will be more important if you use high impedance headphones that the Nano simply can't drive to sufficient volume (e.g., ER-4S's).

Despite the claims of some iPod users to the contrary, I have found that ripping music using a lossless format results in discernibly higher quality output than simply using Apple's own compressed format.

But the fact is, the Nano is valued mostly for its style and convenience, not its high audio output quality.

 

[blessingx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DougGreenberg Despite the claims of some iPod users to the contrary, I have found that ripping music using a lossless format results in discernibly higher quality output than simply using Apple's own compressed format.

Besides lossless, Apple doesn't have its own compressed audio format, but I assume you mean FhG/Sony/Doblys AAC.

 

[sno1man]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DougGreenberg But the fact is, the Nano is valued mostly for its style and convenience, not its high audio output quality.

Compared to what???? Many here love the line out and with the right phones it sounds good out of the headphone jack.

Can we please stop the POINTLESS unsupported bashing please!

Otherwise I'm going to feel compelled to rip on to every creative, sony, cowon, rio and iriver with the same type of BS.

meaningful opinions based on actual experience is fine as is FACT based technical stuff.

And before I get branded an Apple fan boy, I have players from all of the companies I just listed.

I am a fanboy of MP3 players that i'll cop to.

 

[DougGreenberg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sno1man Compared to what???? Many here love the line out and with the right phones it sounds good out of the headphone jack. Can we please stop the POINTLESS unsupported bashing please! Otherwise I'm going to feel compelled to rip on to every creative, sony, cowon, rio and iriver with the same type of BS. meaningful opinions based on actual experience is fine as is FACT based technical stuff. And before I get branded an Apple fan boy, I have players from all of the companies I just listed. I am a fanboy of MP3 players that i'll cop to.

This is just plain silly. Frankly, I don't really understand the emotional outburst above. This is not an "Apple bashing" issue, it's a matter of conveying my own experience with the Nano. The original poster asked for opinions about whether it was worthwhile to spend money on expensive headphones for a Nano. I own a Nano, I own various kinds of earphones and headphones, and I also own various other kinds of portable players (cd, minidisc). My views are based on my experience, and I feel just as "qualified' to comment on this issue as anyone else. I have no axe to grind against Apple nor any other company, nor against any particular technology. I've driven by what my ears and interpreting brain tell me. And since I haven't used players from all of the companies mentioned by sno1man above, I have nothing to say about them.

I bought a Nano for the fun of it, and after using it quite a lot over a couple of weeks, I have come to my own conclusions, i.e., that despite its convenience and "fun" factor, the sound quality is simply not as good as that of the average portable cd player, even a typical "post-1998" model. With lossless format, it's pretty close (and quite acceptable), but I must conclude that people who maintain that a tiny little Nano utilizing compressed format can produce audio quality equal to that of a player with a stronger output processing uncompressed files are, in my view, either not being very discerning or are so hell-bent on worshipping the Nano that they have suspended whatever critical faculties they may possess. Others may disagree, but that's my conclusion.

Based on an informal, non-scientific perusal of user responses to the Nano on the Internet, I'd say that a lot of users think its sound quality is not quite up to (even) the standards of the larger iPods. Frankly, its bass response, even with EQ bass boost, is pretty bad. Caveat Emptor.

The fact is, the old adage, "there's no such thing as a free lunch" applies here. Why would one assume that a miniaturized technology using a compressed format would result in no compromises? I think the compressed format DAP fanatics are the ones who are being emotional here (or is it just Apple fanatics? It's hard to tell).

And the truth remains that the vast majority of portable audio player users seem perfectly content to use the crappy headphones/earphones that come with the players, and this is the strongest evidence available that audio quality is not a primary concern for most buyers.

BTW, thanks to blessingx for correcting my error about AAC format being an "Apple thing."

 

[abitdeef]

Amen Snow1man ! the nano has a nice beefy headphone out (40 mw ch) that will drive most cans nicely, more output then the zen micro- 8mw ch, or the rio carbon , or any sony player. The player is definatly in the top tier of daps. About the only thing I can think as maybe a little better would be an old creative or the karma.

I also have all the brands I have listed

http://www.machrone.net/mt/archives/...ipod_nano.html

 

[Twombly]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DougGreenberg Despite the claims of some iPod users to the contrary, I have found that ripping music using a lossless format results in discernibly higher quality output than simply using Apple's own compressed format.

At what setting? 320kbps AAC should be transparent.

 

[bangraman]

Works for me.

 

[jjcha]

Lol, I was wondering when you'd show up in this thread =)

Cable upgrade? Those don't look like the black dragons to me!

Best,

-Jason

 

[bangraman]

The cable a sidegrade~upgrade in various ways. The Black Dragons are now on the MDR-V700DJ, where I feel they are more appropriate.