[webbie64]

...well, perhaps according to simple comparative reports such as this...

Real world testing: Do generic MP3 players sound better than iPods? - News - PC Authority

This seems to support that listening for yourself really is the only way to get what works for you.

And it also reinforces the perception that initial comparative listens, unlike extended periods with comparative set-ups, leads to a preference to punchiness/impact of the sound over clarity/balance/critical detail.

Of course it'd be good to know what compression the source files were that they were using - maybe the differences were minor because of relatively low compression?

What do you think of this?

 

[Young Spade]

Hmm.....
Source does make a difference but yea it does depend on the person listening to the music.

s:flo2/T51 >>>> iPods

 

[Head Injury]

Show me a trustworthy site that says the same thing and I'll believe you. I mean, these guys made this joke.

I didn't make direct comparisons to my iPod, but the Sansa Clip I briefly tested for my brother who said it was broken sounded quite good. I will give PCAuthority the benefit of the doubt when they say it's subjective, because rather than a nice flat response I actually thought the Clip sounded warm. Oh well. I know for a fact that source does have an impact, having gone from onboard to XtremeGamer to uDAC. Even before I knew what good sound was I knew the XtremeGamer sounded better than onboard.

And as much as I prefer PC to Mac, their "32 Reasons why PCs are Better than Macs" review, ignoring the poorly capitalized title, is almost insulting in its stupidity and, erm, insultingness.

 

[Kayito-san]

Please tell me I didn't just buy a Cowon S9 for nothing.

 

[fenixdown110]

You need higher end equipment/gear to tell the difference between sources. The rest of it does depend on the individual.

 

[Uncle Erik]

People often confuse the amp inside a DAP with the quality of its output as a source.

 

[mobbaddict]

These people are probably not audiophiles (or even music lovers), so they're easily impressed by things like punchyness or bass impact, and less by detail retrieval or clarity.
I think the difference between DAPs is easy to tell if you pay attention, even with some good buds. I can say for sure the last Sony i bought (a E436) was much less detailed than the Clip for instance. On the other hand i can hardly tell the difference between the Clip and the s:flo, only the bass is different. I don't know about ipods but i always found them decent on a quick listen.

 

[shigzeo]

^^ I think you just described the majority of audiophiles from what I understand. Audiophilosophy is just the means to an end: enjoyment of music - or at least I hope it is. The problem with comparing DAP outputs evidences itself in many ways, mainly that DAP's have different focuses. Some have better outputs (less hiss, better bass resolution, et..), but the point is that if it doesn't sound good to you, it won't.

Quality hardly matters any more, or maybe it never did. Look back to the beginning, when CD and MD players were marketed towards audiophiles and look at today. Some things have changed, but the market is the same: tell someone it sounds good and it will.

It is quite like magic. Humans tend to trust what they hear as long as it is what they want to hear. If Apple suddenly said 'Okay, the iPod is for SQ', no one would believe them because the preconceived notion that the iPod suxors is so embedded.

Volume match them with no EQ, no DSEE etc., and the majority of untainted players will sound very, very similar. Those with poor earphone performance will out themselves eventually, but probably not before the name of the brand has gone straight into the brain.

Other than EQ etc., I tend to believe that the most influential organ in determining SQ is the brain, not the ears. The brain wants outside input - and that will never change.

 

[EddieE]

Without EQ or sound enhancements most DAPs do sound very similar. But there is a subtle difference. There is even a difference between different players of the same make.

Bring sound enhancements or equalisers into the mix and there is all the difference in the world. That's why I love Cowon players - they have seriously good, natural sounding enhancements like BBE, M3B and ViVA as well as a 5 band EQ.

If we say there is no difference at all, we may as well say there is no difference between opamps and DAC chips and circuits, since each DAP will use a different combination. There is obviously some difference. Just not a ground-breaking level.

I actually feel the same way about DACs (although I could be completely wrong as I haven't heard many different varierties) and to a lesser extent amps. I just get the impression from the four different DACs I have heard that there is very little difference between any DAC and the rest is placebo and confirmation bias. Someone spends hundreds rather than a hundred on a DAC, they really want it to sound better. I'm sure they do sound a bit better, but nowhere near as much as their owners beleive they do.

 

[roebeet]

I agree with EddieE - I've done several tests with the S9 without any EQ settings, and the SQ is very similar to other DAP's, imo. Where the S9 shines is with its excellent EQ / JetEffects. Assuming that the testers in this article left the S9 EQ neutral, it doesn't surprise me that it got the results that it did.

 

[Young Spade]

Quote:

Originally Posted by roebeet /img/forum/go_quote.gif I agree with EddieE - I've done several tests with the S9 without any EQ settings, and the SQ is very similar to other DAP's, imo. Where the S9 shines is with its excellent EQ / JetEffects. Assuming that this testers in this article left the S9 EQ neutral, it doesn't surprise me that it got the results that it did.

Well yea it's going to sound the same; most of the mass market players out there (Cown, iPod, Zune, etc.) are going to sound about the same because they're marketed to be sold to the mass market, IE: People who use either stock buds or "cheap" headphones.

People constantly forget that they make these are made as cheaply as possible to be sold for as much as possible.
They're all going to pretty much sound the same.

 

[gianluca]

In this last 2 weeks I've read many of your past threads because I was interested buying the iPod nano 5g for its design and a lot of accessories. I usually listen to music with my Thinkpad with intel hd audio and earphones. I like the SQ and I know a difference between 128 kbps or flac but I also know a difference between several recorded track. I think that one Ipod nano whit excellent recorded track whit a excellent earphones like ultimate ears ue is a good compromise for listen to music in SQ. I believe and I am sure that Cowon, Hifiman, Sony and other are good Mp3 player but it is also significant the way tracks are recorded, or I am wrong?

 

[Young Spade]

Yes you're right. Although a track can be encoded at FLAC or mp3 320 kbs, it won't make it sound good if the initial recording is bad. I have a couple of albums ripped to FLAC that don't sound that great because the initial recording wasn't top notch (new alternative bands making their first CD).

But yea it also depends on the genre of music as well. Music with a lot of synthesizers and unnatural sounds are going to be affected less by these things rather than live performances and genre's of the like (Classical, Acoustic, etc.).