Slashdot Mirror
Sound Quality of the Fifth Generation iPods?
ntropi asks: "As the drive on my old MP3 player (an iRiver H320) grinds toward its last days, I've found myself in search of a new one. Given the options the new iPod seems the best choice, but I'm hesitating somewhat over the murmurings as to the iPod's supposedly poor sound quality. However, while Marc Heijligers has provided a comprehensive breakdown of iPod performance for up to the fourth generation, I have been hard-pressed to find any information on the 5G's performance. With the exception of this CNET review, which reports that 'Audio quality is quite good and probably better than the previous iPod's, with reasonable bass, distinguishable mids, and shiny highs, plus the audio-output power is quite good.', there seems not to have been any detailed analysis of the iPod's output quality. Thus, it seemed a good idea to appeal to the Slashdot hive-mind for its personal experiences with the 5G's playback, or even analyses that people might have done which were simply never put online."
I'd first worry about how long the ipod will last. Everyone I know who has an ipod for any length of time (>6 months) has them start breaking down, either a battery issue, or a control wheel issue. One of them has a theory as to why the ipod is so popular: people get their first ipod, love it, while it works, and they then recommend them to all their friends. Their friends get them, and love them, etc. Then the original guy's ipod starts flaking out. By this time, Apple has come out with a new generation of ipods, so the guy decides to upgrade to the new generation, thus starting the cycle all over again.
Anecdotal, yes, but it seems to be pretty universal among the people I know with ipods. *shrug*
For crying out loud. Ipods sound great, as good as any portible audio device I've owned. I listen with good headphones too. Much better the the "walkman" casette players I've owned.
If your an "audiofile" then listen to lossless or a cd or even better "VYNL RECORDS".
The whole point of portable MP3 is to carry as many songs in as small a space. If people wanted perfect CD quality in a portable package they'd buy mini-disc. But they didn't. However people want good->excellent quality and small files.
If the original post were describing coding artifacts, it is actually possible to hear coding artifacts more clearly on "cheap" headphones (or ear buds) vs an expensive set of headphones or good quality speakers. (As strange as this may seem.)
The reason is that "lossy" perceptual coding algorithms (MP3, AAC, etc) work by applying what is known as a masking threshold. A tone of sufficient amplitude masks our ability to hear other tones below this threshold. When compressing the audio the stuff under the masking threshold is eliminated first starting with signals close in frequency to the masking tone.
Low frequencies are attenuated by most cheap headphones and ear buds. As such, if a significant masking tone happens to be in the low frequency range (that the cheap headphones can't reproduce) the coding artifacts become more obvious. (The masking tone isn't reproduced well enough to hide the other stuff the codec was doing to the audio.) This is actually true of any significant nonlinearity in the playback system.
And this isn't just theory as I have found this to be true in my own "real world" experience with MP3 audio. I often hear coding artifacts first on cheap headphones. Very careful listening is generally required to hear the same artifacts on good headphones or a good set of speakers.