Which ipod has the Best Sound Quality?

Discussion in 'iPod touch' started by dazloe, Sep 26, 2008.

  1. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    #1
    I have been doing some research for my first ipod (upgrading from a disk-man...I know, I know) In my research I have come across a fair few people who would agree that the sound chips in the ipod aren't the best and being a producer of music myself I wouldn't want to upgrade from a disk-man only to find there isn't any real improvement in sound quality.

    I pose the question: Which ipod has the best quality sound? (I'm aware that different audio files will have a different quality, but let's say I'm listening to an MP3 @ 320kbs - Which ipod takes the crown?) Thanks for reading my ramble :) Any help is marvelous :)
     
  2. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Location:
    Henderson, Nevada
  3. macrumors 6502a

    yorkshire

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    Yeah, I would say that headphones are the most important thing for sound quality. However I remember reading somewhere that the classic has the best quality. But IMO, all iPods have fairly decent sound quality. Besides, if you are a complete music buff, then I would go for the classic anyway. You won't regret it.
     
  4. thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    #4
    Yeah I've got my headphones sorted:

    http://www.amazon.com/Technics-RP-DH1200-DJ-Headphones/dp/B0002EXJPM

    I use these and some Seinheiser monitoring headphones so I don't think I'll have a problem there :) yorkshire, I was actually looking at the 32 gb ipod touch, but if the classic has better sound quality...I'm starting to lean towards a classic! Thanks for your input :)
     
  5. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2008
    #5
    In Iloung's review of the 2g, they mention that the 2g touch has the same chip as the Classic:

    http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/reviews/entry/apple-ipod-touch-second-generation-8gb-16gb-32gb/P6

    So supposedly they should have about the same sound quality. The main complaint with these is the lack of custom eq settings, but if you want that, Ipods arent the way to go. I really couldnt give you an opinion because all i have are the crappy stock ipod earphones. i can tell you that the touch is i really nice peace of tech. If you want tons of music go for the classic, if you want a fair amount of music plus wifi and a really good internet browser (which is what sold me) go for the touch.

    Adrian D
     
  6. macrumors 603

    richard.mac

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Location:
    51.50024, -0.12662
    #6
    i think they are all the same except for the Shuffle which because of its size uses a smaller chip which cant play Apple Lossless.
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    #7
    You can't seriously be recommend Bose headphones! Bose make the worst products in the industry. You know that term "friend's don't let friends drive drunk?" Well, it should be "friends don't let friends buy Bose".

    Anyway, the 5.5G iPod sounds the best. I've heard em all (with higher quality headphones than Bose) and the people over at head-fi (highly regarded audiophile site) agree. The 5.5G iPod is the best.
     
  8. macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #8
    1st gen shuffle had the best sound.

    Look it up - it's true.
     
  9. macrumors 6502a

    archurban

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #9
    I think that sound quality competition is just neck & neck. isn't it? encoding song, headphone are more important? if you have 256kbps (itunes plus quality) + more than $150 earphone, you are way to go.
     
  10. macrumors 68030

    Ivan P

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Home
    #10
    That's right, traditionally iPods used Wolfson audio chips but starting last year the iPod classic moved away from them; this occurred throughout the rest of the iPod line starting with the models unveiled at the Let's Rock event this year.
     
  11. thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    #11
    Cool, I was hoping the ipod touch had the same or better audio chip as the rest of the line. Is it possible to copy the itunes EQ settings into an ipod touch? because even the itunes EQ can give an effective edge to certain styles of music, good stuff guys, thanks!
     
  12. macrumors 6502a

    .Chris

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2007
    #12
    you dont like bose because you cant afford them. I own a bose set and the sound is great.

    You know some of us work for a living ;)
     
  13. macrumors 6502a

    01jamcon

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #13
    That was true in the past, the 1st gen shuffle was better than the current (4th gen) iPods at the time. However, like it was mentioned, the change from Wolfson chips produced better sound, which all iPods except the new shuffle have, therefore, making them equal.


    Ok, the Bose in-ears are rubbish, but Bose makes decent (if overpriced) over-the-ear headphones.
     
  14. macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #14
    Ahhh, fair enough.

    To whoever it was talking about Bose headphones...

    I've found there are far better headphones out there than Bose and yes I can afford a set of Bose headphones. They seem to be all mid-range, too warm and nowhere near enough clarity at the high end and yes, this is listening from a CD, not an mp3 file.
     
  15. macrumors regular

    maclovin'

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Location:
    Amherstburg, Ontario
    #15
    Bose sound is incredible....just expensive. The only reason people say Bose is crap is because you could get the same quality sound for less, or better for the same price if you got them from a different company.
     
  16. macrumors regular

    teohyc

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    #16
    Audio Technica sound cancelling earphones also not bad.
     
  17. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #17
    Bose...seriously? They're neither that great nor particularly expensive...just overpriced. It's not like we're talking UE10s here. $150 for headphones are nothing. Even my Shure E4cs which originally sold for around $300 (~$175 now) are considered mid-range.
     
  18. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Location:
    Appleton, WI
    #18
    mine does
     
  19. macrumors 68020

    JML42691

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    #19
    I don't think that you are going to notice all that much of a difference between different iPods, but I have heard in the past that the iPod classic has the best chips in it, and it appears from that iLounge article that the iPod touch 2G uses the same chip.
    I could seriously recommend Bose headphones, I used a set of Bose for about 18 months and they worked great and had amazing sound quality all around. They were very comfortable, had great sound quality, and were pretty effective at noise-isolation for headphones that weren't designed to be noise-isolating. My only complaint against my Bose headphones was that they were $99 and should have been priced around $70-$80.

    Would you mind explaining how Bose makes the worst products in the industry? I have also heard the saying, "No highs, no lows, must be Bose," and I find that statement to be completely untrue. I think that so many people that hate Bose, have never used a set of Bose headphones for a long period of time. I could name off a dozen other generic piece of crap headphones that I have used that Bose made much better ones than. Please elaborate on your point here, because it doesn't seem like you have any reasons to your point other than a completely biased opinion, and from what you have said, I'm not even sure if you have used those headphones that were referenced.
     
  20. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    #20
    Yeah Bose are great if you can afford the steep price and haven't heard anything else. I guess Apple users are use to paying a high premium for the same thing you can get for less. But don't fall for the marketing, any serious audiophile will tell you to stay away from Bose and buy something else.

    I love my Shure SE530s. Awesome sound, and my first serious in-ears. Blow my Sennheiser HD-25-1s out of the water.
     
  21. macrumors 6502a

    01jamcon

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #21
    Sorry to hijack the thread, but I was kinda looking to get a decent pair of over-ears for home listening and a bit of travelling, anyone care to point me in the right direction seeing as not many people are keen on Bose headsets. I'm not a complete audiophile, but I am a musician, so I hope I could appreciate the difference, what are these better headphones then? And truthfully, are any of them more comfortable than Bose's?
     
  22. macrumors G3

    QuarterSwede

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    #22
    First off, all iPods are not equal. My 1st gen Nano has terrible sound quality but my iPhone is actually pretty darn good.
    As for the Bose argument (it always is), they're overpriced and cheaply built. My wife has the Triports because she doesn't care about music quality and wanted a pair of headphones that were comfortable and sounded decent. I, on the other hand, have a pair of Sony MDR-7506s and the difference in sound quality is night and day. The Triports are almost all midrange with some highs thrown in. There's no way they're producing 30Hz and below. The 7506's are almost completely flat unless EQ'd and can handle at least up to +12dB without distorting. They also come with a parts list so they can be rebuilt if something were to break. All that while producing deep tight bass, excellent midrange and crisp clean highs without coloring the sound as much as possible. This is why they used to be the standard in studios and are still used in many and why they're my headphone of choice.

    Grado's are also excellent if you like the warm sound they produce (they'd be great for Pink Floyd, Beatles, etc).
     
  23. macrumors 6502a

    01jamcon

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #23
    Yeah, I noticed that the iPhone is, if nothing else, much louder than any other iPod at maximum volume, but that's maybe because it isn't restricted by EU laws like the iPods.

    Anyways, thanks for the tip about the Sony's, I remember using some form of Sony headsets in the music studios at college, and though they sounded good (playing compositions from a computer), I did find them uncomfortable. I'm guessing that at that kind of price, the school wasn't using 7506's, so I can't make a fully informed judgement, but its a start.
     
  24. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    #24
    I recommend looking around the head-fi forums for some answers. Very helpful people there who know a thing or two about sound.
     
  25. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    #25
    Are you an adult? If so, try to act like one.

    http://www.audiocubes.com/category/...t/Audio-Technica_ATH-A500_Art_Headphones.html I use those with my iPods at home. For portable I use Koss KSC-75. Go to head-fi.org. Every poster there will tell you they sound better than any Bose set.

    I've used the Triports on more than a few occasions. They sounded about the same as a $20 set of Sony over-the-ear headphones I had back in 1998 bought from K-Mart. They were built worse too. Go to amazon and read the reviews of the Tri-Ports. You'll find most reviews acknowledging their bad build quality, but people still rate them high because Bose replaced the broken set. Some reviewers stated having their Triports replaced 4 or more times!

    Bose is all about the brand name.

    You don't hear bad reviews of Bose because Bose has actually gone so far to sue publications that rate their products bad! They did it to consumer reports back in 1991 and nobody has thoroughly reviewed their products since. Why do you think their speaker systems are always separate from the rest in stores? Because Bose doesn't allow direct comparisons.

    http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f11/whats-so-bad-about-bose-362633/

    Perfect discussion as to why Bose is bad. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?threadid=343759&highlight=bose another one too.

    I have another link saved on my MacBook that has an in-depth article describing technical details as to why Bose makes bad products as well. I'll post that later.
     

Share This Page