Iphone 3G doesn't have wolfson audio chip

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by kristoffer4, Jul 11, 2008.

  1. kristoffer4 macrumors 6502a

    kristoffer4

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #1
  2. extraextra macrumors 68000

    extraextra

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #2
    ??
    Did you even read it? Seems like your older iPhone is the one with the "sucky ipod sound"?
     
  3. kristoffer4 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    kristoffer4

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #3
    I can see that's what they write but the iphone sound is soooo much better than the ipod nano. The nano is very closed in the top end of the sound and the iphone has so much more detail in the sound. As I understood it the nano and the classic share the same chip and if that's the case then i will take my iphone any day! But correct me if I am wrong. :)
     
  4. Sweetbike40 macrumors 65816

    Sweetbike40

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Location:
    NY/NJ
    #4
    LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  5. greenythebeast macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    #5
    That passage that was quoted definitely states the iPhone 3G has superior sound quality when compared to the original iPhone.
     
  6. tallyho macrumors 6502a

    tallyho

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2004
    Location:
    UK
    #6
    :D
    Anyway, unless you're putting lossless format audio on your iphone (or ipod nano for that matter) there's really nothing to worry about in terms of sound quality. Perfectly acceptable for 128 or 256 aac files. And variables such as the headphones used will also drastically affect the perceived "quality" of the sound too.
     
  7. taylorwilsdon macrumors 68000

    taylorwilsdon

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #7
    extraextra is right on. What are you talking about? Your "old iphone" is worse.
     
  8. D3lta macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Location:
    Cupertino, California
    #8
    A little off topic but I don't believe the EDGE vs. 3G speeds. No way it took ~2 minutes to load CNN.com!
     
  9. greenythebeast macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    #9
    Why did you even post that in this thread?
     
  10. kristoffer4 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    kristoffer4

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #10
    ok. I think I can hear a difference and I guess I prefer the Wolfson sound then. The hifi maker Linn also use their dac but I guess Apple got rid of it to save money and no cares it seems..never mind then. I just thought more people liked the wolfson chip instead of the cheaper circus logic.
     
  11. taylorwilsdon macrumors 68000

    taylorwilsdon

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #11
    Uh, more like you read the exact opposite of the truth (the nano chip is in the old one, not the new one) and you convinced yourself you could hear a difference. The new one is better. The classic is better than the nano. No possible argument...
     
  12. kristoffer4 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    kristoffer4

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #12
    No the 1. st gen. has the wolfson like the ipod touch. ;)
     
  13. taylorwilsdon macrumors 68000

    taylorwilsdon

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #13
    And:
    Nobody said anything about the touch (of course it uses the same audio as the 1st gen iPhone, they were basically the same thing).
     
  14. Van Wildonher macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
  15. kristoffer4 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    kristoffer4

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #15
    Ok that's allways something because I was never impressed with nano 3G sound at all! My old mini ( also with a wolfson dac...) sounded much better.
    The only way to get the nano to sound ok is by using treble boost in EQ...
     
  16. kristoffer4 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    kristoffer4

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #16
    ok. I can see how my first post could be misread. Sorry. All I am saying is that I really prefer the wolfson dac. If the Classics dacs in just as open and detail then maybe the sound is better all I am saying that I am sceptical especially after listning to the ipod nano 3G and knowning Apple picked the Circus chip because it was cheaper for them...
     
  17. 00hkelly macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    #17
    the iPhone 3G most certainly has a new audio chip, quite likely the same Cirrus Logic one that made it into the iPod classic. Direct comparisons between the iPhone 3G and original iPhone showed that the new model has an almost completely clean noise floor, just like the iPod classic, rather than the comparatively noisier iPhone, which used a similar Wolfson Audio sound chip to the iPod nano, 5G, and touch products. We have more testing to do on this front, but what we can say is that the iPhone 3G sounds hugely cleaner with a high-end pair of earphones than the original model.

    Try reading things before you start posting misinformation.

    Mind you, if you listen with the buds that come with it, this whole argument is moot.
     
  18. kristoffer4 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    kristoffer4

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #18
    I did read it! As I am trying to explain. :rolleyes:
    I am sceptical because my experience with the circus logics chips has been rather bad. A lot people also complain about the the poor audio on the classic...
    My concern is that apple are trying to cut coners on the expense of the audio quality of the ipod. So each generation they will use a cheaper and cheaper resulting in poor and poor audio quality and nobody will care....
     
  19. dacreativeguy macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    #19
    The new version of ANYTHING is always better!

    New Coke better than old Coke
    Windows Vista better than XP
    President Bush better than Clinton

    :)
     
  20. 00hkelly macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    #20
    Yes, sorry. I loaded the page a little while ago and when I came to it in the browser window I forgot to refresh before replying.

    Apologies

    The audio on the classic may be poor, but the chips it uses are better than the ones in the nano, which sounds even worse. The iphone 3g may not sound great my many people's standards, but it sounds better than it did.
     
  21. tallyho macrumors 6502a

    tallyho

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2004
    Location:
    UK
    #21
    Er but your old iPhone has the same chip as the 3G nano... so your first post makes no sense :confused:
     
  22. kristoffer4 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    kristoffer4

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
  23. 00hkelly macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    #23
    I think much of the developed world would take issue with that statement.
     
  24. kristoffer4 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    kristoffer4

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #24
    Nope. That is the point. I has a wolfson dac like the touch. ;)
    But maybe the ipod classic is superior in sound to all of them. Hmm.
    http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3204&p=10

    And then maybe the Circus chip can sound as good as the wolfson...
     
  25. kristoffer4 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    kristoffer4

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #25
    lol. :D
     

Share This Page