Ipod nano vs Ipod classic.. What sound better?

Discussion in 'iPod' started by Muscle Master, May 8, 2011.

  1. Muscle Master macrumors 6502a

    Muscle Master

    Oct 15, 2010
    So I want an Ipod to compliment the Solo HD's (Beats by Dre) I just ordered.. but I'm leaning towards the nano.. cause I mite wanna use it as a watch also.. but I'm more concerned about sound quality... which one sound better?
  2. rgarjr macrumors 603


    Apr 2, 2009
    Southern California
  3. yly3 macrumors 6502

    Jan 9, 2011
    I recently had a 6G Classic and the sound was mediocre -> acceptable ( I expect the 7G would be a bit better). However I just bought the latest nano and damn ..this thing is miles better in audio quality.

    I highly recommend the nano if you don't need the extra space.
  4. puma1552 macrumors 603

    Nov 20, 2008
    They both probably have the same sound chip, no?

    In either case, with every iPod I've ever had (and I've had lots), using the Treble Booster EQ cleans up the sound a LOT--they sound fairly muddy without it.
  5. Alistaire macrumors newbie

    May 9, 2011
    Well I have used both . I would say that Sound quality in both have the same . There is no difference in sound quality because both have same sound chip in them . So You can get any one .
  6. bpaluzzi macrumors 6502a


    Sep 2, 2010
    Not to be a jerk, but any sound quality difference in those units will be negated by your headphones ;-)
  7. alexjholland macrumors 6502


    May 3, 2011
    Bali, Cambridge, Sydney.. anywhere.
    Firstly, all Beats headphones are a complete disgrace and universally panned by headphone afficionados. If you want style AND performance, get some AiAiAi - either Tracks or the TMA-1.

    I have a brand-new Nano 6G and and iPhone 4 and the iPhone DESTROYS it.

    I think it's the EU volume limiter as much as anything; even with the Nano maxed out, I have to have my car stereo so loud (using aux in) that you can hear hissing whenever there is no music.

    I can't verify how non-EU Nano sounds, but the UK Nano is certainly a tier below my old Zune and my new iPhone.

    IPhone 4 is pumping at very low volume. If anything, I'm sure it sounds better too.

    Hence, I'm selling the Nano and ordering a Classic from the US.
  8. malnar macrumors 6502a


    Aug 20, 2008
    I will concur with the above: Beats are JUNK. If that's what you're using, there's probably no need to worry about quality difference between a Classic and a Nano.

    If you opt for good quality headphones, however, it's going to depend on which Nano. I had the 6th gen Classic and it's sound quality was never very good compared to my wife's 4th gen Nano. Fairly harsh, rough sound, especially compared to my previous iPod, the great 80gb 5th gen - I should have never sold it just for space! Apple switched audio chips between 5th and 6th gens and it was for the worse. I never really liked that Classic, unfortunately, but it was okay if using it through the dock connector, say, in a car.

    I can't say how the newer Nano is - I worry about minimizing the size, that Apple may have gone with cheaper electronics to fit it all into such a small space. I haven't heard what audio chip is in the 6th gen Nano. I can definitely say the iPhone/Touch are fantastic sounding. A 64gb 4G Touch has replaced my dying 160gb Classic.
  9. HillaryBen macrumors newbie


    May 11, 2011
    I pod nano carries a flash memory and it is more geared toward music. I pod classic has a hard drive and that is more suitable for watch videos. I prefer classic because I like to watch a lot of movies.
  10. MrXiro macrumors 68040


    Nov 2, 2007
    Los Angeles
    I tried the Beats... they are so Blah... I picked up the Sony XB700... probably the best sounding cans I own! Great bass, relatively clean mids and highs. Not the most accurate headphones I own... but I kind of prefer the thumpyness of them. Makes watching movies on the iPad like rocking a home theater system on your head.

    You look like Princess Leia though.
  11. kwajkat macrumors regular


    Aug 17, 2009
    Just bought a nano 6th gen and like it. This is my firwt experience with a nano, have always had a ipod classic and touch as well as the ipad.

    I have found that the sound quality really depends on what headphones you use. One set I tried made the sound sound really bad. The other set made the sound real rich and clear.

    My only fault with the nano is I got the 8GB and should have gotten the 16GB!!
  12. iEvolution macrumors 65816

    Jul 11, 2008
    The nano is definitely cleaner sounding and can get louder than the classic can.
    (This was done with Sennheiser HD485s, which value @ $150)

    Classic is a bit of a disappointment these days and really needs to get a better chip.

    Though when I listen to my Fuze +, neither the nano or classic compare.

    If sound quality is truly a goal I honestly would recommend Sansa or Cowon for audio quality as the iPods SQ is fair at best.
  13. Alvesang macrumors regular


    Sep 4, 2010
    First, I don't really understand why there's always someone criticizing Monster Beats. I bought the Solo HD as well, because they are small, lightweight, passive (I simply don't like battery-powered headphones) and produce a really deep bass. No, they are not in the audiophile category... so what? I don't need "perfect" sound, I want MY music to sound they way I want it to, and for me the Solo HD Beats deliver. You don't like 'em? Don't buy 'em.

    Second, I have both the 160 GB classic and the nano 6G and I don't really notice a difference when using the Beats (or any other audio equipment for that matter). I would make it a practical choice. I find myself carrying around the nano far more often than the classic, because it's so easily attached to my clothing, doesn't seem to weigh anything and is beautiful to handle. I would love to see its capacity upgraded, though. Yeah, as if I was the only one. ;)
  14. tablo13, May 12, 2011
    Last edited: May 14, 2011

    tablo13 macrumors 65816


    Jul 29, 2010
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Because Beats are way too overpriced, and I don't think you would notice a big difference between nano and classic anyways because Beats Solo (HD?) didn't have too much detail when I listened to them.
  15. iEvolution macrumors 65816

    Jul 11, 2008
    For the price you are paying for those head phones you could have a pair that are actually in the audiophile category.

    Plus they are made by Monster..the same company that:
    a) advertised alkaline batteries as having 25% more power when independent lab results showed otherwise.

    b) The same company that tried to promote their HDMI cables as superior by comparing two TVs, one with a composite cable and the other using their super elite special HDMI cable.(aka the same $10 or less HDMI cables you can find online)

    c) They've tried to sue various companies for simply having the word "monster" in their name, including Monster Energy Drinks & Monster Minigolf.

    There have also been comparisons done online that state their supposed superior audio cables had no distinguishable difference from a 16 gauge lamp cord.

    The only thing good about those particular head phones are the bass, but there is more to music than just bass if you listen to ANYTHING other than rap.

    As far as the classic vs nano, there is a pretty big difference when you use head phones that give a nice range of highs and lows. nano seems to be more crisp and better overall roundness than the classic.

    I wish apple would make the classic into an audiophiles device because as it stands right now I think it is the worst of the batch, even the shuffle sounds better now. Audiophiles would love the capacity and adding a quality sound chip would give the device a bit of a facelift without drastically diverting from the name.

Share This Page