|
I'm not the only person who hates how the iPod sounds
 I owned an iPod (4th gen) from December 2004, to sometime in May 2005. I was never happy with it for several reasons, stability being one. But the absolute worst thing about it was how my music sounded. Even with expensive ($100+) ear buds, the bass was unacceptably weak, and music sounded harsh. I'm not an audiophile - I just absolutely do not get told what I do and don't like, and I know what, to me, sounds pleasant, and what doesn't. Well, OK, "pleasant" probably doesn't describe some of the music I like, but there's a difference between "heavy" and "distorted and crunchy".
I ranted about the audio quality of the iPod on my site a lot, and I've had tons of comments and e-mails from people who don't seem to understand the problem. Some of them were nice people who were just sharing opinions. Others were Apple zealots. This post is aimed at them.
Yep, guess what I just read on HomeTheaterHiFi.com, an incredibly well-respected A/V reviews site? An in depth review of the iPod, in which the reviewer mentions just about all the same problems I had with my 2004 model, which appear to still be present (funny, I've been told many times that the problems have been completely fixed?)
But wait. There was no bass to begin with. At least not nearly as much as I thought there should be.
The highs were detailed, maybe a bit harsh, but the midrange was weak, and the bass was just barely there.
Even if I used both hands to stick the ear buds into my ear canals and hold them there, nope, not much bass at all.
I decided to try using better quality ear phones. [...] Even the phones that were labeled as being for those consumers who really love bass (yours truly), and have big "enclosures" . . . well, the bass was just not there.
Even with no ear phones, the response falls off significantly [...] Hey guys, this is not good. In fact, lousy.
The iPod - any MP3 player in fact - has the potential to be an audiophile product. The extraordinarily low noise floor, coupled with acceptably low distortion, delivers detailed highs in the music. However, the declining frequency response from 10 kHz on down results in poor midrange, and unacceptable bass.
I told you so! And now so does John E. Johnson, Jr, who I will gladly buy drinks for if I ever meet him in real life. Interestingly, his article ends with a link to a CNET page about what MP3 players sound the best. And what do I see a picture of when I click the link? You guessed it. The Sony NW-HD5 that I've been raving about for close to two years now for this very reason.
Sorry to sound so rude, but I found this incredibly satisfying after two years of people making out I have some sort of hearing problem. Oh! And it looks like I'm NOT the only person who had stability/usability issues with the thing, either:
So, after a trip down to an Apple store, and having the very knowledgeable clerk tell me that "Sync iPod" is "awesome", not nonsense, and helping me get the now crashed iPod back into working condition, I went back home and loaded some music into my computer ...
Site Design © by David Mackenzie. Unless stated, the opinions contained herein are entirely my own. I make no claim to any other properties or trademarks mentioned. NOT AFFILIATED with Lyris Technologies, an e-mail marketing software provider. This site uses a cookie to store your preferred visual style. Some Javascript functions are the work of other programmers (used with permission).
|
Leon Ahoy!
I watched an episode of the ' Gadget Show ' and the reviewer tested an assortment of MP3-Players. Amongst them was an iPod
He concluded that the iPod had pretty poor sound quality. Lacking punch and far from rich, the audio sounded indistinct.
I forget what the other makes were. I use a new Samsung which cost £40, and it's very good.