# New iPods



## Hir (Sep 13, 2009)

So Apple have again changed their range of iPods and have failed to see the massive problems that the iPods have and refused to fix them.

Yeah I'm talking about their awful sound quality.

The iPod Classic now has a bigger memory, a big 160GB and now cost Â£10 more (About $20 in America.).

The iPod Touch now costs less for the 8GB model, and now you can get them in 8GB, 32GB, and 64GB (Which raises the question of why the hell they don't just upgrade the 8GB version to 16GB since it looks so out of place).

With the iPod Shuffle you can now get a Stainless Steel version in 4GB size. The other shuffles come in 2GB and 4GB.

The biggest change is the iPod Nano which is the first MP3 player to have a video camera on it, which apparently works pretty well. It is now in a anodised aluminium casing. The sizes in memory are exactly the same.

Still, I have no idea why they don't fix their god awful sound quality.

What are your views on the new iPods?


----------



## Carenath (Sep 13, 2009)

I've never really noticed any problems with the iPhone sound quality.. but then.. compared to 6 year old harmon-kardon speakers plugged into an old SoundBlaster 16 soundcard on my PC.. playing back MP3's and a smattering of songs bought on iTunes.. quality has always been about the same.

I dont really know what I'm supposed to be hearing that would class the iPod's sound quality as bad. That said.. I didnt own many iPods.. my first was a 4GB Nano.. followed by a 20GB iPod Video which I sold.


----------



## Remy (Sep 13, 2009)

I would liked to see that camera go on the Touch.
But...eventually I might just go with an iPhone. -_-


----------



## Runefox (Sep 13, 2009)

Are you sure you're not using some incredibly low bitrate when you transfer songs to the iPod, hence the terrible quality? Most accounts I've heard of put the iPod's sound quality pretty far up there.


----------



## CinnamonApples (Sep 13, 2009)

*listens to songs on Shuffle* Nope, sound quality's fine for me.
Anyhoo, I'm not really excited about any of the new iPods. Sure
they have fancy new features but I'm fine with what I have.


----------



## Hir (Sep 13, 2009)

Carenath said:


> I've never really noticed any problems with the iPhone sound quality.. but then.. compared to 6 year old harmon-kardon speakers plugged into an old SoundBlaster 16 soundcard on my PC.. playing back MP3's and a smattering of songs bought on iTunes.. quality has always been about the same.
> 
> I dont really know what I'm supposed to be hearing that would class the iPod's sound quality as bad. That said.. I didnt own many iPods.. my first was a 4GB Nano.. followed by a 20GB iPod Video which I sold.





CinnamonApples said:


> *listens to songs on Shuffle* Nope, sound quality's fine for me.
> Anyhoo, I'm not really excited about any of the new iPods. Sure
> they have fancy new features but I'm fine with what I have.


You won't know the difference until you've heard what is better.

Listen to a Samsung MP3 player on the right sound quality setting and you'll see exactly what I mean. I swapped my Samsung player which was Â£35 for the iPod classic which was Â£175 and I immediately got rid of my iPod to get a Samsung again.

Oh and it isn't the headphones, I used the same pair for both. Sennheiser CX-299. Good headphones BTW.


----------



## Runefox (Sep 13, 2009)

I'm still wondering if you're using a low bitrate or a lower-quality codec, particularly if you're transcoding from MP3 to begin with. Since iPods/iTunes usually enjoy using AAC - Which is actually a higher-quality codec than MP3, but will introduce more artifacts if transcoding from MP3 (as any lossy codec will do) - it's likely that if you've got MP3 files being transcoded, you'll get a lower quality anyway. That's one of the reasons why I use FLAC where possible.

Though yeah, I find my PSP's audio output and my PC's audio output (thanks to my Auzentech X-Fi Prelude) is far better than pretty much everything else I've heard.


----------



## Hir (Sep 13, 2009)

Runefox said:


> I'm still wondering if you're using a low bitrate or a lower-quality codec, particularly if you're transcoding from MP3 to begin with. Since iPods/iTunes usually enjoy using AAC - Which is actually a higher-quality codec than MP3, but will introduce more artifacts if transcoding from MP3 (as any lossy codec will do) - it's likely that if you've got MP3 files being transcoded, you'll get a lower quality anyway. That's one of the reasons why I use FLAC where possible.
> 
> Though yeah, I find my PSP's audio output and my PC's audio output (thanks to my Auzentech X-Fi Prelude) is far better than pretty much everything else I've heard.


I use FLAC files primarilly. They average at about 1000 KB/s.

Yeah, Samsung are one of the first mainstream MP3 players to support the filetype.

And I only get 320KB/s MP3 files.

I used the same files on the iPod that I did the Samsung and the Samsung was considerably better on every front.

I'm an audiophile, I know about filetypes and bitrates.


----------



## CinnamonApples (Sep 13, 2009)

DarkNoctus said:


> You won't know the difference until you've heard what is better.



I'm not denying there's mp3 players with higher sound quality, I'm just stating that I think the sound quality's fine on my own iPod.


----------



## Hir (Sep 13, 2009)

CinnamonApples said:


> I'm not denying there's mp3 players with higher sound quality, I'm just stating that I think the sound quality's fine on my own iPod.


Sure but since I've had much better for less, I couldn't adjust to the quality. Hence I got rid of it.


----------



## Runefox (Sep 13, 2009)

DarkNoctus said:


> I use FLAC files primarilly. They average at about 1000 KB/s.
> 
> ...
> 
> I'm an audiophile, I know about filetypes and bitrates.



>_> Not to be an ass, but bitrate isn't a concern for FLAC.

Still, I'm not sure what about the iPod would make it sound worse otherwise. I do have to wonder what the difference in terms of quality in the ADC's are in terms of the Samsung and the iPod, but frankly, I'm a big fan of the PSP.


----------



## Takun (Sep 13, 2009)

Drop the required itunes or make it easier to swap files in and out like it is when I use winamp.  Other than that they should focus on making the battery last as long as possible.


----------



## Hir (Sep 13, 2009)

Runefox said:


> >_> Not to be an ass, but bitrate isn't a concern for FLAC.


Yeah just thought I'd say the bitrate to show the difference in the audio diversity.


Runefox said:


> Still, I'm not sure what about the iPod would make it sound worse otherwise. I do have to wonder what the difference in terms of quality in the ADC's are in terms of the Samsung and the iPod, but frankly, I'm a big fan of the PSP.


Samsung have their own soundcard technology called DNSe 3.0 which you can edit clarity, EQ, and other various things based on sound quality to make it perfect. That is what sets it apart.

With the diversity of music I listen to, just being able to change an EQ isn't enough. I listen from the heaviest bands in the world to pure folk music.


----------



## Aden (Sep 13, 2009)

Slight audiophile here - member of What.CD, tunes speakers to rooms, checks ripping logs, yadda yadda.

My audio sounds fine through both my iPhone and old iPod classic 30GB. Yes, that's with lossless music. Yes, I have nice Bose headphones (yeah, got them for xmas, don't bash because of price |:c  ). Yes, I've compared it to my friends' Zen players and Zunes.


----------



## Rel (Sep 13, 2009)

To be honest, i have an Ipod touch 32GB 1st Gen, and i really didn't _just_ buy it to listen to music. I mean the sound sounds perfectly fine to me, i have no complaint to it, and i know there is better, but there is more to an ipod touch than just music. (Mainly Wifi and its a mini computer).


----------



## Hir (Sep 13, 2009)

Aden said:


> Slight audiophile here - member of What.CD, tunes speakers to rooms, checks ripping logs, yadda yadda.
> 
> My audio sounds fine through both my iPhone and old iPod classic 30GB. Yes, that's with lossless music. Yes, I have nice Bose headphones (yeah, got them for xmas, don't bash because of price |:c  ). Yes, I've compared it to my friends' Zen players and Zunes.


Oh yay another member of What.CD 

Zen players are OK but mine broke after 6 days so I don't even consider them an MP3 player, I just consider them as overpriced badly built crap. I've never tried a Zune.


----------



## Night-Leopard-800 (Sep 13, 2009)

The iPod Touch seems to have good quality. Nano... not so much...

Nextar has a very good and reliable $20 1GB mp3 player that supports .mp3, .wma, and .wav.


----------



## Aden (Sep 13, 2009)

DarkNoctus said:


> Oh yay another member of What.CD



Nice! What's your login? Mine's "AdenZerda".



DarkNoctus said:


> Zen players are OK but mine broke after 6 days so I don't even consider them an MP3 player, I just consider them as overpriced badly built crap.



But I hear many people say that they have top sound quality.



Runefox said:


> I'm still wondering if you're using a low bitrate or a lower-quality codec, particularly if you're transcoding from MP3 to begin with. Since iPods/iTunes usually enjoy using AAC - Which is actually a higher-quality codec than MP3, but will introduce more artifacts if transcoding from MP3 (as any lossy codec will do) - it's likely that if you've got MP3 files being transcoded, you'll get a lower quality anyway.



Just wanted to point out that iTunes will not transcode your songs while putting them on your device. But yeah, gonna have to agree that lossy to lossy transcodes are a sin against all that is sacred.


----------



## CinnamonApples (Sep 13, 2009)

DarkNoctus said:


> Sure but since I've had much better for less, I couldn't adjust to the quality. Hence I got rid of it.



Fair enough.


----------



## Hir (Sep 13, 2009)

Aden said:


> Nice! What's your login? Mine's "AdenZerda".


DarkNoctus. I need to start uploading more but almost everything I have is already there.


Aden said:


> But I hear many people say that they have top sound quality.



Absolutely depends what you're listening to. I had a Zen X-Fi which was the best in the range, and it had 3 different technologies for enhancing sound quality. Crystaliser, 3D Surround, and an Equaliser. The crystaliser was ok, 3D Surround muffled the sound, and the Equaliser...Well...It's an equaliser.

One thing I will hand to Creative is the buds they come with were pretty good. But I didn't use them much. I tried them and they were decent but my Sennheisers were better so I stuck to them.

It was definately no better than Samsung since the Samsung does what the X-Fi does and more.

AND IT DOESN'T BREAK AFTER 6 DAYS.


----------



## SailorYue (Sep 13, 2009)

i hate ipods... the scroll wheel is impossible to control
and it just doesnt work with the car radio. i don know if it sthe tuner, the car radio, or the ipod itself, but either way i always end up with horrific feedback and static.


----------



## Jessica Chen (Sep 13, 2009)

not interested. have a mp3 and loving it. I use headphones, as ear buds dont fit me


----------



## Hir (Sep 13, 2009)

Jessica Chen said:


> not interested. have a mp3 and loving it. I use headphones, as ear buds dont fit me


What MP3 player do you have?


----------



## Jessica Chen (Sep 13, 2009)

umm I think it's an RCA mp3 or something. not very fancy


----------



## Aden (Sep 13, 2009)

DarkNoctus said:


> DarkNoctus. I need to start uploading more but almost everything I have is already there.



Cool, add'd. And yeah, that's both the gift and the trouble with that site - they have everything you would ever need, but it's so tough to maintain a ratio there. I've come to realize, though, that that's what keeps the site striving to improve. Best place on the 'net.


----------



## Hir (Sep 13, 2009)

Just noticed my uploading priveleges were taken away because I accidentally uploaded the lowq version of the MP3s instead of the high ones. I actually have an album they don't have too. Great.

Have to wait until October until I can upload again.


----------



## Aden (Sep 13, 2009)

DarkNoctus said:


> Just noticed my uploading priveleges were taken away because I accidentally uploaded the lowq version of the MP3s instead of the high ones. I actually have an album they don't have too. Great.
> 
> Have to wait until October until I can upload again.



Oh yeah, I noticed you had a little "warned" icon. D:

You could always go into #what.cd-disabled and explain your case? Don't forget to be honest and polite.

Edit: Don't forget to go through your CD collection and "fill in the gaps" on the site with regard to formats. :3


----------



## Hir (Sep 14, 2009)

Aden said:


> Oh yeah, I noticed you had a little "warned" icon. D:
> 
> You could always go into #what.cd-disabled and explain your case? Don't forget to be honest and polite.
> 
> Edit: Don't forget to go through your CD collection and "fill in the gaps" on the site with regard to formats. :3


Meh, I'll just wait it out. Sucks though =/


----------



## SailorYue (Sep 14, 2009)

what IS what.cd? and how do you join?


----------



## Hir (Sep 14, 2009)

It's the best torrent site on the net.

You can only join if you are invited to join.


----------



## Carenath (Sep 14, 2009)

DarkNoctus said:


> It's the best torrent site on the net.
> 
> You can only join if you are invited to join.


Yay, Elitism 

I dont use torrent sites much.. direct downloads have always been faster, as has getting stuff off my friends.


----------



## Takun (Sep 14, 2009)

DarkNoctus said:


> It's the best torrent site on the net.
> 
> You can only join if you are invited to join.



Waffles is pretty cool.  I like the community so far.  It's not as unbearably extreme as what seems to be.  Though I wouldn't mind a what account.


----------



## SailorYue (Sep 14, 2009)

i dont mind torrents from trsted sites... ive gotten plenty of  viruses from lessrknowns. but some torrents are cool.


----------



## Aden (Sep 14, 2009)

DarkNoctus said:


> It's the best torrent site on the net.
> 
> You can only join if you are invited to join.



I actually was not invited. I took the interview to get in.



Carenath said:


> Yay, Elitism



Elitism keeps the quality at its maximum. I'm just fine with that.



> I dont use torrent sites much.. direct downloads have always been faster, as has getting stuff off my friends.



You're not using the right torrent sites.


----------



## Runefox (Sep 14, 2009)

I've become a bit of a fan of Demonoid, personally. I couldn't give a crap if someone said "LOL THIS TORRENT SITE IS BEST", between it, ISOHunt and the Pirate Bay, I can find virtually anything. Now, with that said, why are we talking about the best places to download *backup copies of our legally-purchased media*?


----------



## Aden (Sep 14, 2009)

Runefox said:


> I've become a bit of a fan of Demonoid, personally. I couldn't give a crap if someone said "LOL THIS TORRENT SITE IS BEST", between it, ISOHunt and the Pirate Bay, I can find virtually anything. Now, with that said, why are we talking about the best places to download *backup copies of our legally-purchased media*?



I mostly use my demonoid for software and movies now. I can barely find any of the music I want OUTSIDE of What these days, let alone in FLAC.


----------



## Hir (Sep 15, 2009)

Runefox said:


> I've become a bit of a fan of Demonoid, personally. I couldn't give a crap if someone said "LOL THIS TORRENT SITE IS BEST", between it, ISOHunt and the Pirate Bay, I can find virtually anything. Now, with that said, why are we talking about the best places to download *backup copies of our legally-purchased media*?


Regardless, I've never seen a website that has virtually any album I desire. Let alone in FLAC Codec. Thats What.CD for you.


----------



## Runefox (Sep 15, 2009)

Why did you both respond with exactly the same answer? 

Anyway, I don't often go looking for music, and the stuff I do look for I tend to find in FLAC. Maybe I'm just lucky that way.


----------



## Aden (Sep 16, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Why did you both respond with exactly the same answer?



I responded first >:V



> Anyway, I don't often go looking for music, and the stuff I do look for I tend to find in FLAC. Maybe I'm just lucky that way.



Your music is obviously not too hard to find.


----------



## Arcadium (Sep 17, 2009)

I was disappointed. Nothing new. I put this with the worst Product update for the Touch and Classic, right next to Zune 3.0. And what's the deal with the Nano not able to take Still photo's.


----------

