iPod Touch excels in sound quality
Zune HD
(Credit: Microsoft)I find it hard to evaluate an MP3 player until I've lived with it for a little while. Specifications, demos, and even quick hands-on tests don't tell you the most important thing: how does it sound? Can you listen to it for an hour? A week? The rest of your life?
On Tuesday, I spent a few hours with the 32GB versions of Microsoft's new Zune HD and Apple's latest-generation iPod Touch. To me, these are the top-of-the-line competitors in the MP3 player market--if you're a serious music listener with nearly $300 to spend, these are your two choices.
On a straight specifications basis, each of them has clear advantages.
The iPod Touch excels as a portable multifunction computer, with tens of thousands of available applications, and it's the only choice for Mac users. The Zune HD has superior music-discovery features, particularly when used with a Zune Pass subscription. Plus, it has an HD Radio and a sophisticated desktop PC client that makes iTunes look stale.
On industrial design, I think they're about even--a commendable feat for Microsoft given how far behind the previous Zunes were. On user interface, the iPod Touch may be more intuitive at first, but the Zune HD is way cooler--I love the way artist images and words scroll across the background as you play a song--and gives you far more customization over the music-playing experience. (I'm amazed that the iPod Touch still doesn't have an easy way to add songs to a now-playing queue, for instance.)
But what about the actual sound? To try them out, I ran them into the audio input jack in my car, which is how I most often listen to portable music. I turned each device up to just below maximum volume (I've heard my iPhone distort at its max), and made sure the EQ settings were completely flat.
iPod Touch
(Credit: CNET)The Zune HD sounded very crisp and clean, with clear separation in the bass, but the midrange--guitar, vocals--didn't seem full or loud enough. When I turned it up to try and get a fuller sound, the treble became overwhelming.
The iPod Touch was noticeably louder at the same volume setting on the car stereo. The trebly parts--cymbals, high-hat, the squeak of a saxophone reed--were still distinct, but the bass sounded rounder and warmer, and the midrange (the most important spectrum when choosing audio gear) shone through. It made me realize how much sound was missing when I listened to the Zune HD.
The difference became most obvious when I took a couple songs--Radiohead's "How to Disappear Completely" and Mr. Bungle's NSFW funk-bizarro song "Squeeze Me Macaroni"--and listened to them back to back on each player. On the Zune HD, the acoustic guitar in the Radiohead song sounded clinky and thin, and the percussion in the Bungle song was unbearably high-pitched. On the iPod Touch, the guitar sounded like guitar and the percussion was complementary rather than overwhelming.
A few hours later, I tried a similar test through the relatively cheap headphones that come with the Zune HD. Here, the Zune fared a bit better--it sounded louder, so I didn't need to turn it up so much that the over-boosted treble hurt my ears--but there simply wasn't as much audio information coming through, especially at the low end.
Hearing is subjective--apparently younger listeners are beginning to prefer the "sizzle" of highly compressed MP3s, and one listener's "crisp" is another's "harsh." And I'm an analog fan, with far more records than CDs in my home collection. But to me, the Zune HD sounded pretty good, while the new iPod Touch is the best-sounding MP3 player I've ever heard, comparing favorably with a decent CD player.
Your lesson? Don't just read the specs and look at the interface before you buy an MP3 player. Spend some serious time listening to it, at volume.
Matt Rosoff is an analyst with Directions on Microsoft, where he covers Microsoft's consumer products and corporate news. He's written about the technology industry since 1995, and reviewed the first Rio MP3 player for CNET.com in 1998. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network. Disclosure. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mattrosoff. 
"while the new iPod Touch is the best-sounding MP3 player I've ever heard, comparing favorably with a decent CD player."
The irony is the new ipod use the same audio chip inside and even some editors on this site have said the ipod has lacking sound quality. Matt is the ONLY one saying different.
Very interesting indeed.
But I am curious to know if Apple finally improved the sound on the new models.
If you wanna talk bias, here is an article about extensive testing, and you attack it because of your preconceived notions, without any experience of your own...
You make a weirdly oppressive argument that all reviews should come to the same conclusion. So on that basis, if the nine reviews that have gone before are all favorable then as a reviewer your objective is clear: you must also write a favorable review.
Anyway sound quality is always going to be objective, you just have to decide what you're comfortable with. I personally can't stand compressed audio and always go for the lossless codecs.
Why the heck would you measure SQ from the headphone jack to a car? Wouldnt you rather have a direct line out to the car? You are trying to puch an amp that is used for portable listening through the speakers of a car. Very different.
What codec and bitrate was the music you listened to?
Did you alter the EQ?
What is your car setup?
You do not say anything about the Itouch portable sound?
Why would you not use different types of headphones? Standard that came with, High end, etc?
This is a terrible article that ended up with no relevant information whatsoever.
This is my subjective opinion, and I tried to frame it as such, using the word "subjective" and closing with the simple tip that you need to listen to an MP3 player, not just buy it on spec. I also mentioned that I'm a bit weird--I like records over CDs. So that might account for my difference in opinion between other reviewers--people who grew up in the CD world tend to like crisp and trebly music, which I think is painful to listen to. Subjective, subjective, subjective.
As far as the browser goes, it's funny that Gizmodo called it awesome then noted that pages load more slowly than they do on Safari, and the screen's smaller. If that's awesome, I guess the iPhone browser is totally crazy amazing awesome. And as far as Bing mobile goes, we just flat out disagree.
|
|--- This from someone who hasn't actually listened to either...
I listen to my iPod Touch with Sony headphones and I think the sound is pretty good. Having said that I've never listened to music on the Zune HD. So maybe I don't know what I'm missing...
yuuuuck
Main reason i am commenting is I see your a Mr. Bungle fan as well. And those are few and far between. What a great way to test your new MP3 Players! lol. "Travolta!"
I regret I never saw Bungle live. Seen a bunch of Patton projects though--Fantomas, Moonchild were both incredible--and Secret Chiefs several times. Great stuff.
Here's Matthew Miller of ZDNET saying how have "always found my Zune devices to sound a bit better than my iPods and the Zune HD continues to sound fantastic to me through my Ultimate Ears headphones."
http://blogs.zdnet.com/mobile-gadgeteer/?p=1996
"The bad: The video cameras found on the iPhone 3GS and iPod Nano remain conspicuously absent. The lack of refinements to its audio quality, hardware design, and video playback leave us feeling just a little uninspired."
"Unfortunately, as much as Apple seems inspired to push the limits of processor speed and video game graphics rendering, the attention it pays to audio quality and sound enhancement is at a standstill."
http://cnettv.cnet.com/?tag=hdr%3bsnav
In this review he contridicts Matt on the browser and contradicts the "story" about OLED screens at apple insider.
http://cnettv.cnet.com/?tag=hdr%3bsnav
Even when comparing the Zune classic to the Zune 120, sound was always better on the Zune...and considering that the Zune HD uses the same sound chip as the previous Zunes as the Ipod touch 3rd gen uses the same sound chip as the 2nd gen touch, i have no idea what Matt is thinking.
Hey reviews are subjective. But saying the ipod touch has the best sound for a MP3 player?
Listen to a Zune or Sony player just to refute that
"...if you're a serious music listener with nearly $300 to spend, these are your two choices..."
renders this article void if you are indeed a serious music listener.
If, as you say, you're looking for multi-functional devices for playing games, watching videos, etc, then the iPod Touch and Zune HD might well be the top contenders> But if you're looking for music quality, that's very doubtful. Cowen? Creative? Sony? Many people have even been saying that the Creative Zen Stone has one of the warmest, clearest sounds of existing MP3 players...
Then again at least Matt says this:
"|In my admittedly unscientific test, the new iPod Touch sounded louder, warmer, and more distinct than the Zune HD."
lol
I just wish Apple and Microsoft would make it as simple as say the Sansa players, where it treats it like a USB drive and you just drag your songs and albums to the Music folder... no need to load up some bloated memory hog like iTunes.
Totally agree with your preference for PMPs being treated as removable storage and supporting the ability to "drag and drop" your media files onto the device. It blow my mind that people are so naive that they let that capability become uncommon.
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f15/zunehd-so-does-sound-good-445424/index2.html
Most folks are saying it sounds like the older models. If found that it sounded better than the Zune 30 in some ways, but seemed to have an unnatural boost in the treble, 5khz and up probably.
He is obviously in the minority when it comes to this topic as all other sits that have compared audio quality to the new ipod says the Zune HD is better,
Reviews and opinions are subjective even if some are biased ;)
And some of the reviews probably are biased. It would not be the first time reviews were influenced by the amount of advertising a company does. Symantec comes to mind as an example of that. :-)
I haven't tried the Zune HD myself (and probably won't get a chance since I don't know anyone who owns Zunes).
The iPod line has a long history of rather undistinguished audio performance, especially if you're using the headphone circuitry. Line out audio on many iPods sounds considerably better. The iPod touch (Late 2009) is no better than previous iPods; I also own the first-generation iPod touch and an iPod classic 80GB.
Perhaps Cnet could get Steve Guttenberg to review the newest iPods in terms of audio performance.
I don't think iPods are horrible exactly, they just aren't as good as some other players. They're "good enough" and that's all that seems to matter to those who MUST have an iPod.
I've got nothing against people who like to use iPods, but to say that they excel in sound quality is taking it too far.
Handicapping the Zune to make up for a defect in the iPhone/iPod, now that makes sense.. The difference in balance of the sound can have a lot more to do with your car stereo, and the input levels it "prefers". I would have expected a little more rigorous testing from a professional. Your conclusion may have been right, but not sure I can trust it with how you went about it.
But do like your point about subjective listening. A technically inferior sound, may in the end be the most pleasing. You didn't say the ipod produced more accurate sound, just that it pleased you more..
- by weegg September 16, 2009 7:45 AM PDT
- Doh, its all subjective. No 2 listeners will agree. Besides given the format, both are good enough and just listen to both and pick the one you like.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 3 pages (108 Comments)You can't equate either of these devices to a properly set up system with records or super-bit recorded CDs.
btw: I have one japanese anime song that actually sounds lousy in mp3/aac formats but is just fine on its original CD.