Have your say & ask the experts!

ipod classic 160gb..bad sound quality?

23 replies [Last post]
ashworth_rich
ashworth_rich's picture
Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 386
Re: ipod classic 160gb..bad sound quality?
manicm:

I would still say, unless you absolutely need the 160gb capacity, avoid the current Classic. It's too stodgy, slow and outdated.



Ouch!
(as a classic user)

Still I cant argue that its overkill for 128kbps tracks and yes a touch is much "cooler" - for the kids and that.

Still comparing the experience of using my classic against my iphone for music, I'd hardly call the classic slow or outdated.

IMHO - of course!

I mean you cant play games on it or use spotty-geek-fi/lastfm
Clare Newsome
Clare Newsome's picture
Offline
Joined: 4 Jun 2007
Posts: 13733
Re: ipod classic 160gb..bad sound quality?
manicm:

Clare Newsome:

I'm going to be brutally honest here. If you're listening at 128Kbps, the quality of your player is one of your least concerns! In fact, the better the product, the more likely it is to show up the ultra-compressed music files.


If you re-ripped all your music in Lossless (even 320Kbps) format and upgraded to that 160GB Classic (with decent headphones), you should hear a massive performance upgrade.


Sorry if that's not the advice you're after (sounds like you've got a big library to rip!), but i'm being cruel to be kind Big Smile



Hand on heart Clare, this having being said, on my very first iPod, the Mini way back in 2004, I ripped to 128k AAC and the sound was brilliant - you should have The Who's Tommy on it - the imaging was unbelievable. The fact is Apple has over the years shoved in inferior DACs onto their iPods - and admitted the very first Shuffle was at the time the best sounding Pod!


I truly believe the 'fatty' Nano was the last truly great sounding 'Pod, haven't heard the latest one though.

No iPod has sounded as good as my first MP3 player, in pre-Apple, late-1990s times - or so my nostalgic brain tells me.  It sounded amazing with 128Kbps files...at the time, because there was nothing to compare it toBig Smile

Creative Jukebox 

Wouldn't swap back to it from my iPod Touch, though Wink

__________________

Group PR Manager - Computers Unlimited;

Former Group Editor of What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision and Whathifi.com

Twitter: @ClareNewsome

Andy Clough
Andy Clough's picture
Offline
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
Posts: 5393
Re: ipod classic 160gb..bad sound quality?

Ooh, I had one of those too! Was a bit cumbersome for the gym, mind.

__________________

Andy Clough is Brand Editor of What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision and whathifi.com

ashworth_rich
ashworth_rich's picture
Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 386
Re: ipod classic 160gb..bad sound quality?

Before becoming an apple bore (or should that be who*e?) I had real faith in creative.
I bought two of the tiny NuVo Mp3 players and really avoided Apple like the plague.

Sadly, they never really took off. The interface on the device was clunky (three menus deep to pick a playlist), software was a pain and there was little support for the device (docks, etc) outside of Creative.

In the end I succumbed and went Apple and I've never looked back.

Sometimes its just too much effort to buck the trend!

Graham_Thomas
Graham_Thomas's picture
Offline
Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 1774
Re: ipod classic 160gb..bad sound quality?
manicm:

I would still say, unless you absolutely need the 160gb capacity, avoid the current Classic. It's too stodgy, slow and outdated.



It's great, massive capacity with ripped lossless and I love it! Horses for courses.....
__________________

Childs1962
Childs1962's picture
Offline
Joined: 3 Jan 2011
Posts: 97
Re: ipod classic 160gb..bad sound quality?
ashworth_rich:
Before becoming an apple bore (or should that be who*e?) I had real faith in creative. I bought two of the tiny NuVo Mp3 players and really avoided Apple like the plague. Sadly, they never really took off. The interface on the device was clunky (three menus deep to pick a playlist), software was a pain and there was little support for the device (docks, etc) outside of Creative. In the end I succumbed and went Apple and I've never looked back. Sometimes its just too much effort to buck the trend!


 


Likewise, even down to the two Creative Nuvos, what I do like about them is the USB compatability.


I also have a Creative X-Fi sound card which is great.


 


 


 

ashworth_rich
ashworth_rich's picture
Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 386
Re: ipod classic 160gb..bad sound quality?
Childs1962:
ashworth_rich:
Before becoming an apple bore (or should that be who*e?) I had real faith in creative. I bought two of the tiny NuVo Mp3 players and really avoided Apple like the plague. Sadly, they never really took off. The interface on the device was clunky (three menus deep to pick a playlist), software was a pain and there was little support for the device (docks, etc) outside of Creative. In the end I succumbed and went Apple and I've never looked back. Sometimes its just too much effort to buck the trend!


 


Likewise, even down to the two Creative Nuvos, what I do like about them is the USB compatability.


I also have a Creative X-Fi sound card which is great.


 


 


 



Yep, looked at one of those too (the soundcard), nice spec on them. Not sure they are HiFi? But they must be as close as you can get in a PC (except for using the USB out and a DAC).

I no longer even own a personal PC (I use work laptop to sync itunes on and to rip CDs). I survive with an iphone and ipad for typing.

But I digress....

Back on topic, I'd recommend a classic. Is the DAC as good as previous models - cant say, but the consensus seems to be no. If you dont need the capacity or like playing games, get a Touch. Then again, why not jsut get a 32GB iphone 4 on contract? Less outlay, same hardware (I assume) and its one less thing to carry/sync.
Lee H
Lee H's picture
Offline
Joined: 7 Oct 2010
Posts: 1462
Re: ipod classic 160gb..bad sound quality?
ashworth_rich:
Then again, why not jsut get a 32GB iphone 4 on contract? Less outlay, same hardware (I assume) and its one less thing to carry/sync.

Which is why I have one. It's just one less device to carry. There are better sounding portable music players from other manufacturers out there, but for me the compromise was only needing to carry one device.  If you don't mind carrying two, then the world doesn't have to be Apple shaped.

__________________

Formerly Still known as Lee H