Media bias towards IPODS

Fighting talk for a first-ever post.

Media bias toward iPods? Next you'll tell us you've just discovered that water's wet.

(BTW FWIW I think iPods are hateful things, and single-handedly responsible for a whole generation with no concept of sound quality, but what do I know...?)

But before anyone suggests it's all to do with freebie iPods all round, think again. Doesn't happen, and even review samples are grabbed back very smartly.

IME most of the iPod evangelists paid their own hard-earned for the objects of their devotion.

Andrew Everard:

(BTW FWIW I think iPods are hateful things, and single-handedly responsible for a whole generation with no concept of sound quality, but what do I know...?)ÿ

Interesting comment. The iPod (and all it's compatriots) is doing plenty of good if you ask me. We can't cart turntables around in our pockets forever after all.

I guess it's because I drive to work, and tend to catch up with some reading or sleep on planes rather than partaking of the entertainment supplied, but I've never really felt the need for one.

And whenever I've heard one, I've struggled to work out what all the fuss is about.

Did momentarily toy with the idea of one as a means of storing music for playback in the car a while back, but then realised that most of the time I listen to speech radio when driving.

Anyway, just my 2p's worth...

I think the quality of sound from an iPod is great given it's limitations. I'm not an iPod owner (unless you call my girlfriends mine - which I'm not ready for yet) but I've had a couple of otherwise not really into audio friends ask me how to improve the sound. If an iPod is what it takes to make people realise there is more to be had then so be it - and more people to silently snigger at the white people.

smudgegib:

Why do Apple products always receive 5 stars in the media?

1. How can a product that comes supplied with headphones that are not fit for purpose gain 5 stars.

2. Apple products are so unreliable insurance companies will not extend the guarantee on them, surely reliability must come into the equation.

3. Sonic ability how can a S&V reviewer state that IPODS are sonically better than Cowon and Sony?

4. Proprietry software, Surely this should go against IPODS.

 None of the above detract from the what Hifi obligatory 5 stars for apple products.

 A hifi magazine should take all the above into account and not give it 5 stars because it looks pretty and is popular. 

Whoa! Deep breath, and go...

Points 1 and 2 are applicable to all MP3 players

3) We comparatively test everything, with a range of headphones, and using music ripped at various bit-rates (very important, that bit) and simply have found the iPods to be better on most occasions. And we always use both legacy and current iPods in our testing, too (very few people bother to do all of  this, and so fail to place players in their true context).

4) Propritary software, yes. Really easy to use software? Yes. Available for PC and Mac? Yes.  Try that with a Sony player.

Oh,  and we haven't given every Apple product five stars - the woeful Apple Hi-fi speaker system (to date the only product Apple has ever readily given us for review  - we've had to buy all our reference iPods and the majority of others we've tested) got an initial three-star verdict that then dropped to two stars when fresh competition  came along.

The iPod Touch only finally got five stars when the capacity was increased and the price dropped (it was four stars initially) and we prefer the Samsung Pebble to the iPod Shuffle.

We continue to review players from all the main iPod-rivals, and would love to find stronger competition for Apple's dominance. Bring it on, CE manufacturers!

Clare Newsome:

The iPod Touch only finally got four stars when the capacity was increased and the price dropped (it was four stars initially) and we prefer the Samsung Pebble to the iPod Shuffle.

I'm confused.

Sorry, was typing in a hurry - of course meant five stars from four - amended above.

Clare Newsome:

Sorry, was typing in a hurry - of course meant five stars from four - amended above.

Aha! Figured it would be something like that.

Thanks.

Andrew Everard:

FWIW I think iPods are hateful things, and single-handedly responsible for a whole generation with no concept of sound quality

JohnDuncan:

Andrew Everard:

FWIW I think iPods are hateful things, and single-handedly responsible for a whole generation with no concept of sound quality

No, I think JVC, Aiwa, Goodmans, Alba, Amstrad, Sharp and even Sony (inter alia) were there first.

Thin ice, my friend...

aiwa, sony, jvc - all giants!!!

and, er, good giants.

And bad giants.

Ooh, why you...

Octopo:

I think the quality of sound from an iPod is great given it's limitations. I'm not an iPod owner (unless you call my girlfriends mine - which I'm not ready for yet) but I've had a couple of otherwise not really into audio friends ask me how to improve the sound. If an iPod is what it takes to make people realise there is more to be had then so be it - and more people to silently snigger at the white people.

Hifi World rates some players as sonically superior to the iPod, but I can vouch that my iPod nano 3g paired with my Sennheiser CX300s can sound heavenly, and not at lossless but at 256k AAC or some 320k MP3 files which I purchased.

And yes, if buying an iPod, before you even open the box dump the supplied earphones - they are patent rubbish.

al7478:

Ooh, why you...

Anyway. My point was that to say that people have only discovered bad sound quality since the iPod came out is nonsense. Outside the people who frequent this site, poor sound quality has been accepted since I was a boy. My dad thought buying a 150 quid stacking system (which might have been by Alba, I forget) to replace his Fidelity record player was the height of audiophilia.

Amongst all the people whom I count as friends, I have the second best stereo (behind a Michell/Moon/Alchemis/Sonus Faber setup), the next best being an 80 quid Sony CD player with a Cambridge A1 and foul Missions until he bought all my castoffs off me. The rest have Bose/Denon minis/Sony micros/Bose iPod docks with the speakers set on top of shelves by the ceiling. The truth is that the vast majority of people don't know (and care less) what can be achieved with even modest money, and most importantly, never have. So to blame the dumbing down of sound quality on the iPod (particularly when it's a damn sight better than the first Sony Walkman) is plain wrong.

And yes, it was perhaps slightly unfair to lump Sony/JVC/et al into the "rubbish stereo" camp, but they've been as guilty as any of providing flashing light monsters to the masses ever since CD promised "perfect sound forever"...