Does the Touch Sound Require some getting used to?

[Ljazz]

The more I listen to my Ipod Touch the more I am inclined to conclude that it sounds good but just has a different sound signature than some other players I've used. As I get more accustomed to the sound I am enjoying it more. Perhaps what those people mean who say that the sound quality is not good really mean that it is not necessarily what they are used to or what they prefer. Just a thought. I hope it continues to grow on me :) .

[kornchild2002]

People don't know what they are talking about when they say that the iPod touch doesn't sound good. More than likely they are just iPod bigots who have something against iPods because they are popular. RMAA tests (which measure the physical outputs of each player) show that the iPod touch and iPod classic (there is an internal debate saying the iPod touch sounds better than the iPod classic, wrong) show that the iPod touch is on par with players from Creative, Cowon, and various other companies. People just have these preconceived notions that iPods have bad sound quality because that is what everyone says (without proof). The placebo affect plays a huge role here in that people think iPods should sound terrible so, whenever they listen to them in a non-blind test, their brain makes them think that the sound quality is terrible.

I don't think the iPod touch needs some getting used to, I think that most people just aren't willing to give the player a chance simply because it carries the iPod name.

[bobb-mini]

Are u using using the exact same earphones? 'coz otherwise the comparison is invalid.

[Ljazz]

Are u using using the exact same earphones? 'coz otherwise the comparison is invalid.

Yup, same earphones. But your point is well taken. The biggest difference I notice really has less to do with the sound of the player and more to do with EQ (I've been listening to other players with the sound EQ'd for some time and because the Ipod EQ is not very pleasing to me, I need to get used to listening to the music flat). That said, I do still notice a slight difference between the players themselves and I honestly don't think it's a placebo effect.

I DO think different people are used to different sound ... for example, some like a pumped up bass and don't care if the mids and highs are muted, while others prefer a sparkling high and just want a more accurate, less pronounced bass (hence the different preferences in headphones). I've noticed that players with better, or more customizable EQ settings are often the ones that people tend to say are the "good sounding" ones. Really, I believe they simply gravitate toward players that allow them to modify the sound in a way that gets closer to their individual perceived "ideal." And clearly, there are some that will say something doesn't sound good simply because it's a brand they have a negative reaction to or because they were told it isn't good.

[kornchild2002]

Well, if you have EQ's enabled on these other players then yes, they are going to sound different. You can't directly compare the way an iPod touch sounds to a Creative Zen (or whatever) if you have an EQ enabled on one of the devices. The reason being is than an EQ on a Zen is going to sound different than the same labeled EQ on an iPod. It is like comparing oranges to a TV or a PS3 to a pen.

However, just know that RMAA tests have proved that the iPod touch produces sound on par with all these other "high end" portables. So, if you are going to make a comparison between an iPod touch and a different device, you need to do the following:

Conduct a blind test not using any EQs, turn them off (don't use a FLAT setting either as that isn't the same).
Conduct your own RMAA tests.


You need to do both. Otherwise the differences that you think you hear are in fact caused by the placebo affect. Some people (me) take audio claims very seriously. Hence blind tests are needed along with RMAA tests. That way your blind tests are backed up by hard evidence. iPods have been bashed for having bad sound quality ever since they became extremely popular back in 2003. There was some justification as the 3G iPod (released in 2003) did produce inferior results when compared with other companies. These results were measured. However, ever since about 2005, iPods have been on par with what everyone else is doing in terms of sound quality. Even Creative's Zen X-fi produces the same sound quality as a 2G iPod touch or iPod classic.

I hate to sound rude but I take audio claims very seriously. So please conduct a blind listening test and measure the results from your iPod touch and player/s you are comparing it to. That way your claims can be taken seriously and not just chucked aside due to the placebo affect (which occurs a lot whether people like to admit it or not).

[bobb-mini]

Bad news, there is a pretty much unanimous consensus the iPods including Touch EQ is crap. To get the "signature" that pleases u, u will have to pick the earphones that provides u with that. Anything that u EVER want to know about earphones are found at head-fi.org and those ppl write paragraphs like warm, sound stage, dark, accurate, energy, type of music different earphones favor. Have fun and "Watch your wallet." (the site's moto).