Friday, February 15, 2008

Upcoming...

Photobucket

And some of the phones in regular rotation in preparation...
Photobucket



Update - May 2009.

Ah... If only you could see the number of unfinished 'Draft' posts on this blog. So many reviews ended up this way - the D2, RH1, ESW9, etc etc...

Considering what to do about this blog. In the meanwhile I've cleared out as much of the comment spam as I've been able to find. I wouldn't look for much in the way of headphone updates to be honest with you guys - if anything changes, you'll probably see it here or on Head-Fi first.

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

I hear you...

...coming to pwn me.

All the gear, no idea. A pic from a while back.
Photobucket

Bose Triport OE (On-Ear) review

The newest Triport headphones from Bose are of a folding On-Ear design, and are intended to address a more mobile user than the older, non-folding Around-Ear Triport. The OE usually commands a price premium over the AE - perhaps unsurprisingly so, given the added accessories and the higher grade of materials used on the phone.

DESIGN & PRESENTATION
The Triport OE has a contemporary design which is quite smart, if not so successful when actually on the head due to its rather “broad-shouldered” look once the ratcheting headband rails are slightly extended. The phone is a very high quality item in terms of construction. Materials are good with well-chosen plastics, padding in the right places, and cast aluminium alloy used at points of higher stress such as the folding joints.

Photobucket

Photobucket

The cable actually attached to the earcup abruptly ends just half an inch or so from the earcup, terminated in a 3.5mm standard stereo plug. Two extension cords are supplied to plug into this – a short 16” cable for remoted and jacket-pocketed players, and a longer 45” article for more traditional use. The plug is very standard and there is no obstruction to using third-party cables for longer or shorter runs, unlike say Sennheiser’s replaceable cables.

Photobucket

While it’s not a rugged design as such, it feels well made and seems like it will last a while if used properly. The phone folds flat with the cups rotating to a flat position and then folding into the headband. The folding process is an absolute no-brainer. The package is shipped along with a smart, if rather bulky carrying case which holds both the phone and the two extension cords.

Photobucket

Bose quotes no specifications for this phone from what I can see, unlike the older AE’s for which they quote efficiency and impedance. A nominal electrical measurement of the phones reveals them to be a ~54-ohm load (but of course, effective impedance usually changes over the frequency response of a phone and I’m not equipped to measure that). They seem pretty efficient, delivering decent levels of sound from reasonable volume settings on most portables.


ISOLATION & COMFORT
The phone has an unusual design for the ear cushions which effectively seals the driver to the ear, and this is one aspect of why the phone has a high degree of isolation for something so compact.

Photobucket

This has certain sonic implications we’ll look at later. While it doesn’t keep out as much noise as in-ear monitors the level of isolation on offer is very usable, and would be ideal for most commutes.

As you can see, the Triport OE is notably more compact than the Triport AE, and is clearly better suited for the regular traveller.

Photobucket

And the big achievement is perhaps that Bose have managed to isolate a phone pretty well, have it as a compact on-ear design yet have it remain pretty comfortable. The key is the relatively low pressure exerted on the ears and how the oval cups sit on the ear without creating large areas of point pressure.


SOUND
A long time ago, some members of Head-fi adopted a phase "Fart Cannon" - a headphone whose bass response was bloated / slow so all bass hits came like a wave of flatulence. While the Sony MDR-V700DJ (a mediocre phone by all yardsticks) was the recipient of the title back then, going straight from the Bose Triport OE to the V700DJ makes the Sony sound like the heights of hi-fi.

You might say "Say it ain't so bangraman, surely it isn't that bad?"
I would say "It is."

I’ve avoided a one-word summary here because it’s worth mentioning just how excessive this phone’s bass is, partly I suspect thanks to the unusual earcup design. And it’s not a tight, well defined large slap of bass. It’s basically audio diarrhoea that's more commonly heard in cheap & nasty car stereo systems.

And because of this, the OE is surely the king of Fart Cannons. Because of the constant assault of this bass, it's also very fatiguing to listen to. I could mention soundstaging, accuracy of the trebles and mids, etc – but it’s pointless. The bass completely dominates the scene the moment something in the mid-bass downwards comes along… which is let’s face it, most music. You’d think, hey, “I’ll slap some classical on and figure out whether this phone can resolve!” – nope, the cellos are low enough to let rip the Fart Cannons and kill any attempt at gauging this phone fairly.

Quoted from the Bose website: “You'll hear deep lows. Clear mids. Sweet highs. Distinct separation of instruments. Try them with your favorite tracks and you just may find nuances you never heard before.”

My response would be: “Bollocks.”

CONCLUSION
A well designed and well built phone in terms of construction, and one which provides good isolation while retaining excellent comfort for a supraaural closed phone. Add the adjustable cord length and physically it has all the elements of a winner. But of course a headphone’s sole actual purpose is to produce sounds and this is where it falls flat, unless your idea of quality audio is what comes thudding out of a low-rent car tuner’s meeting.

However even if you like bass, and even if you possess an MP3 player that could do with a bit of bass boost (like the iPod), I very much doubt that the Triport OE’s rendition of it will leave you feeling anything but nauseated. I have nothing to say about the sound apart from that - because there are no saving graces. Avoid like the pla… no, I’ve already written that before, and we need to take it up a notch. Avoid like extremely contagious Ebola.

Link: Bose

Sunday, September 10, 2006

Sony MDR-710LP review

Recently I was handed as part of a deluge of other gear a pair of MDR-710 headphones. I didn't actually get around to opening it for a few weeks, but closed mini-phones are something that I'm quite keen on. So, with the 710 being targeted squarely at the PX200 and the AKG K26P, I thought I'd give it a go.

Photobucket

In the UK at least, the price for these phones is about the same as the AKG and the Sennheiser competition. The earcup diameter is very similar between these phones with the AKG being the biggest, the Sennheiser being the thinnest and the Sony being somewhere in between with an earcup diameter identical to the PX200 but with a thicker cup assembly.

DESIGN
The phone arrives in a ball, shipped along with a plastic puck-shaped case.

Photobucket

The folding mechanism is easily the most fiddly when comparing between this, the AKG and the Sennheiser. First the bottom part of the phone has to be folded out, then the top bit folded out and the adjusted into position.

Photobucket
Photobucket

Takes a good deal of time longer than the AKG or Sennheiser, and also is fiddlier to hold in an unfolded position, as it doesn't have enough self-support to prevent it from going into an 'auto-strangle' position.

Photobucket

It's not actually a bad phone to look at, and personally I think it has a fresher look than all the miniphones out there bar the Audio-Technica ATH-ES5.

ISOLATION
Because of the extensive creases in the earpad cushions, the phone is not able to form a seal around the earlobe like the K26P or the PX200. And it's not just that - there's actually an opening around the area which the earcup pivots whic lets in /out sound. Which means that rather like the Audio-Technica ATH-ES5 I reviewed a long time ago, the earcup assembly is not actually as acoustically closed as the K26P or the PX200. This also means that it leaks sound outwards significantly more than the AKG and Sennheiser competition, although I couldn't call it an offensive level. While the K26P and PX200 are inaudible at normal volumes when my 'test head' is held out at arms length, the MDR-710 was clearly audible.

SOUND
A weekend's burn-in being over, I stuck them on my head. I went outside, started walking, cued up Diana Krall's Night In Paris album on the NW-E005 and pressed Play. I didn't even get to the opening cymbals before I made a face. The audience clapping at the start had a dreadful, enclosed tin-can aspect. This is 'closed phone honk' at it's worst. The phone delivers the usual musical frequency range without problems but the treble takes a back seat while the 'tin-can' midrange and the bloated lows take centre stage. The soundstaging is not bad with a fairly spacious feel to the sound, but the overt roughness which is spread throughout the frequency range has an odd 'downsamping' effect, where the song feels like a lower bitrate than it is actually recorded at.


SUMMARY
Pros in comparison to PX200 / K26P:
Looks - Rather "90's Japanese Mecha-Anime". Just the sort of headphones the partially armoured, large-gun-toting scantily clad schoolgirl about town might wear. The PX200 has dated and the K26P looks rather bulbous.

Cons in comparison to PX200 / K26P:
Less isolation, more leakage, heavier than the PX200 with no higher potential durability, lower quality sound, more fiddly to fold/unfold, less practical folded form factor, one year less manufacturer's warranty.

Photobucket

CONCLUSION
You know, what with some products recently I'd hoped that with the MDR-710 Sony might be making a worthy competitor to address the PX200, a phone that's proved very successful for Sennheiser. Alas, the ball remains dropped. No doubt by dint of their still considerable marketing muscle, Sony will still shift bucketloads of these phones... but the fact remains that the MDR-710 is a distinctly subpar mini closed phone.

While the Audio-Technica product in this category (the ATH-ES5) has superior sound quality to partially make up for the fiddlier folding mechanism and the lack of isolation / increased leakage, the Sony has no such advantage in it's bag. Apart from the visual aspect, the MDR-710 is inferior in every single regard to the AKG and Sennheiser miniphones. Buy them instead of this.

Monday, March 13, 2006

Sony BMG Settlement

Usally I don't put non-original material up on this blog, but the more news gets out about this the better... The settlement reached by Sony/BMG regarding the stealthed exploits (aka rootkits) that their audio CD's dumped on PC's upon insertion. These guys need to be punished for their contempt for the public in the only way a corporate knows... via it's bottom line. If you're affected, go claim.

http://www.eff.org/sony/

(Spotted on Slashdot.org)

Saturday, February 25, 2006

More updates. Zen Vision M with Napster To Go, amped or unamped progress

Hello everyone. Just another brief update about what I'm up to these days.

NAPSTER TO GO



I've now got the Zen Vision: M working with the Napster subscription service, Napster To Go. It was a bit of a struggle to begin with, and it included various gotchas like your DAP's clock having to be basically exactly synced with the PC. But now it's going, it's going very well indeed. I love effectively having a Virgin Megastore at my fingertips... it's fantastic and I'm kicking myself for not getting involved with this earlier. If I like a download enough I order it from Amazon on CD, simple. No worried about the download quality in the end (for the CD-buying reason), and since I can have the music on the player for as long as I like provided I pay the subscription fees, I buy no duds. Compared to this, iTunes is somewhat lame for the avid music lover. I can spend all day on Napster which is bad for productivity, but so far so great.

VISION:M



And what about the Zen Vision:M? Is it the iPod Killer? So far, yes and no. It's the closest thing out there which isn't an iPod. It does more, and some of what it does is clearly superior. Other things, a notable step down.

I would suggest that the hype already occuring on some boards about the Vision:M having significantly better sound quality than the iPod 5G is just that, hype. I'd say overall it's pretty similar to the iPod 5G, iRiver H3xx and the iAudio X5, with the Vision:M being somewhat smoother (some might say 'boring' but I quite like 'boring') than the iPod. You might say "Hey, it claims 97db SNR, that's got to be better, STFU!". Well, in which case I'd be asking at which point are you actually hearing anywhere near the claimed SNR of these players? And the answer to that is unless you're amping, never. And in any case, we're talking claimed SNR, something that I'll get to the bottom of when I do my now standard measurements after the listening tests. The EQ, rather like the EQ on the Muvo flash players I've used recently, are rather suspect in terms of slightly excessive sound quality degredation. I'll get to the bottom of that while doing my writeup.

The video feature is good. If you choose carefully, you can download most P2P content, stick it on the Zen without time-consuming transcoding and be on your way. If you 'roll your own' MPEG2's using a PVR card or whatever, in my experience with a Hauppauge card, you're out of luck a bit... the files need transcoding. And in this instance, the Creative video conversion software is awful but third party solutions as easy as Videora for the iPod must be available.
I haven't got around to battery testing music yet, but I was pretty surprised to discover that both Apple and Creative more or less exactly hit their claimed video playtimes. Contrary to published reviews, I'd say that videos surprisingly look a lot better on the iPod than they do on the Zen under actual portable use, but you can't beat that actual double playtime if you're a video enthusiast. The Zen Vision:M also offers the intriguing possibility of battery-powered hookup to an external monitor, which could give the guys who carry around bulky headphone amps shivers of delight, because now they can carry a bulky 7" portable LCD monitor too. It's not something I intend to try, but who knows... I'm a curious guy as the readers of this blog must know.

The photo features are fine, but... er... how do I attach a camera? No? Not supported? Well that's a bit moronic isn't it that a Photo player in this day and age ships without USB-OTG.

More in the forthcoming writeup.

AMP OR NOT?
I've got all the equipment back and am currently in the middle of my side of the writeup. Looking at my colleague's notes on this so far I think we'll have an interesting disparity of opinion to present with this review. Both of us can be pretty clear about why we arrived at why we preferred each solution, so I expect this to be a pretty informative article. Once again sorry it took so long, I know it was announced in December but we really haven't had the opportunity to get together often, and there was a testing miscommunication about halfway thorough.

The next post will be the amp article. I just hope I don't keep you in suspense (yeah... as if) for too long.

Monday, February 13, 2006

Updates

The amp article should be done in 2-3 weeks time. Sorry it took so long, but you should know my frequently glacial pace by now. I'm about to swap gear with my colleague this weekend, and I'll have some time to myself during the two weeks after that so I'm doing writeups.

I was planning to write a few words about the recent Sony players, but I've shelved the article. The NW-A3000/1000 looks great and I love the way they sit in the hand, but unfortunately that's about all I like about them.


Also...



Yes, there'll be an iPod comparison.

Monday, January 16, 2006

Update on the 'amp or upgrade' article

Just thought I'd let you know that I think we're about halfway through the article.

Saturday, December 31, 2005

Audio-Technica ATH-ES7

The “Earsuit” range from Audio-Technica extends further with the ATH-ES7. Audio-Technica’s intention with the ES range is exactly what the name hints at… something smarter and more upmarket than the rest, offering refinement in design. The ATH-ES7 has mirror finish stainless steel earcups on a lightweight, low-profile design and was created to fold flat in your briefcase, Prada manbag or whatever it is you consider stylish work storage. The phone is available in black and white. The black is shown here.





DESIGN & ENGINEERING
If you search through this blog (which is a pain and one of the main reasons why I want to change now) you’ll see a somewhat lukewarm review for the ATH-ES5, it’s smaller, older sibling. While essentially a decent headphone, the ES5 offered no isolation and a very slow folding mechanism. The ES7 shares very little with the ES5 in terms of mechanical design and is a considerably larger headphone, but you can probably see that the two are related in terms of offering understated design uniqueness that seeks to stand out from the rest.

Although I complained about the mechanical properties of the design, there was no question that the ATH-ES5 was built to very high standards of quality. The same is true with the ATH-ES7. Build quality is top notch, and everything feels very "bespoke".


The pivot mechanism for the earcups feels very tightly put together with no wobble.

However the mirror finish, just like the iPods back is unfortunately a fingerprint and scratch magnet. No real scratches yet for this ES7, but it’s only a matter of time. It does ship with a cleaning cloth for the inevitable fingerprints.


The fantasy...


...And the reality after a day's worth of heavy use.


The headband adjusts on ratcheting twin steel heavy-gauge wires made of very tough steel, and there’s enough movement of the band as well as of the earcups for it to adjust to virtually any ear or head.


In terms of the overall look, it’s very smart and does justify it’s ‘Earsuit’ moniker. It’s comfy for a supra-aural design (on the ear) but it has a slightly ‘wide-shouldered’ look once on the head, which makes it look slightly goofier than it needed to, compared with some other more low-profile headphones.

The elastomer-covered, metre-long, compact 3.5mm plug-terminated cable is a carryover from the ES5, and they’re still as potentially delicate as the ES5’s cables were. There’s better strain relief at the earcups now, but I think if anything is going to break first on these phones it’ll definitely be the cable.

How’s the external noise isolation? Decent. Not anywhere near as good as the top performer in this range (the Sennheiser HD25-1), but on a par with or slightly inferior to most closed DJ phones. Sound leakage to the outside is minimal.


Quality earpads offer decent comfort for an 'on-ear' phone,
but not the greatest isolation.

SOUND
The headphone is pretty easy to power from any portable. It's unlikely that you'll find much, apart from Sony's most heinously European-crippled machines perhaps, unable to drive these to a decent volume level. In terms of sound quality and treble / midrange response, the ATH-ES7 is quite similar to the more ubiquitous Sony MDR-V700DJ headphone. That means a relatively mild treble and a slightly prominent midrange. However the ATH-ES7 ups the bass ante from the MDR-V700DJ with much more ‘boom’, delivering real weight in the mid-bass (where the bass action normally occurs in pop/rock). I say ‘weight’ instead of ‘punch’ because the sonic response, rather like a low-cost subwoofer is a bit slow. The trebles in common with the Sony feels somewhat rough, lending some erroneous texture to the highs but the ES7 does offer a slight improvement in overall sound accuracy to the Sony. There is a noticeable case of ‘closed phone honk’, artificial-sounding sonic reflections caused by not overcoming design limitations in closed phones. To sum it up, the ES7 is basically a slightly more accurate Sony DJ-phone with added subwoofer.

Putting that in overall context, there are plenty of (even other closed) headphones around the $50~$100 mark which can get very close to or even beat these on a sound quality assessment, but perhaps no others which offer the sort of combination of an unfatiguing yet still relatively well defined sound plus the "wave o'bass". Am I impressed? Not as such. But the overall sound is actually quite pleasing for pop and rock use, and I can imagine many people being very happy with this sound.


LAST WORDS
The ATH-ES7 is a subtly blingtastic alternative for the more image-conscious who might be considering a higher-end portable headphone. Rather expensive for the level of performance offered as far as the full imported price goes, but nevertheless there are some definite plus points about these. If you love kicking out the beats and keeping it to yourself, then these might be just the phones for you with a powerful bass and usable, if not spectacular isolation. The image is distinctly cool and overall it’s not a bad headphone at all to spend your commutes with.



ATH-ES7 "Earsuit"
Manufacturer: Audio-Technica Japan
Impedance: 32 ohms
Efficiency: 100db/mw claimed (sounds higher, but that's perhaps because of the bass response)
Drivers: 42mm
Weight: 160g claimed
Freq. Response: 5 ~ 30,000hz claimed


Availability: Retail in selected Asian countries, import elsewhere using the shops below
Price: $150ish + shipping
Buy from Bluetin
Buy from Audiocubes




EDIT:
I was doing some idle searching in Bing, and came across this - apparently they're better at SEO than some. An interesting remix, wouldn't you say?
http://www.headphonegeek.com/reviews/review.php?pro_id=35

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Schedule

Hi guys, yes I'm still alive.

Still working on a replacement for this blog, but for now I'm trying to get some behind-the-scenes stuff sorted out.

Next Major Article
I and a fellow Head-Fi member are working on a comparison of unamped and amped configurations. Say you start with an Etymotic ER-6i and are looking to step up. You visit Head-Fi or other forums and they tell you that amping the ER-6i can work wonders. You get directed to Xin's website and learn about his new Supermini. Then someone else recommends the Ultimate Ears Super.Fi Pro as a step-up earphone. Which do you pick? Well that's exactly what we're about to establish. In the case of balanced-armature in-ear phones the choice of a more expensive earphone is not always as clear cut as it might be, since the drivers in use by all the main companies (Etymotic, Shure, Ultimate Ears, etc) are all pretty much the same in terms of capability. The difference is in the use of multiple drivers of differing size and the tuning of each driver. Amp or Upgrade? That's the question we'll be answering.


I've also got hold of a pair of the Audio-Technica ATH-ES7 headphones, which I'll be posting a short review soon.

Monday, November 14, 2005

Sorry!

Hey guys, I'm sorry about the lack of updates to the blog. The truth is that I've gone directly from being ill and dragging my feet on an otherwise simple in-ear review to too much gear to review! Multiple DAPs have hit the bangraman household, and the people who provide these to me must be satisfied first. Not to mention other things taking up my time. I'll pick out a choice article and re-do it for here fairly soon.

Wednesday, October 26, 2005

Logitech Bluetooth Headphones

I picked these up a while back as… well, they’re interesting, and usually that’s all that’s required for me to pick something up. I was not expecting a whole lot to be honest. My audio-based experiences of Bluetooth technology to date have not been, shall we say, stunning. The headphones retail for £99 in the UK and approximately $130 in the US.




The Logitech Bluetooth Headphones use the Bluetooth (duh) short-range digital transmission system to send audio to the headphone from the slightly bulky transmitter at a practical maximum of around 4 ~ 6m (12 ~ 18ft) range.




The headphones have built-in controls for volume, and the iPod-specific version also has track control / pause functions. As the iPod version has the remote socket built-in to the transmitter, it’s not compatible with non-iPod players nor the Nano / 5G. So I chose the regular “MP3” variety.

Charging up the non-replaceable Li-ion batteries in both headphone and transmitter takes around 3 hours, and pairing it is as simple as switching on the phones after the transmitter is on... and they’re ready to use.

I plug the transmitter into an iPod and am quite surprised at what comes out. It’s actually music as more or less it’s supposed to be played, not a frog chorus with the flu in an echo chamber!

The sound is comparable in general quality and tonal balance to the £30 Sennheiser PX100, although there is more 'enclosure honk', a sort of tin can effect overtone especially in the midrange. There’s a fairly solid bass, a mild top end and a midrange that doesn’t feel particularly boosted or recessed. Quite an agreeable tonal balance in general, but nowhere near a half-decent £99 wired headphone in terms of sound quality. Of course, I wasn't expecting that.


The Logitech phones compared to a Sony MDR-G74.


The general physical characteristic of the Logitech is comparable to other behind-the-neck headphones such as the Sony MDR-G74SL, only that it doesn’t fold. It’s the same sort of street style design, and unfortunately just as uncomfortable, tending to dig in at the top of the ear after a while. There’s also a convex curve to the phones where they meet the ear, and this means that placing of the phone on the ear is slightly more critical than your regular mini / street style phone. Shifting the phones around does create a change in the sound so it’s important to seat them properly. The increase in weight with the circuitry and batteries is definitely noticeable if you compare the Logitechs with a regular street style, but it's not a big deal when worn. The general lack of comfort though (like the Sonys) was more of a problem for me.


Charging the Logitech.


Battery life seems adequate for a commute. The maximum I’ve used the phones for between charges is 4 hours or so, although I'm sure they could have gone on longer (I haven't really tested the battery life). The claimed life is 8 hours on a charge. The phone and transmitter are charged by a ‘dual-head’ socketed AC charger.


Transmitter headphone jack positions


The transmitter is somewhat bulky, but it’s fairly lightweight. It also has a jack that locks into two different positions, so it works with a wide range of players. If the jack positioning isn’t optimal, there’s a low-profile extension cable supplied.

The range depends on whether there's anything between you and the transmitter. Either way, it's pretty clear whenyou're about to go out of range as the music starts breaking up... you get bursts of music with silence inbetween. Usually, I got about a 4m range with one plaster wall / wooden door inbetween.

In terms of sporting use, my jury’s out… although they’re stable while worn, the phones are noticeably heavier than a pair of lightweight earphones and even a pair of regular street styles, and sweat / Li-ion batteries can’t be a match made in heaven.


You certainly don’t get what you pay for in sonic terms, but what it does achieve is quite impressive. And as minor an inconvenience as it might seem to many, the lack of a cable is quite refreshing in use. It is a bit of a shame though that they chose to pattern the phones on an open, street-style chassis as it’s not particularly comfortable, and although open phones are safer for active use, I feel some isolation would have been nice for commuters in general.

Would you pay an effective 200% premium on top of a £30 headphone to get rid of the cable? If I was given a choice once again, probably not. But the wireless technology does work pretty well, and for some I would imagine the curiously satisfying sense of freedom is worth it.


Logitech Bluetooth Headphones: ~$130 (US), ~£99 (UK).

Product Link (Logitech USA)

I have a good excuse, honest...

So... some upcoming reviews have been delayed by the fact that I'm busy, and also because I've caught the flu. Not of the avian variety I hope.

Although I am still generally listening, my nose is blocked and my ears are 'clicky' so obviously any reliable listening evaluations are out for the time being. I'm organising my notes (or in my present condition: "urganising by dotes") on the JVC phones and will have it up fairly soon. It doesn't really warrant the build-up I've ended up giving it but anyhoo, it'll be finally up.

Wednesday, October 12, 2005

On the way: JVC HA-FX55 in-ear phone review.

Initial opinions are that they seem a tiny bit less compromised than the MDR-EX71SL in certain sonic aspects, while in terms of bass they offer more of what people like about the EX71's (the amount)... and they're cheaper. Some ergonomic misses were apparent within a second of putting them on, but it's about the sound, innit? :p

Full review up soon.


FX55 on top, EX71 on bottom.
The silicone 'bungs' are actually slightly different in design, but they are very similar.

Tuesday, October 11, 2005

iCleaner

My Nano took a couple of falls onto underground/subway train floors, both nice and gritty... and in one case, I accidentally gave the Nano a little kick, sending it grittily slithering across the floor to my dismay. Fortunately, although the superficial scratching was heavy I had no functional problems with it. I could still see the screen fine.

But you know... it's practically new and a rough Nano was clashing with my sense of well-being :p So I ordered the iCleaner Ultra Pro kit.



The Ultra Pro includes your regular scratch remover and a polish, as well as the cloths to do the polishing. It also includes a deep scratch remover / back cleaner, which I didn't need this time around as on both impacts the Nano landed face down.

So, 5 minutes of antiscratch and polish later, this is what I ended up with.



Not completely pristine, but the scratches have been reduced by perhaps 90%. If I put more elbow grease into it (and pehaps a tiny bit of that deep scratch remover) it would undoubtedly end up looking even better.

For what it is, the kit is of course somewhat overpriced... but if you don't have the time nor the inclination to hunt for the individual components by yourself, the iClean is a fantastic all-in-one scratch removal solution for your iPod.

Wednesday, October 05, 2005

Apple iPod Nano



The player on the right is the Sony D-555 portable CD player. Introduced in 1989, the 555 is considered 'legendary' in terms of sound quality and desirability. They still change hands regularly for the ~$400 mark.

The player on the left is Apple's latest...


...And for sound quality, it blows away the D-555.


I briefly abandoned the iPod Photo because I felt its audio performance was compromised compared to older versions (I ended up re-acquiring a 60Gb Photo recently, but primarily to use as a portable large disc/backup for my documents). It just didn't quite sound 'like an iPod' even with the Qualias, which were great with the 3G and the mono 4G. Sticking the Photo on the measuring rig revealed that various undesirable nasties were creeping into the sound even with a 70 ohm load, while the falloff remained uncured. On aggregate, it was no better than (and slightly worse than) many 'also-ran' players in terms of sound quality so I quietly put the Photo aside.

The Nano on the other hand is a sonic return to form for Apple. The most noticeable thing to anyone will be a significantly reduced bass falloff in comparison to previous hard-disk based iPods. The fall-off level is now favourably comparable to the iAudio X5, and the overall quality is a little higher with a more open, incisive sound than the X5, especially noticeable on the Qualia 010. The power of the headphone amp is on a par with other iPods... which probably makes the Nano the most powerful flash player in terms of being to drive more demanding or odd-load headphones.

I'm assuming everyone who reads this knows about how iPods work in general these days, so I'm not going into that. Suffice it to say the Nano works exactly like a full-sized iPod, with the exception of camera USB-OTG and the lack of a remote capability. The smaller control wheel takes a little while to get used to but once mastered works as well as the Mini/Photo wheels.

In conjunction with iTunes ease of loading in general, the HDD player-like loading time (unlike the majority of other flash players, especially Sony's dreadfully slow NW-Exxx OLED players) and Smart Playlisting, you can put a decent collection of tracks for that day's listening onto the Nano in next to no time.

Battery life tested with Apple Lossless (since I felt this is a player worthy to use that codec) is ~8 hours with an additional 15 minutes of backlight-on 'fiddling around' time. Not spectacular, but usable. I'll edit this article later if possible to relfect MP3/AAC tests. There's also negligible battery drain in standby mode.

There are lots of nice things about the look and feel of the Nano, but the display completes it. It is extremely crisp despite its small size, and like the Photo (and unlike most other colour-screen players) is visible in daylight without the backlight needing to be on. Photos are convincingly vivid on the screen, although the screen is a little too small to make out real details. Zoom would have been nice.

Unfortunately Outlook sync is still very flaky. I had a problem with syncing which I assumed was due to the complex nature of my email set-up but actually it turned out that a lot of people were having problems. If it's fixed, then it makes a passable appointment reminder and phonebook. The Screen Lock is a new feature which allows you to secure the iPod against other people using it. It's something which is handy if you do use it as a phonebook/calendar. But the feature isn't that practical to use since you have to turn it on manually.

Scratches? Yes... but I did drop mine a couple of times onto very gritty surfaces. The result is a network of fine scratches covering most of the front panel, but nothing that impedes my ability to use the player or appreciate the screen.


Overall, I think this could well be the best iPod yet. It sounds good (and even better with truly high-end headphones), retains everything that's good about the iPod and is incredibly portable. As a pure music player, the Nano is a great choice for those who want full mobility.


Addendum: 11/Oct
I forgot to add the bit about the EQ of the Nano, mainly because I rarely touch EQ on any of my portables. I'm not sure exactly what is taking Apple so long, but they have still yet to grasp the meaning of workable EQ. This is a problem that they've had for ages.

Applying EQ does screw up the sound quality in practically any portable I've had (even the "fabled" Rio Karma), and after a short time of enjoying the 'zing' put into the music by an initially optimum-sounding EQ curve, the loss in quality always leads me to put things back to flat... but there's no doubt that some people want to add that extra thing to the sound, regardless of quality. The problem is that many of the EQ curves on the iPod which heavily reinforces bass result in audible distortion, regardless of the headphones you have (i.e. higher-impedance phones aren't a cure).

Everyone else seem to be able to manage this, so you do have to wonder what is going on. Are the Apple engineers closet audiophile nanny-state'ers? Did they calculate by making 'bad' EQ settings unusable they would swing people towards actual sound quality? That would be a nice story but highly unlikely.

Friday, September 30, 2005

A false hiatus? No, time for an overhaul.

So... There have been a few posts during my so-called hiatus, but I'm REALLY quite busy over the next couple of months and while I'm away I'm definitely investigating what I can do to make the contents of this blog more accessible. It's now getting to the point where even I find articles slightly time consuming to find, and the whole initial point of this blog was not for promotion or related purposes but that I had easy access to my opinions of stuff, instead of being potentially lost in a relatively hard-to-search forum.

It's fair to say I've outgrown Blogger, which I have to say for what it allows you to do is truly a great service. It's becoming clear that I'll have to look towards moving away from it and setting up a dedicated site or something... but if it's on a dedicated site, there's quite a bit more I want to do.

It's all something I'll be looking into. As they say, I'll be back.


Queries, offers, brickbats, etc... you can reach me on Head-Fi Private Messaging as 'bangraman'.

(by the way, I am far from the only person on the Internet with that handle. I was beginning to get tired of questions about clearly other 'bangramen')

Thursday, September 29, 2005

Boil from the Past

The image may not register immediately with the coffee-centric Americans, but that's a kettle. I made this a while back, found this picture yesterday.



A META42 headphone amp was built inside it. The lid acted as a battery holder mount, so I could change cells by opening the kettle. The volume knob is just visible in the picture. I thought about adding a DC jack where the original cable existed, but never got around to it.

It was great to unearth on planes and long train journeys. The weird looks it got was highly amusing.

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

What the fall-off sounds like

Here's a brief test for everyone who's thinking about buying the Cowon iAudio X5 and concerned about the fall-off effects of the Line Out... and wondering what it sounds like.

The music is from approximately 4:00 to 4:30 of the track "The Missed Symphony" of Infected Mushroom's Classical Mushroom (this is an amazon link) in 192K MP3. Well worth buying by the way if you have any interest in electronica. I've chosen this music because the effects of the falloff are most apparent in heavily beat-based music like this.

Both exerpts were recorded directly out of the X5 from the headphone socket (40 volume, all FX off, no EQ) and the Line Out socket on the subpack, going into a soundcard with a line-level input impedance.

Here's sample 1
Here's sample 2

Guess the Line Out with bass falloff (no need to post your guesses here though). It should be obvious... at least it is on the headphones/amps I use, but whether it bothers you is something according to your own tastes.

If you can't hear a difference, it's probably because your headphones /speakers have a boosted mid-bass response which is obscuring the differences in the lower bass regions, or that your phones / speakers aren't able to depict lower bass (either issue is not uncommon on lower-end consumer gear). In which case the falloff effect doesn't really disadvantage you in a practical context.

As you can hear either way though, the falloff-afflicted output doesn't sound noticeably more 'terrible' as some might whinge (too much time in RMAA, not enough time listening). But clearly it needs to be fixed because an EQ boost can't compensate for it, because all that would happen is that the EQ will boost up to the point of the falloff curve.


The track excerpt is not used with permission, although arguably speaking it falls within fair use. If anyone concerned has a problem with it, please drop me a private message at Head-Fi and I'll upload something else.
PS. The first sample is the line out.

Saturday, September 17, 2005

Amping the iAudio X5

Amping is something that I don't do very often, but the performance of the iAudio X5 in relation to the monochrome iPods has me wishing to reach for the Porta Corda II rather more often than I would like.

The Meier-Audio Porta Corda II (now replaced by the Porta Corda III) is a generally high-performance portable amplifier. Because some elements of the signal passing through can be noticeably changed and sort of cleaned up by an amp, applying good amping to an underperforming player can sometimes have a bigger felt impact than amplifying a good one... although of course, amping a good player is the best solution!

When I had the iAudio M3, the X5's predecessor, I didn't really bother amping it as I felt the subpack assembly (a 'dongle' that fits without any means of retention on the underside of the M3) was too delicate to use for portable amping purposes. The X5 sticks to exactly the same arrangement and I still feel it's too delicate. However, I tried amping it this time around.


The X5 and subpack. Darn, that carry bag was dusty... :D


The X5 subpack connector and the iPod dock connector.

The problem I encountered is something that's already discussed a lot on the iAudio related forums. There is a bass fall-off, like the iPod's headphone out... only on the X5, you get a fall-off from both the headphone out and the Line Out.

The X5 headphone out's bass fall-off and other factors contribute to a sonic performance on aggregate on a par with, or maybe just slightly better than, the iPod Photo... which correspondingly has a lower audio performance than the monochrome iPods. So it's not bad at all, although it could be better.

However the Line Out fall-off is something that I've rarely seen on modern players. According to my measurements at the headphone side of the Porta Corda II amplifier (input impedance: 3.6kohms), it is registering a 4.5db falloff at 47hz, with a 1db falloff starting at 130hz. Plugging in the Porta Corda II amp into the headphone socket of the X5 however, turning the volume up to max and turning off all effects, I'm rewarded by a ruler-flat frequency response and significantly decreased distortion compared to the subpack line out... a very audible difference, I ought to say.


Both measurements were made at the headphone socket of the Porta Corda
at nominal listening levels, with a 32 ohm headphone in the chain.


Now, there are plusses and minuses to this. Firstly, as I said the subpack design hasn't changed, and in my opinion it is too fragile to use portably with a Line Out cable plugged in on a regular basis. So you could argue that there's no point in portable amping using the subpack... and this is true to an extent. However, using the subpack allows the use of a remote, which is very handy while using a portable amp.

The same falloff by the way happens with the optional dock.

Having said all that, even though the measurement looks pretty dire the Line Out is not a dead loss... it's still perfectly listenable as it were. Apart from the bass loss, there's nothing particularly crappy about the sound. It's just not as good as it should be given the performance of the headphone out when used in the same way. It just looks like lazy design or a component mis-spec that wasn't corrected for a long time (the X5 sub-pack uses the same PCB as the M3 sub-pack... so I'm assuming the components are the same, and the M3 had the same problem).

I must admit on the basis of problems like this, I'm having second thoughts about getting rid of the iRiver H320. The H320 definitely doesn't work as well in daily use and is a a bit of a huge tank in comparison, but it seems to be sonically and physically better sorted out. Sigh...

Click here to go to a later post about what the falloff sounds like