[sirlexelot]

I went to the Apple Store in Peabody today to take a look at the iPod and try it out (they have one demo prototype model to show people). I brought along a CD and my discman for direct comparison. I took Rammstein's "Sehnsucht," and transfered "Du Hast" over to the iPod as a sound test after ripping it on an iBook in the store. (160kbps both non-VBR and VBR)

Suffice to say, I was thuroughly underwhelmed by the iPod's bass response, as well as its complete lack of an EQ to change that. If you're going to make a $400 elite product targeting the high end of its market, at LEAST make its most important feature (duh, it should sound good!) as high-quality as possible! The iPod is just a high-priced disappointment. Too bad, Apple, but you dropped the ball on this one (not that it's the first time!).

The sound is crisp and clear, I will say, but its dynamic range is simply lacking, and it's not just because it's playing mp3s - it has a very tinny and flat sound, just not terribly enjoyable. Rio 800's and Nomad II MG's sound better.

Once Apple releases a 10gig iPod with a full EQ (or at LEAST treble/bass settings) at $200 or less I'll think about buying one. Until then, there STILL isn't the right mp3 player out there for me... alas.

[Eugene]

Check back in a few years then, because a 10 GB 1.8 inch HDD equipped an mp3 player like the iPod for $200 is only available in your Fantasyland.

And bass response? Maybe an EQ will help, but what were you listening to the iPod with? The standard earbuds? The Sonys they have at the store? I think your listening experience might be a bt richer on a pair of Grado SR-60s.

[sirlexelot]

Oh, I'm full-aware that it'll take a few years - I realized that after buying an Archos Jukebox, discovering that it was awful, and returning it. But it will happen, unless the evil that is the RIAA gets their way.

As for what headphones I was using, I used the buds it came with, the sonys in the store, and my own sony buds which I use on my discman. I immediately compared the same song on my discman, and it sounded about twice as good coming out of there on each pair of headphones - the sound was much fuller and deeper. This is because my discman has quality bass amplicifation, and it's a FOUR-YEAR-OLD LOW-END model. I think it's pathetic that mp3 players don't have better sound; and no, it's not just because the files are mp3s, because mp3s sound WONDERFUL coming out of my computer on the very same headphones, compared to how they sound coming out of these not-quite-paperweights. Ugh, I'm just frustrated.

[MacGregor]

Hi Sirlexelot

About the EQ, isn't iTunes2 supposed to allow you to set EQ settings per song to get the best response and don't those settings follow the mp3 file, itself. Maybe the EQ settings on the iBook you used in the store weren't very optimal.

[Apple Pro Underwear]

What you consider "good sound" is sort of like what people consider "good music". Everybody's got a different opinion.

Rammstein is really hard and you may be right in that rammstein sucks on ipod.

However, to me as long as it sounds good and sometimes great is good enough. i live in NYC and i have to watch me back on the streets. At work i gotta turn it down a little so i can hear if somebody calls for me. On the train i have to watch out for potential terrorist attacks (no joke, the MTA put out a phamplet for us) or service changes. Plus if i blast it, i can't hear my mobile phone, so basically NY sucks (just kidding).

I meant to say that the Ipod may be great for people with different needs or different tastes and of course some people don't care and enjoy anything and everything.

[Immortal K-Mart Employee]

I bet it is just the earbuds. My hipZip sounded like crap when I used the supplied earbuds. I got some $20 Sony's and it sounds awesome.

Go back to the store with a good pair of headphones and see what it sounds like then

[sirlexelot]

Like I said, I tried it with 3 different pairs of headphones - the buds it came with, the big sony headphones at the Apple Store, and my sony buds that I use with my discman (which sound superb, BTW).

The reason I used Rammstein as a test is because they are recorded extremely well and cover the full dynamic range adequately and thuroughly. As for EQ settings from iTunes following the mp3 file into the iPod, I've never heard of that - where did you hear that? If that's true, maybe there's hope, but I'm doubtful.

As for the subjective nature of the concept of "good sound," no it is not the same as the subjective nature of musical taste. People do have different tastes (some want heavy bass, some want clear highs) but flat sound is unilaterally poor. This is the very reason for bass and treble settings, which the iPod painfully lacks. Ultimately, as a result of its poor sound, the iPod just isn't the player for me Let's just hope that the next generation rio's and nomads live up to this new standard that Apple has set in all other regards.

[timmerk]

Originally posted by sirlexelot:
<STRONG>As for EQ settings from iTunes following the mp3 file into the iPod, I've never heard of that - where did you hear that? If that's true, maybe there's hope, but I'm doubtful.</STRONG>

I don't know if iPod knows about these settings or not, but Steve Jobs said in his movie that iTunes 2 can store the EQ settings for each MP3 so you don't have to set them each time. Whether it stores the settings in the MP3s and if iPod knows about these is the question - maybe Sal can shed some light?

-Karl

[mrfett]

I went in and listened to the same iPod - your Ramstein was still on there. I was trying to see if I agreed with you. I think there's some validity to what you're saying. I can't imagine why they couldn't add an EQ. It definitely needs one. I didn't think it sounded poor, but it could've used an EQ. I'm still getting one in any case.

-Paul

[timmerk]

Originally posted by mrfett:
<STRONG>I went in and listened to the same iPod - your Ramstein was still on there. I was trying to see if I agreed with you. I think there's some validity to what you're saying. I can't imagine why they couldn't add an EQ. It definitely needs one. I didn't think it sounded poor, but it could've used an EQ. I'm still getting one in any case.

-Paul</STRONG>

I never use a EQ on my computer or on my stero when listening to msuic - I might have bad music quaility tastes, I don't know. In any case, do you think I will like the iPod then since I don't use EQs anywhere?

Thanks,

karl

[mrfett]

It sounded better at high volume, which is bad for your ears. I think the addition of simple bass and treble controls is essential. That said, yeah, it's still the coolest player on the market. I can't see why you'd use anything else. Plus, I'm sure they'll add an EQ. It doesn't require much. Like the originator of this thread pointed out, none of these things (mp3 players) are incredibly high fidelity. The point is they're the only way to carry tons of tunes no matter what you're doing wherever you go. Portable CD players are _so_ 20th century

[tobster]

You can for sure set the EQ for each song in iTunes 2 ... it works in the way you make a preset EQ setting you like, then through the info of the song you apply the preset setting to the song. Then after that, with iTunes 2 alleged excellent scriptability, you make a script that applies to all Rammstein, Mozart or whatever artists to make life easier... Then sync with your wonderful iPod...

I don't know about you guys... but I really really really want one...

I do admit though that the price is far above what i want it to be... but really, the features it offers are great for the price... value is high I'd say...

Wether it fits your needs is a totally different matter.

Hope that EQ thing helps out though

Tobs

[sirlexelot]

Are you certain that the iPod will reflect the EQ changes made to the mp3 file? Does it really have that capability? If so, perhaps I should give it another chance... I'll see about making another run to the Apple Store to try that out. I wish they would friggin' open the Cambridgeside Galleria store already!

To Tobster or anyone else that can provide an answer:

Where can one find the information regarding the EQ and syncing with iTunes? The EQ option is a critical feature for me. If you can in fact transfer the EQ settings from iTunes I will certainly buy an iPod.

thanks kindly

[MacGregor]

I can't remember where I read about iTunes2 implanting the EQ settings in the mp3 file itself, but I do remember reading about it. Looking at the Apple's iTunes website, there is the little QT that shows how to set the equilizer and make your own custom settings and give them a file name. In the iPod QT it shows the process of updating the iPod and in the background is the equilizer window with a custom setting - "My Electronica."

It seems hard to imagine that the Genius Bar at your nearby Apple Store (lucky bastards!) can't help you with this?

[GK]

friggin' open the Cambridgeside Galleria store already!

What ever happened to the friggin' Cambridge store, I want to buy the iPod, but I just refuse to run a semi-marathon to friggin' Peabody just to have a look at his thing. Wasn't the store supposed to open in september of october ??

[lextek]

I tried iTunes2 EQ settings. It does'nt seem to be downloaded to my Nomad II MG. I also listened to the iPod at the Apple store (briefly). I used a pair of Sony 821 earbuds. It sounded as good as my Nomad. Kind of hard to tell. I would like to see an EQ added also.

Bob

I would also be very interested to know if iTunes passes the EQ settings to the MP3 file. I know that my walkman would sound VERY flat if it weren't for the bass boost. Substituting the packaged earbuds for high end headphones isn't practical for many activities. It would be great if someone lucky enough to be close to an Apple Store could test this.
.. Mac

sirlexelot- most of these pimps here wouldnt have a frikin clue about audio. Play a tune down the telephone and these guys would think it sounds great so there is little point explaining about the ipod's lack of dynamic range.

For a 400 buck unit that cant record id expect the ear buds to have a very high level of acurracy. Having to pay more for a 3rd party pair that provides a better output is unacceptable.

Another breakthru "Wally Box" from Apple.

Laiterz
Targon

[tobster]

Not that I can verify this by checking (seeing I don't have an iPod) I would think that the EQ setting goes with the mp3. Apple has been saying that the unique thing is that the iPod takes advantage of the id3 tags that come with iTunes 2... the EQ preset setting is set at the same place as the tags so i would image that the presets follow too...

not swearing on my mother's though...

Anyone with a test iPod would be a good person to try...

Tobs

[jwblase]

Might the EQ settings be embedded in the iTunes library folder? I'm betting that the iPod uses these, since it syncs with iTunes so well.

JB

[BobVB]

Originally posted by jwblase:
<STRONG>Might the EQ settings be embedded in the iTunes library folder? I'm betting that the iPod uses these, since it syncs with iTunes so well.

JB</STRONG>

Well, since we know that iTunes is just SoundJam we can look there to see how it works.

There things like the volume and eq settings seem to be stored in the playlist (and probably the library - just a global playlist - on iTunes). So that data will probably all be transported over to the iPod.

The question is, does the iPod do anything with this information? I asked at the Mac Expo here in Seattle today and they guy said 'yes', but he seemed to be in 'sales mode' and I don't know if he really knows or not.

We need someone with an iPod to import two copies of the same song with diametrically opposite settings and see if they sound different or the same.

[sirlexelot]

Bob, you're exactly right - we need someone to go to an Apple Store and try this to see what the results are. If favorable, I may still consider getting an iPod. But if the EQ settings don't affect the playpack in the iPod itself, then forget it - my discman is fine.

[scadboy]

according to my b/f the mp3 fiend, mp3 files can carry a number of embedded "tags" with extraneous information outside of the actual audio. the most commonly used are id3 and id4 tags, id3 is for the storage of a song's name, artist, and other relevant text information, and id4 can be used to store the songs preferred volume level and equalizations settings.

so that's where the info is stored, but the question of whether or not the ipod can use that info has yet to be answered. I think it's rather unlikely, and I'd say if it could, then apple would be highlighting that feature. I also think that the lack of a more traditional equalizer also suggests that the ipod can't do anything with the id4 tags. Of course, the ipod's firmware is totally upgradeable, so I expect if enough people bitch, apple will make a revision to add one in, or, maybe a third party could develop one?

ciao,

michael

[BobVB]

Originally posted by scadboy:
<STRONG>according to my b/f the mp3 fiend, mp3 files can carry a number of embedded "tags" with extraneous information outside of the actual audio. the most commonly used are id3 and id4 tags, id3 is for the storage of a song's name, artist, and other relevant text information, and id4 can be used to store the songs preferred volume level and equalizations settings.</STRONG>

I found in Soundjam that if I copied files I had 'set up' with EQ settings and the like to the desktop and back into Soundjam, they had lost the setting values, so my guess is it isn't being put in as tags in the files themselves (though that is theoretically possible)

so that's where the info is stored, but the question of whether or not the ipod can use that info has yet to be answered. I think it's rather unlikely, and I'd say if it could, then apple would be highlighting that feature. I also think that the lack of a more traditional equalizer also suggests that the ipod can't do anything with the id4 tags. Of course, the ipod's firmware is totally upgradeable, so I expect if enough people bitch, apple will make a revision to add one in, or, maybe a third party could develop one?


I guess it depends on how the iPod is set up. If *ALL* the sound processing capability is in the flashable firmware, then they could add EQ and even customizable settings. But if the sound processing is being done by hardware, it might not be possible to add the EQ adjustment ability post production.

Again, we need someone with access to an iPod to check out if EQ works at all. Please

[MacGregor]

With flashable firmware and the obviously adequate input buttons, I would think it exceedingly possible and easy to make the thing run EQ settings. The whole EQ interface in QT and now iTunes2 look like a monochrome LCD screen so why would apple not keep the analog going onto the mp3 player itself?!

I hope the beauty of this system and the Firewire interface is that Apple can put any number of upgrades on their webpage and allow fast downloads and reconfigurations to the iPod. It could be an "iTool." Criminy, they could have dozens of firmware configurations that could be used to reformat the iPod into whatever the owner wants! That is the real power of all the $400 technology. Apple just has to make it easy. Just plug the iPod into your Firewire port, go to iTools, select from a menu of functionalities (like the check boxes to configure systems in the Apple Store). You like normal EQ or advanced EQ abilities, check the box. You want the visualization module, check the box. You want upgrades to the Brick game, check the box. You want every Cat Stevens song, check the box.

Anyway, the system is the right direction for Apple, the price is high, but it COULD be more successful than the cube, because it CAN do more than anything else on the market.

Sorry to go off topic.

[Todd Madson]

As an aside, I remember once there was a product that plugged in between
walkman devices and the headphones that used a 9V battery - it was a
powered mini-EQ. Does anyone remember these? It let you equalize the
sound to your tastes. Might be worth a search.

[neurack]

Just my guess, but in the first firmware revision- I don't expect iPod to respect iTunes EQ settings. EQ settings are stored in iTunes db itself, not the mp3 file- and even if iPod was told what they were, it defies logic (especially Apple logic) that there would be no interface element describing the current EQ setting, let alone not having an interface to change it.

Now like I hinted with my first sentence- at the VERY least there will be treble and bass in a firmware update. I am 99% confident. Why? It is a firmware/interface change. The DSP chip inside is completely capable of it (Apple has said so), and hopefully even an equalizer in the near future. These aren't hardware issues, they are firmware.

To those who onboard EQ and bass control is important, keep your eyes open on the first firmware update before completely ignoring the iPod. I think it is going to answer a lot of the currently-well-founded criticism.

[ 11-01-2001: Message edited by: neurack ]

You might not be able to answer this, but when would you expect us to see the first firmware updates?

[Todd Madson]

After re-reading this I realize what's happening. Maybe.

We've been brainwashed into accepting exagerrated bass in our music
because so many Walkman type devices has a "Super Bass" or "Bass Boost"
switch - it's set-up that way because many Walkman devices come with
admittedly cheap headphones and the exagerrated frequency response
curve (typically in the bass and extreme treble frequencies) has a
way of compensating for this.

After a while, we want exagerrated treble and bass in everything we
listen to (any modern city on a friday night will resonate with the
sound of cars with ridiculously loud subwoofers). BOOM! BOOM! BOOM!

It's not a bad thing, even I'm guilty of this. Check out my music
at www.ampcast.com/aliensporebomb. I'm thinking specifically of
two tracks, one is "aliensporebomb", the other is "soaring". Both
of these tracks contain extended passages of ridiculously low,
ridiculously loud synth bass. I just like the way the sound feels
as much as the way it sounds.

I think what happens is that we finally hear music the way it's
supposed to sound (or at least the way audio engineers think we
should hear it) and we go "Oh....weak."

Another thought: as the baby boomers age, I guarantee you're going
to see a very interesting trend in hearing loss. People who've been
listening to rock since the 1960s and getting progressively louder
and louder sound systems. They're going to demand higher-fidelity
hearing aids (I used to work in a hearing aid company, all I heard
all day, every day was the sound of acoustic feedback as they tested
those shrill little things) due to years of exposure to loud noise.

I know I've been guilty of listening to my walkman too loud because
the crap headphones have poor bass and treble response.

A guy I worked with was an audiologist and he said that the guys who
were buying hearing aids in the mid to late 1980s were typically
World War II vets who were artillery gunners, and polka band drummers.

Just wait until the 1960s-1970s rock generation hits old age, say
around 2020-2030. We're gonna see some interesting things.

Sirlexelot and others,
I found this on the Macword forum, under the topic "iPod complaint, it’s not the price… "

"its an assumption by me- but since in itunes2, each file can have its own eq setting associated with it- and since when I asked the people at the apple store demo how come no bass/trebble control and they said b/c theres an eq you can use in the s/w I figured you eq the files in itunes and transfer. the good news- you can select an eq setting for a batch of songs (like changing the genre)."

Thought you might want to know.

[Spliffdaddy]

low frequencies reproduced by subwoofers are almost not harmful at all to hearing - even at levels you can feel. It is both safe and pleasurable.

The damaging frequencies are on the other end of the spectrum - or the result of distorted music reproduction (but still at frequencies much higher than subwoofers).

The reason low bass is heard above the higher frequencies is because it is non-directional and easily passes through materials with a high resonant frequency.

[bsturgen]

Posted this Q on another board where someone was in actual possession of an actual iPod (pre-production).

Sorry, but EQ is an output-only effect -- if you set the EQ for a tune in iTunes, not only does it not carry over to the iPod, but the settings don't stay with the tune you EQed in iTunes. Each time you set the EQ, it stays that way for all tunes until you change it again.

Someone followed up with:

What if you set the EQ settings in the ID3 tags dialog.

No response to that one as of yet.

[Euphrates]

Interesting tunes, Todd. You got a CD or something?

[Eugene]

http://developer.apple.com/membership/hardware.html

$3500 a year for a premier membership...

[aaanorton]

Originally posted by bsturgen:
<STRONG>Someone followed up with:

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What if you set the EQ settings in the ID3 tags dialog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

No response to that one as of yet.</STRONG>

If you access the EQ from the main iTunes window, you can select an overall setting that will be the default for all songs. If, however, a song has another EQ setting in it's tags, iTunes will use that configuration over the default.
Open the EQ in the main window and watch it as iTunes plays a next song with a different EQ setting. It clearly changes to accomodate the new song. This is not only in playlists, but in the library as well.

Cliff

So is this question STILL up in the air, or am I just in denial and there is no current EQ customization ability for the iPod?

I'm a thousand miles from the nearest Apple Store.

[neurack]

I haven't tried an iPod, but I am quite certain there is no EQ functionality in the current release. I would love to be proven wrong, but all the evidence I've gathered points to this fact.

But at the same time, I am also quite certain there will be either a bass-treble and/or EQ in a future firmware update. The chip is definitely capable of it (two sources: Apple has said so, and the people who found out what DSP it actually was)

I wish I could agree, but I've noticed more than anything a lack of evidence regarding the iPod and EQ capabilities. There's conflicting information on lots of boards. Some say Apple has officially rejected the idea, others say they've confirmed it. Any chance you could share some of the info you've found?
thanks,
-t

[neurack]

One reason, as I stated earlier in the thread: no one has seen or mentioned any UI element on the iPod itself regarding EQ settings. Not on the demo site, videos, or in any reviews. I'm hard pressed to believe Apple would have this with no way to see the current setting and no way to change it.

Another reason, is in this AP news article the reviewer states quite specifically:

"My biggest complaint is that there's no way to adjust treble and bass on the unit - something Apple says it plans to address in future software updates."
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/30...pensive+.shtml

Since the reviewer mentioned it is something Apple plans to address in future software updates, it is clear it simply is not there- and not just something this reporter missed.

Just an additional note- this is only evidence regarding control on the actual unit. As far as iTunes2 synching the settings over somehow, I think I remember someone saying that he only saw the byte-for-byte identical copies of mp3s get copied to his iPod. So if this is correct we know that the MP3s aren't getting processed through the normal iTunes effects before being sent over.

Now is there any reason iPod couldn't just read the effects info from somewhere and process those itself? Not really- but I don't think we should expect that functionality out of the box (although it would be a nice bonus by all means!)

[ 11-07-2001: Message edited by: neurack ]

[Todd Madson]

Euphrates:
Yep. http://www.mp3.com/aliensporebomb and click on the link for the CD.
60 minutes for $10.99 I think. Hope that helps.

Anyone heard a production iPod yet and verified the audio quality with
a known source?

Just a thought... how long did it take for iTunes to gain an EQ? I don't recall anyone ranting this badly about its absence...

[BobVB]

Originally posted by neurack:
<STRONG>Just an additional note- this is only evidence regarding control on the actual unit. As far as iTunes2 synching the settings over somehow, I think I remember someone saying that he only saw the byte-for-byte identical copies of mp3s get copied to his iPod. So if this is correct we know that the MP3s aren't getting processed through the normal iTunes effects before being sent over.

Now is there any reason iPod couldn't just read the effects info from somewhere and process those itself? Not really- but I don't think we should expect that functionality out of the box (although it would be a nice bonus by all means!)
</STRONG>

Well in SoundJam/iTunes 2 the individual file EQ settings are stored in the playlist/library file - so does the iPod make a 'new' different format playlist on the iPod during the import procedure, or does it just take the file from iTunes? If the second the data is available even if it currently isn't being used.

One thing is that the EQ is a significant drag on the CPU - they warned about this way back when SoundJam was iTunes. Personally I always thought its absence in the original iTunes was because of this CPU load, and that the new higher CPU load of iTunes 2 is partly because so many people have turned on the EQ.

To finally get to the point, does the iPod have the 'oomph' to actually do on the fly equalization? I would think it shouldn't be too difficult if its on the chip - my RioVolt has EQ and even added a customized EQ setting via a firmware upgrade (a significant ray of hope for the feature being added to the iPod too) But if they are going to try a 'software' analog to iTunes EQ, it might be more than the poor thing can handle.

(and do I have to fly up to Alaska and rip mine out of Customs hands - what's the delay?)