iPod Nano Sound Quality - Your Feedback Please?


My initial impression of the Nano sound quality is different than I expected. I would like to hear from others.

HOWEVER, if you don't mind, I'd like to run this as a blind collection of feedback. Instead of posting our collective impressions, discussing them, and in the process INFLUENCING EACH OTHER, please - at least at first - just drop me a short email with your impressions of the sound quality of the Nano. I'll post a summary of responses after a relatively short time, probably a week.

I will summarize the responses anonymously but after I do that feel free to own up to your opinion in this or other discussion boards.

Email to:
artmaltman@yahoo.com

In this discussion thread, for the moment, feel free to post your opinion of my IDEA of doing this. Do you think it's a good idea to initially collect feedback that is not influenced by discussion with other members, or is this too... what?

Thanks!
Art

ps: I'm not necessarily suggesting that you hook up the nano to your main audiophile system rig, although that might be interesting. My own testing has been done under circumstances that I normally plan to use the nano in; that is, with stock earbuds, a $25 pair of Sony "sports" headphones, and a $200 pair of Shure e3c. But you do your own thing, and summarize the results.
artmaltman
I'll be comparing it to a mini. That's the only iPod that I have available for comparison.
Art
>>I'll be comparing it to a mini. That's the only iPod that >>I have available for comparison
You can't compare the hardware only!
Which compression format? ACC? Apple Lossless?
Art:

I forget whether it was here or at Audio Asylum where someone posted a newspaper review of the iPod shuffle. The journalist was claiming that the amplifier used in the shuffle was of the push-pull variety and was way quieter than the 4th generation iPod which was way quieter than the iPod mini. The point of the article was that the shuffle was the quietest and possibly of audiophile quality and the mini was the nosiest. Apple declined to comment on any of this for the newspaper journalist.

I bring this up, because if true, you will be comparing the Nano to the nosiest product of the iPod family and possibly, not a model that most of us may own. For example, I own a first generation iPod and was considering purchasing a new one (cracked the headphone jack and it is of borderline use). So, I am not so sure how valid a shoot-out this ultimately is.

Regards, Rich
Good comments, thanks for bringing these up.

1. I am using mostly 128 AAC, with some 192. So my comments will not be definititive with respect to use of lossless, although it probably provides strong hints.

2. The nano is replacing the mini. Steve Jobs is replacing his most popular product, in the middle of it's prime, with a radically different product. So it is interesting from this point of view. And I think the mini owner is a good candidate to transition to the nano, and prospective purchasers of the mini will now be funneled to the nano instead.

3. The reason I'm comparing mini to nano is that this is the migration that I'm considering. If I had the good fortune to work for an audio journal then probably I could discuss with the editor which comparison to do, and then even get loaners from Apple.

4. I don't think there is any single comparison that would serve all purposes.

The comparison itself is taking longer than I hoped and I'm not willing to use "vacation" time from work to do it, so I'll post more information over the weekend. I would really like to hear from others as well if any of you do any testing.

Briefly what I've found so far - testing only via my Sony sports headphones and also via Shure e3c, is that these two units sound quite different. This is not only the opposite of what I expected, but, well, prior to using the nano I never even considered that they MIGHT sound different. I took it as a given that they would sound the same.

The nano seems to sound more solid - more saturated - with more color, more dynamics, more vivid, more authoritative and far deeper bass. However on some recordings the nano sounds irritating, kind of strained or shrill. The mini sounds consistently far more relaxed, a little bit grainy, and while not as extended top and bottom, it is quite well balanced. (Is the grain what you call "noise"?)

I don't have a clear preference yet, in terms of sonics, but I am likening the difference between nano and mini as kind of like the difference between Thiel speakers and Spendors. When everything is perfect in a system - great gear, perfectly matched and set up - with an excellent recording - I find Thiels pretty spectacular, really hard to beat. But if something is off - particularly if it's not a great recording, or the amp is less than stellar for example - Thiels can be unpleasant. Spendors make a wider range of music enjoyable (to my experience) whereas Thiel increases the intensity of the pleasure of the best recordings.

That is what I've found so far, very tentatively.

What I want to do next is hook both of these units to my main stereo. I don't have line out so I'll be amplifying the output stage of each iPod, which is probably just as well, since that's part of what I want to test.

I am very curious as to others experiences. It could be, for example, that my testing reflects unit to unit variation. I have a very early model nano, and first generation mini, by the way.

Art