05-24-2007, 04:12 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 52
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by enjoythemusic
Dyvim,
Agree they need more people to have any real scientifically signification outcome. Also things to consider is that the iPod can handle non-compressed audio files while the Zune is limited to lower resolution/quality compressed music files from a CD (which is also compressed from studio tape/disc to 16-bit/44kHz by the mastering engineer BTW).
On another note, the guys over at Head-Fi feel that the Zune does indeed have very impressive sound quality, better than many stock iPods. Am not sure why MicroSoft chose to only allow compressed audio files when Apple has for many years allowed non-compressed from CD files.
Lastly, the outcome of the survey could also be skewed simply by choosing headphones or in ear monitors (IEM) that better suits the built-in amplifier of the 'preferred' unit. Still, judging from what the Head-Fi guys are saying it appears the Zune does have better sound quality if one compared stock to stock given the compressed audio file.
FYI: There are companies/guys who modify iPods for higher sound quality concerning the amplification section, yet do not want to open that can of worms though felt the need to say it for full disclosure. This means a modified iPod could beat out the Zune.
|
for a bunch more of money the iPod can beat the Zune...ehehe
Zune > iPod
iPod + LOD + amp + good grade phones + $$$ > Zune
iMod + amp + $$$ >> Zune
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Threaded Mode
Similar Threads