05-24-2007, 01:00 AM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,097
|
|
4 Out of 6 Prefer the Sound of the Zune Over the iPod
"Which one is better? The Zune or the iPod? Difficult to say but CNET-Crave found a way to avoid fan bias. They did a simple "Coke-Pepsi challenge" with people in the street. Participants had to listen to each player and tell them which one sounds the best. Of course, just like the old "Coke-Pepsi challenge", they didn’t know what player they were listening to. Results of the test: iPod: 2 and Zune: 4. So, based on a very small number of people, the Zune has a much better sound quality." Much as I love the Zune (and dislike all things Apple), I think it would have a little more fair to ask a few more people. Like maybe 10? In any case, I'm glad to see the Zune hold its own in a 'blind' listening test. So, do you concur? Do you find the Zune to have superior sound quality to the iPod? I know the sound quality of the Zune is very good, but I've never owned an iPod to compare it to...
|
| |
|
|
|
05-24-2007, 03:14 AM
|
|
Sage
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 676
|
|
I'm sorry but I'm going to have to call this completely ridiculous. It could easily have gone 6-0 or 0-6 and either way wouldn't mean anything. 10 wouldn't really be much better. I think you'd need to do more like 600 to have any real sort of credibility in terms of which one sounds better.
If you flipped a coin 6 times and got 4 heads would you then conclude that you have a 2/3 chance of getting heads any time you flip that coin?
All things considered, I would certainly hope that the Zune sounds better since it is the newer device (I don't really count the Fall 2006 "refresh" of the 5G iPod as being a new iPod).
__________________
64 GB iPad 2 WiFi, Apple TV 2, 32 GB iPhone 4
Early 2011 MacBook Pro 13" (dual boot with Windows 7), Early 2009 Mac Mini
|
| |
|
|
|
05-24-2007, 03:22 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 40
|
|
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
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
|
| |
|
|
|
05-24-2007, 04:55 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 242
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricardo Dawkins
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
|
Man, that's like saying a souped-up Chevette beats a Corvette.
Clearly moot when we're talking about stock devices here. Also voids warranty!
I get the joke though. 
|
| |
|
|
|
05-24-2007, 07:38 PM
|
|
Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,432
|
|
from my own personal tests, the Zune has stomped the iPod when it comes to playing music with a ton of bass. I listen to a lot of drum and bass and I have found the Zune's quality to be a lot cleaner than the iPod. All in all, I'm happy with my purchase 
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
Similar Threads