Any difference in sound quality?

g4 imacs. the early ones had a combo line in and line out port whereas the latter ones had separate ports. is the sound quality while using these ports the same on one type as the other or is one type better than the other? anyone know?

The g4 iMacs all had unamplified stereo sound through there headphone port. They also came with a special audio out port for Apple's external ball shaped speakers which were much better quality. Many USB speakers also offer amplied audio, but not all g4 iMacs supported USB 2.0. Only ones newer than September 2003 did.

Similar Messages

Is there any difference in sound quality in streaming music over Airport Express in IMac, MacBook Pro and iPad?

I've noticed a difference in quality when streaming my iPad wirelessly to my Yamaha receiver and high quality speakers versus my Pro or iMac. The iPad sounds like a toy in comparison to the computers. I'd like some expert advice on what I should expect from the three mentioned devices when streaming wirelessly through a pretty good audio system. Like for instance, should there be much difference in sound quality between the Pro and the iMac?

First, don't hang onto the hope that next year's MBP won't have an optical drive; instead, you'd be advised to purchase a 2011 MacBook Air, which doesn't have an optical drive but relies on SDD. If you need a CD/DVD drive, you can get that separately, if you need. The latest Air has received better reviews than anything else in the Apple lineup.
I'm not an expert on the different brand of keys available. But you'll want to make sure the color is an exactly match to the model. Replacing thes keys is relatively inexpensive but tedious, you might do well to email sellers to guarantee the color and fit.
Good luck with the repair!

Ipod Touch or iPod Classic Sound quality

Hi
I am considering geting either an iPod Touch or iPod Classic and was wondering if there is any difference in sound quality between the two?
Many thanks
Ken

I looked at the tech spec and could find no differences. I would not expect there to be much difference since mp3 are not that good anyway and the earphones have a great effect on sound quality.

How can I improve the sound quality of my new iPod?

Hey there,
I just received my new iPod with my new MacBook Pro computer.
I have read every bit of documentation i received plus I have scoured resources here on the forum, but I am baffled.
I just synced my iPod for the first time to my Macbook, iTunes,
With the supplied earbuds (from the iPod), the sound is not very good at all. In fact, it the sound of each song seems to break up quite a bit, and the clarity is not very good.
As an experiment, I plugged the earbuds directly into my MacBook using the same songs, same quality, etc, and the MacBook sounds decidedly better.
What can I do to improve the tonal quality that is so lacking in my iPod compared to the same recordings on my computer?
Any tips? Tricks?
Thanks for your input.
Joel
www.readyacoustics.com

Ok Joel, I think I have the answer for you.
First, the iPod sound. The 5th Gen iPod is a good sounding unit. It has been designed to have a flat, neutral - uncoloured - sound, which is a good thing.
There should not be that much of a difference in sound quality between the iPod and the MacBok Pro. Are you sure that all settings are equal on both units? For instance, make sure that the eq is flat on both units, and same goes for the output level. For the same material being played, the louder one will be perceived as sounding better.
There are ways to improve dramatically the sound you hear from your iPod: (a) better headphones (b) a mini, portable headphone amp.
(a) better headphones: For a good roundup, check out these two sites:
http://store.earphonesolutions.com/shureearphones.html
http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=2
I would say that the new Shure E500 (around US$450) would be on top of my list, price not being an issue. It seems like they're good no matter what you're listening to. All others seem to sound good on, say, classical/acoustic, but are way too flat - read boring - for modern music, such as techno or house, or R&B. The brand "Etymoyics" fall into this category, for example. But then again, some people would disagree, so read as much as you can on one of the forums I mentioned above, Headfi - really good.
(b) mini headphone amp: These are very small and portable, and people who have bought them swear by them. Check out Headfi again, this time on their amp forum:
http://www4.head-fi.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=3
Think about spending about around $500 for a great little portable amp. They're made by enthusists, small-scale companies. Real jewels, some of them, and I mean jewel in terms of quality, not just looks.
Anyway, this should get you started...Good luck.
A.

Difference in sound between Logic on PPC and Intel (64 Bit)

hi,
I'm using PPC for Logic Pro. Is there any difference in sound between using logic pro on PPC and running it on Intel Macs. I'm not good in tecnical things, but someone told me, Logic would sound better on Intel based Macs, because the system is 64 bit instead of 32 bit on PPC. Is that true? Any experiences?
Thanx,
grooveX

There are no differences!
the "sound quality" is stryctly relted with the Audio equipment.
(the new Intel Xeon processors are faster than PPC... in 2008... obviously... but in 2003/4/5 PPC G5 was much faster than same year 2003 Intel Xeon release
If you work with DAE TDM HD accell in PPC or on Intel the sound will be the same...
obviosly if some update shoot down the compatibilty with PPC side you will cannot use the future upgrades...
if you use a Motu 828 Mk3 the sound will be great... and same as ppc or Intel or Windows and Linux
(but Logic works on Mac... PPC and Intel... is the same... logic is the master of the sound).
Anyway... I think the analog recording studio in the 1970 1990 gives you a super great sound... in some cases the analog recording studio sonds much better that digital studios..
I'm talking about a simple example.. the audio frequency are from 20 to 20.000 HZ... the music quality... (artistically) is not related with the quality of the machine that you use for make it....
I suggest you not follow the mode ... and run to buy the last model .. most often are money thrown to the wind.
if you buy a good new interface.... you are in the rigth way...
but the very important thing is:
MAKE YOUR MUSIC AND DON'T MATTER ABOUT these unnecessary competitions ... is only useful to those who sells computer!
I know people that doing good music with old G4 ...
...music with highest quality ...
is not the machine that makes the music .... Only MEN can obtain a piece of art ... even using dirt!
G

Convert to MP3 (sound quality)?

I have two questions about converting Itunes files to MP3s, but I will include the Itunes instruction here, so you'll know what I'm referencing. I have an Imac with OS 10.7.4 and here are the instructions (italicized):
You can convert a song to a different file format (and keep a copy of the original). For example, you can save a copy of a compressed song file such as MP3 or AAC in an uncompressed song format (AIFF or WAV).
When converting from a compressed to uncompressed file format (for example, from MP3 to AIFF), you shouldn’t notice any reduction in sound quality. However, when converting between compressed formats (for example, MP3 and AAC), you may notice a reduction in the sound quality. For the best results, if you want your music encoded in a different file format, import the music again from the original source using the new encoding format.
Important: You can’t convert iTunes Store purchases unless they’re iTunes Plus songs.
HERE ARE MY QUESTIONS:
1. What type of file type is an Itunes music file? Is it compressed?
2. Will I lose sound quality if I convert an Itunes music file to MP3 in order to move it over to a Garmin GPS (which supports only MP3s) and therefore would it be best to follow their instructions to reimport my music using an MP3 encode?
Thank you in advance!

1. What type of file type is an Itunes music file? Is it compressed?
If it is something you bought from the iTunes Store it is 256k AAC compressed. If it is something you imported from another source such as a CD then the format will depend upon what settings you used. Get information on a track in iTunes and see what "kind" the file is.
2. Will I lose sound quality if I convert an Itunes music file to MP3 in order to move it over to a Garmin GPS (which supports only MP3s) and therefore would it be best to follow their instructions to reimport my music using an MP3 encode?
Technically, yes, you will lose sound quality in any conversion to compressed with each conversion you do (a photocopy of a photocopy...). Whether or not you notice the quality difference is really an individual thing. Technically if you have an audio CD you imported into AAC and now want it as mp3 then you will get better quality by re-importing from the CD as mp3. I have in a few cases exported from other formats to mp3 and not noticed a quality difference, but then I don't have $200 speakers attached to my computer, nor the ears to appreciate them.

Is there a difference in video quality shot on MiniDV tape or HDD ?

Now that the new Macbooks lack a firewire connection, and following on from Steve Jobs comment that there are many HDD camcorders available I just wondered if there is any difference in the quality of the end video between that filmed with a MiniDV camcorder and that on a hard drive based camcorder. I have a Panasonic 3CCD camcorder that is still going strong and I think produces very good footage so I wasn't intending to replace it until it dies, but when I do replace it I want to improve on it rather than take a step backwards or sideways. If hard drive camcorders can produce better quality footage and are not just better for convenience sake I can see the point of dropping the firewire connection.
So could someone clarify this for me, and also maybe tell me what the format choice of the professionals would be?

The answer is that HDD has nothing to do with video quality. It is just another media on which the video is recorded. The selection of media has its own pros & cons independent of the video 'quality'. That said, most tape-based cams record in DV or HDV whereas most HDD based cams record in AVCHD.
Quality is subjective. You can read all about the relative merits of DV, HDV & AVCHD on the net and in this forum. HDV and AVCHD are much more highly compressed than DV but they enable hi-def, 16:9 video.
If you're an average consumer you would be hard pressed to see significant differences between these formats in the finished video other than the obvious 4:3 vs 16:9 aspect ratio difference.
As David said, you will be better off spending time looking for camcorders that have the best lenses, and learning how to shoot top quality video, then worrying about the codec or the media.

Has GB sound quality improved?

I am trying to determine why my garageband mix sounds so good all of a sudden. Four things were done recently:
*I cleared some space on my hardrive, allowing more scratch space.
*I updated Quicktime 7
*Recorded my mix without monitoring or reverb
*I locked tracks as I went along, keeping the moving triangle in the white.
What I am noticing is a marked difference in sound quality. No rice crispies, crystal clear grand piano, Extraordinary guitar and harp sounds. All in all it just seems as if Garageband really came alive.
I am wondering if the new updates had anything to do with it and if others are noticing this as well. Perhaps I am finally learning to use this program correctly. : )
Anybody else noticing a difference since January's updates?
Kurt

Kurt I bet the biggest change to the sound of your mix is probably the removal of Reverb. Quincy Jones is notorious for going around an audio mix turning off the reverb on many of the tracks. To me reverb on many tracks can start to add a lot of simulated reflective type information in a mix and that can begin to confuse the ear with a lot of underlying reflective type cues.
You may also be correct about your suspicions concerning GB's reverb quality. I have noticed that when I use Apples GB reverb and then use a compressor on the output of the Master track I begin to hear Rice Krispy type of distortions even though I am not pushing my individual track output or my Master track output.
And it could also be that GB's built in Reverb is garbage and dirties the signal in some way, that is a suspicion I have myself. When I use other third party AU's for reverb it seems to sound much clean and less "thick and heavy".
What update are you talking about? Is it for GB2 or do you mean GB3 as an update?
I have GB2 version 2.02, is there something higher?

Ipod touch 4G vs iphone 4 sound quality

Tell me please,there's difference in sound quality(as a music player with headphones) between Ipod touch 4g vs. Iphone 4?
they are the same? volume,frequency,etc.?
because i'll always thinked that an ipod touch for example is made only for music and it will be created different or enhanced because is exclusively for music.
those anybody compare the iphone 4 vs ipod touch 4g so they can fell the diffrence?
and what are the differences?
thank you.
Message was edited by: nectarie

I do not understand what you are saying? Both the iPhone and iPod have a built-in speaker (which are not that good) and a headphone jack.They both use the same audio processor
Cirrus Logic CS42L61

Sound quality: If you want to hear the difference between higher and lower bit rates

Have you ever wondered about the difference in the sound quality of music at different bit-rates? Can you hear the difference?
If you listen to 64kbps and 28kbps (either wma or mp3), you'll hear the great difference. However, if you listen to 28kbps and 92kbps (either wma or mp3), you'll find that there is little or no difference (to me, that is).
collegeboy wrote:
We all know that wma 28kbps sounds just as good as wma 320kb
ps.
the reason i and you go higher than 28 is because where able to. you can deny all you want.
If you want to experience better sound quality at higher bit-rates, the best thing to do is to listen to the music at a quiet place. This may sound like lame advise, but it really works. Try 320kbps for the best results. You'll be able to hear minor details you never had before.

SSR wrote:
Wayyyyyy back when I first started encoding MP3s I was using 28 with an inferior encoder. At the time I couldn't spot the difference, but now the difference is stark. Particular types of music (and more specifically instruments and combinations) do emphasise it though.
Actually, you cannot hear the difference when the background noise is loud, or example, public transport. I suggest that one uses a noise cancellation headset. $$$

Is there any difference in quality between mp4 and m4v?

Is there any difference in quality between mp4 and m4v? I am figuring out how best to save old VCR files. Is the 264 category the best?

So, what would that software be? Anything that I mentioned, e.g., iMovie? Any Video Converter?
I'm a Mac user so I want files that play "natively" in QT X, QT 7, QL, iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad, and/or TV players. This means I want the H.264/AAC compressed data in MOV, MP4, or M4V file containers. I can use QT 7 Pro, MPEG Streamclip, and /or QT X to move MPEG-4/AAC compressed data to MOV file containers, MPEG Streamclip to movie M4V and MOV MPEG-4/AAC data to MP4 file containers, and Subler to move MP4 or MOV MPEG-4 AVC/AAC/AC3/Chapter data to M4V file containers. This is strictly a simple "copy" operation and no recompression of data is involved. (I.e., the quality is not changed.)
iMovie is a video editor and it forces an export conversion of your project once completed which can degrade quality. Have never used the Any Video Converter so I don't know if it has an audio and/or video "passthrough" feature for data already in a compatible compression formats. If it doesn't then any conversion it makes has the potential to degrade video content.
As to AVI, this is a legacy file container abandoned by Microsoft a dozen years ago in favor of their modernized WMV compression format/file type products. Compared to MKV, AVI is an outmoded/out-of-date container which I don't recommend you use unless you are a glutton for punishment. However, if you must use it, then you might try the AvidMux app. It can "copy" compatible content to a number of file container types—including AVI and MKV. Just don't blame me if its use creates more problems than it solves on current Mac systems.

Difference in sound from A2Z and DVD home equipment

Hi,
Does anybody tell how different in sound from Audigy 2ZS and home theater system. What i mean by this is the output system is the same (Home theater speakers, surround receiver). The only difference is signal source, either from sound Blaster A 2ZS or from home DVD player.
As far as i understand, the A 2ZS wont maximize its utilities if we select the SPDIF pass through and the signal will be sent directly to the external decoder. Am i correct to say this? and if so, the sound quality is totally subject to the external decoder and speakers systems. But i have read couple audiophile forums, it said that the sound varies according to CD/DVD player, how come we have this.
To conclude, any strenghs of A2ZS over home CD/DVD player interms of sound quality?
Appreciate if anybody could tell.

Well sound in this context is made up of 3 componemts: source, amp and speakers. The 3 things to watch are THD (total harmonic distortion), S/N (signal to noise ratio) and Frequency Responce.
For a good system you need <0.0% THD, S/N >20 Db and frequency responce at least as wide as 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz.
There is a difference between listening to music, which is best in stereo, and home theatre, which is designed for spacial effects rather than reproducing high quality music.
To address your question directly it is not possible to answer because you wish to compare a disc player with what in this instance may be described as a switch/router.
In relation to sound between the Audigy 2 ZS and my home theatre system there is a world of difference even though they are interconnected. That may be because of a 25 fold difference in cost though.
Home theatre should include video switching as well, normally incorporated in the amp and called an AV amp. Spend money on a good one of these and you won;t go wrong. Look for 6 powered channels with a minimum power of 30 RMS per channel. In stereo mode the 2 channel amps should be class A. In 5. mode you will not get the above specs unless you are intent on spending serious money.
Hope this is helpful.

Airtunes sound quality - Please share your experiences

I use a Powerbook G4 to stream mostly lossless classical music files to an Airport Express 802.11n linked using a standard cable to a NAD 326BEE amplifier (auxiliary input) and PSB Imagine B speakers. The sound is very good with not a lot of bass but I find that despite all the "sound enhancements" features of iTunes [8.02 (20)] being unchecked, the music is projected forward, overeager, too present vs. a portable CD which I also use from time to time. For a start, the maximum volume of this CD player has nothing to do with iTune's maximum volume which is sensibly louder but still, even at volume levels that appear comparable, the sound from Airtunes has a glow which can be fatiguing after a while. Are there differences between computers over Airtunes? Are some better than other? Any idea on how to improve the sound?

Tesserax wrote:
Are there differences between computers over Airtunes? Are some better than other?
Not really. The AX can only handle audio at a 44.1kHz sample rate, regardless of the source ... so switching devices shouldn't make any difference.
iTunes uses a QuickTime CODEC to convert audio files to Apple Lossless, and then, uses AirTunes to send them to the AX. In turn, the AX uses built-in software that converts the Apple Lossless to an Encoded Digital Audio format. From there, digital audio is sent to a optical transceiver to convert the electrical signal to an optical one before sending it to the innermost part of the audio port.
The AX works only with iTunes v4.6+ and is limited to music files that iTunes can read; ie, 16-bit data only. (An exception is you can use a third-party product like Rogue Amoeba's AirFoil to stream other non-iTunes sources.) These data, though, can be in any file format that iTunes recognizes, from lossy MP3s at the low-quality end of the spectrum to Apple Lossless and lossless AIF or WAV files at the high end. Again, it is important to note that the AX functions only at a 44.1kHz sample rate. When you play 32kHz or 48kHz data, iTunes sample-rate-converts the data in real time before sending it to the AX.
In all honesty I have no idea what half of that means.
I'm having the same problem, horrible Airport Express sound. And all of my files are Apple Lossless which is apparently a completely copy of whatever is on the CD.
kHz and sample rate is irrelevant as far as I know. It's Lossless. It's a straight up copy basically, right?
So why does it sound so godawful through Airport Express?

Sound Quality Loss

When I create a track on an audio instrument track using the Vienna Symphonic Library Special Edition, the sounds are great. But then, when I export it to an audio track in order to save room, the sound quality goes way down. Is this because I am using the built-in audio on my macbook pro? 16 and 24 bit exporting doesn't seem to make a difference.

Colin, theorectically, there should be no difference.
theory sometimes lets us down.
it does here.
i find the same thing: everything sounds like a million bucks then you press bounce or export and the resulting file sounds like a quarter of a million.
some things you can do to keep up the dub quality are: get the instrument to peak at no more than -6 on logics meter.
keep the playback tracks level down, especially if you have a full orchestra going (25-40 tracks). mine end up somewhere around -18.
a frozen track results in a 32bit file. 24bit is the max for export and bounce.
i can hear a difference there too.
this is nothing compared to the quality loss, as in Waveburner, when dropping to 16bit for CDs...... THAT is very noticable.
let's not mention CD to mp3(:
maybe things will change in a future edition of logic where 32bit files may be used anywhere.
make sure you are listening to the playback at the same level (spl) as before dubbing.
The built in audio has nothing to do with the quality of a bounce, it only outputs the result.
apples conversion is not top grade, never has been.
it might be time to invest in a pro D/A. Benchmark make a beauty.
if you don't need 8in/8out, just go for a 2in/2out. at the same price point, the 2/2 should be of better quality.
the loss with digital is nowhere near as bad as with analog, if that makes you feel any better.
best, david r.

Improved sound quality in 4.2.1 - My imagination?

I play music from my iPod through a lead from the headphone socket into my car stereo's Aux input, also a 3.5mm headphone socket. Since I installed 4.2.1, the sound quality seems to have improved significantly; in fact, it's fabulous!
I saw in the 4.2.1 release note that it included improved audio quality via USB for car stereos, but I wondered if any gurus out there might be able to explain the difference I'm hearing: is it a result of that improvement? I'm also wondering how they effected the improvement via USB, since as far as I understand it (which isn't that far, obviously) in those cases the iPod simply passes the digital file for playback through the car stereo DAC. Is there some kind of decode, re-encode for USB process going on?
Any light anyone can shed would be gratefully received!

Did yo do this:
Try disabling the computer's antivirus and firewall.
- Next try the manual install method of:
iDevice Troubleshooting 101 :: iPhone, iPad, iPod touch
- Then try on another computer

Any difference in sound quality?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for