Touch or Classic? Which is better (quality)?

Which is better in terms of sound quality?

Classics. The Older 5.5 gens and Older series Ipods. The Newer 5.5 gens and the 6th Gens use a new sound chip. Same as for the Ipod Touches but Im not 100% sure with the Iphones.
Be careful though, The Ipods with that use the old style sound chip, which is far superior in quality of sound,  wasn't soldered well and the chip can seperate with The constant temperature change and unobserved  pressure applied to the unit when its in your pocket, book bag... ect.
Now Im not going to say that is 100% positive. Its just from experience owning a few new and older Ipods/Iphones.
Besides, How many older Mp3 plays can literally blow out your Earbuds{quality earbuds} if played too loud. I owned Bose Series{IE 2} in ear headphones and klipsch In ear Headphones{S5I Rugged series}.... The Key word is "Owned" lol.
Find an Older model that works great and compare it to the newer models. You will Hear the DIfference... or make you deaf in the process LOL.

Similar Messages

  • Which yields better quality images?

    Which yields better quality images?
    If I "send" my slideshow from iPhoto to iDVD? Or if I start in iDVD and import a slideshow from iPhoto?

    That’s the same thing.
    The problem is that iPhoto needs to make a movie of the slideshow to export. This inevitably involves compression. Then, when iDVD prepares the movie for burning, it also compresses. Many folks find the quality drop off too great when the material is doubly compressd.
    One solution is to create the Slideshow in iDVD, though that has limitations too - no Ken Burns effect, fo instance. But there’s only one layer of compression.
    Another way is to create the Movie in +as high a quality as possible+. Some ways to do this: Export the slideshow from iPhoto using the new high quality options. Alternatively, use another app that has more export options - PhotoToMovie, Final Cut Express, perhaps even iMovie HD - to get a high quality movie, and so minimise the impact of the compression.
    Regards
    TD

  • H.264 vs. MPEG-4 video, which is better quality?

    Which is better quality? H.264 or MPEG-4? Is one more compressed than the other? I'm putting video on my iPod and also may want to output to television from the iPod, so I'd also like to know which is better for that as well in addition to which is better in general.

    H.264 is significantly more compressed than typical MPEG-4. MPEG-4 naturally would be better quality to the discerning eye, and is not as dependent on the speed of your processor and the strength of your GPU as H.264 is. I managed to get a 320 x 240 video of H.264 compressed to be 200 Megabytes for a 2.5 hour video. On a G5 iMac 1.8 Ghz the playback was fine. Trying the same video on a slower Mac there was significant amount of stuttering of the video itself. Experiment with some one minute shorts and measure the file size and see which has better quality on what you are playing it back on. If you can tell the difference, then go with the higher quality format. Certainly keep a higher quality format burnt to DVD in case you need to recreate from the original.

  • Which is better quality for watching a pre downloaded movie airplay or HMDI?

    I have the new Retnia. I have an apple tv and high quality HDMI cable. If I want watch a 900P movie from my laptop to my up to 1080p tv which would be more reliable/better quality? BTW the movie is predownloaded so it WOULD NOT be streamming.
    Thanks!

    My guess is the HDMI cable will yield better quality than AirPlay. Since you already have an HDMI cable and a Mac that supports AirPlay, why not try both for yourself then report back here with your results?

  • MPEG-2 vs. mini DV - Which is better quality?

    I want to transfer video from VHS tapes into iMovie. Which is going to give me better quality?:
    A) Copy VHS to mini DV tape on my camcorder and then import into iMovie.
    or
    B) Copy VHS to DVD with my VHS/DVD recorder combo player and then transfer the DVD to iMovie using Apple MPEG-2 Player.
    Thanks!
    David

    Hi Greg,
    VERY good question! I think, we have three groups:
    * the poor guys who have bought a "dvd camcorder"...- I don't have a clue, why I should record on a mini-dvd instead of a cheap tape...- the compression codec used on such machines is by definition! no editable format, so you allways need workarounds...
    there should be a warning on that boxes "for playback only!"
    (besides: the mpeg2-format allows to store video that way, you can edit it later, has to do with i-Frames etc... but that is not the way, Sony & Co goes...)
    * using "older" homebrewn dvds...- ok, maybe somewhere are the old tapes... but where? and on that tape where do I find THAT scene? isn't it easier, to throw the DVD I made and copy that into iM?..... again: people see the fantastic pic quality of a DVD made with iDVD and think, "press play and record!".. THAT would be nice
    * re-edit commercial DVDs... you made your personal version of StarWars, Episode XVII, and you are not that good in CGI as ILM... so, you want to copy a few frames from the disc on your shelf...- or, "forget all that plot, I want all Bruce Lee fighting scenes on ONE disc!" (<< ... "favorites", as we do in iTunes with playlist!)
    you could make BIG Bucks with a 49$ tiny, shiny white box, analogue-in >> firewire out, which is recognized by iM....- ;-))

  • Slow burn vs Fast burn (which is better quality) fact or fiction

    Ok again I would like to know the official answer to this question because from the response last time, I'm not really confidence with the answer.
    IS IT FACT THAT IF YOU USE WAV BURNER AND BURN AT A SLOWER SPEED COMPARED TO FASTER SPEED THE QUALITY BECOMES BETTER BY PROOF?
    IF THIS FACT OR FICTION.
    SOMEONE PLEASE PROVIDE SOME LONG YEARS EXPERIENCE PROOF.

    Sorry, can't wait until someone clocks what I've said, 'cos I might be going out soon, so thought I'd write it up first...
    The difference between the HHB and the Mac burner is... nothing much. The actual tray and laser workings are probably the same in both units. The extra dosh for the HHB covers the casing, functionality and the convertors - it's basically a hardware version of WaveBurner, and we all know hardware versions cost more than software versions.
    Therefore, in my alleged test there should only be one of the four that shows any difference, and that's the real time recording via analogue. The other three, all remaining in the digital domain, irrespective of speed, should give the same results, because data is encoded in the same way, no matter how you do it. It would be interesting to see if there is any difference, but I doubt the equipment I've got would be sensitive enough to monitor it (or would allow me to zoom in and see the difference enough to post here). With that in mind, the human ear isn't going to hear it.
    The only REAL difference the speed option gives you is reliability of burning. The faster you get, the more prone it is of making an error in the burning process, but this can sometimes come down to the quality of the disc itself. Not all discs are the same, as I guess most people have realised to their horror at some point (data).
    Just a final note. I'm working with a voice-over artist for TV and radio, and the stations are happy to receive the files as MP3's via email. Who'd have thought that would happen when MP3 came out?!? Just goes to show people are putting a perspective on the quality standard for final use. But I'm still sending AIFF files though, MP3 makes me shudder as an original! And here we are worrying about CD quality...

  • 'Which is better quality?' EVGA or MSI - Nvidia GeForce GTX 760

    Hiya
    I am looking for feedback and suggestions on which manufacturer creates the best video card hardware particularly the 760 I am currently looking at two cards but am also open to other suggestions and feedback on cards
    has anyone had any experience with MSI video cards?
    these are the two cards I currently have in mind
    EVGA SuperClocked 02G-P4-2765-KR GeForce GTX 760 2GB
    newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130932
    MSI Gaming N760 TF 2GD5/OC GeForce GTX 760 2GB
    newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127745
    does the MSI have any advantage over EVGA in longevity with something like solid state Japanese capacitors? I am kinda looking for a card that will last the longest with out warranty support ect
    and do MSI cards have rust problems? I thought I would ask just to be sure when I made a account I saw this thread at top of forum with a picture that will surely haunt my dreams
    forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=171735.0

    This is an MSI forum. Discussing competing brand's products is not allowed. The MSI card is a great one. Google it and check online reviews.
    Quote
    and do MSI cards have rust problems?
      No, I'm using all kinds of MSI vgas for more than 10 years and have never seen anything like the pic in that thread. It's something the user did physically to this card as that doesn't happen just after time.

  • Which yields a better quality slideshow?

    Which yields better quality images?
    If I "send" my slideshow from iPhoto to iDVD? Or if I start in iDVD and import a slideshow from iPhoto?

    It's probably more a matter of personal preference than anything else. Allegedly, a track ripped at aac 128 sounds "better" than a 128 mp3. You should rip a track with which you are familiar in both formats (and perhaps at different bit rates) to see which you like the best.

  • Which has better export quality. imovie 11' or adobe premiere?

    has anyone used both? which has better quality when you export it? I notice that imovie downgrades the quality when exporting by a LOT. It looks great inside imovie and looks terrible once exported!

    Hi
    I can only guess - (have no Premiere) but
    Depends on what will be the end result. DVD or publish on YouTube etc. or saved on an USB-Memory to be Played on PlayStation 3 and alike.
    If DVD - then most probably Adobe Premiere is better (if it can export interlaced video to iDVD) - iMovie'08 or 09 or 11 can not do this - they discard every second line resulting in a sever loss of quality.
    I use
    • iMovie HD6
    • FinalCut any version
    And they do deliver full quality over to iDVD
    If other end results - then it most probably doesn't matter.
    Yours Bengt W

  • Which is better the 1st g or 2nd generation ipod touch

    I like to know which is better and last longer and wont have much issues
    A. 1st g ipod touch
    or
    B. 2nd genertion ipof touch
    I like to know I dont know which one I want, and I like to hear it from a person who know what there talking about and who knows alot about ipod touch
    reply back real soon
    I need to know

    Hello,
    It really depends on your own wants/needs. When the price of the refurbished touch dropped down to $199, I went ahead and purchased it, and so far, I don't regret it or want the 2nd generation (which I have seen and played with).
    The main differences with the 2nd generation include a built-in Nike+ receiver (Nike+ is pretty much an iPod-integrated pedometer that works with just the Nano so far), external volume controls, and an internal speaker for "casual listening" (meaning that it doesn't really have that great of volume/audio quality, but the headphones are just as good as any other iPod).
    I don't think at this stage we can determine which will have a longer, overall life expectancy. After all, the 2nd generations have only been around since the 9th of this month, and the 1st generations are roughly a year old at this point. Not really a fair comparison.
    Regarding issues you might experience... several users on this forum have reported Wi Fi issues with the 2nd generation, but, keep in mind that this is generally a support forum, so most of what you see on here will be issues looking for resolution. I haven't had any issues with the 1st generation that I haven't been able to solve by a simple reset.
    Hope this is helpful
    CG

  • TS1363 my ipod classic is visible in windows but not in itunes, this happens on 2 different computers where my iphone and ipod touch work fine which leads me to think something is up with the ipod itself and i cant find any threads to help

    my ipod classic is visible in windows but not in itunes, this happens on 2 different computers where my iphone and ipod touch work fine which leads me to think something is up with the ipod itself and i cant find any threads to help.
    any thoughts anyone??

    Perhaps the reason you haven't had any replies is because there is no such thing as an 8GB iPod Classic.
    I suggest that you begin by correctly identifying which iPod you have.
    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1353

  • Realtek vs. Via Vinyl, which is better sound quality

     I downloaded the Via Vinyl Codec in an attempt to fix the Internet noise sound talked about in this https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=75995.0 post and all is well since.  Tiresmoke, or anyone else using Via Vinyl, what do you think of the sound quality.  I think there seems to be a little less bass response, nothing major, but a little different.  Also, the EQ is set up a little different.  What is your take on it?  Can you think of a reason why MSI went with Realtek on Sound if Via has their own solution built into the southbridge?  It is widely held as better quality?  Also, what about the actual realtek audio chip on the motherboard?  What is it doing if you are using Vinyl besides collecting dust?  Any idea on which uses more CPU time?  I know this is a lot of questions, but I'm curious.

    Thanks for the reply Tiresmoke.  I guess no one else is giving the Via Vinyl a shot.  Given that the Realtek is a separate add-in solution on the motherboard, one would think it would be better to warrant its existence.  However, in this crazy silicon world, who knows.

  • Officejet 8000 VS Deskjets ink quality? Which is better?

    Which uses better ink quality?  Officejet Pro 8000 or Deskjets?  
    Officejet Pro 8000 uses pigments and the Deskjets uses dye.  Pigment inks are supposed to be better than dye inks.
    However, the inks for the Officejet Pro 8000 (HP 940) are so much cheaper that I wonder about the quality.  Is it cheap due to supply and demand (for office use = lots of prints = inks purchased more often) or is it cheap because it is lower quality?
    This question was solved.
    View Solution.

    The reason that the ink cartridges are cheaper is because for the Office jet 8000, the cartridge is just an ink reservoir. the printheads are separate and would only need to be replaced if they went wrong. For Deskjets you buy the ink and new printheads in each cartridge.

  • Which is Better Nokia Asha 303 or Nokia Asha 311

    Can you tell me which is better 303 or 311?

    hmm.. as owner of both phones, I would like to say my bet.
    Actually, there are lots of difference on both phones. I'll dice it up.
    1. Homescreen
    On 303 the homecscreen is the same as other s40 devices , you know, the "active standby" thingy, where you can stack up a pile of shortcuts on the homescreen.
    On the 311 however, it has 3 different homescreens, the app drawer where all your apps are displayed, the active standby where you can put your favorite apps and contacts as a shortcut, and your frequently used app (music player, radio, or dialler) which you can jump to and from with just a swipe from left or right.
    2. Input method
    On the 303, it has a full physical keyboard, which eases up the typing experience, branding the 303 as "type smarter". To be honest, I truly miss that keyboard.
    On the 311 however, it has a virtual keyboard and the usual phone keypad (virtual also). They can automatically turn to landscape mode if you will turn the phone to landscape. In writing this comment, I am using my 311, as my 303 died when it plunged into the pool.
    3. Camera
    both features a 3.2mp camera, which is good for a higher than basic photo and video capturing. You can view my videos on my yt channel (MultiCadmiel) where I used a 303, and 311.
    Noticebly, the meer difference on the two is their mic. The 303 can capture every sound pitch, as on my videos I am capturing trains passing by. Whenever a train horns on thr 303, it can capture the sound without distortion. But the story is different on the 311, even a single horn can distort the mic.
    4.Speaker
    the 303 is impresibly a great boom box, voicing out a great sound quality thru it's speakers, again it is not the same with the 311. The 311 is not that loud, but who thr heck would use loudspeaker while inside the bus? Headsets are available.
    5. Internet
    here, the 311 boast as being faster on loading internet pages, as well as download speed.
    There are still many to consider, but overall, both are better for me.
    If you want a full qwerty experience, use the 303, if you want a full touched phone, use the 311.
    Oh, I forgot to mention that the camera on the 311 automatically rotates to landscape or portrait, a thing missing on the 303.
    Nokia Lover since childhood.
    my phones are 3120c, 303, and 311.

  • Which has better sound - DVD or highest setting Quicktime?

    Hi (I hope this question did not go through twice) -- I will be engaging in performances where I'll be streaming video and sound from my laptop... my quesiton is - which is better DVD or highest quality Quicktime? - for sound and vid... and by what degree? -- thanks.

    I'll have to say for me it's a tie between my iPhone 3GS and 120 GB (6th gen) iPod Classic. The sound using the Apple in-ear headphones is awesome on those two models. I can't explain why, but that's my observation-there's a marked improvement with those two compared to Nano and older iPod Classic models.

Maybe you are looking for