BenJammin Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 I just sprang for the NH1 this morning and then ran into this comparison of the iPod Mini vs. the NH1, and the reviewer is saying that he judges the sound quality of the NH1 to be slightly inferior to the iPod Mini, especially on higher end headphones. He also states that the digital amp in the NH1 (while technically better) has no effect on the sound quality and that its only there for power saving purposes. Well I would like to know if there is any merrit in his points? I hope I am not starting a flame war here, its just that I was convinced that the NH1 has superior audio quality and that the digital amp was the difference at least in part. I come from a Sharp MT-77 that I thought sounded terrific, and was weary about the Sony sound quality. Now I'm wondering if I've made a mistake and should cancel my order? Please help soon! Btw, here is the review in question: http://www5.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=78472 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atrain Posted January 4, 2005 Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 (edited) do you like it though? just 'cause bhangra is a little down on it, don't let it effect your usage unless it really gets to you***edit***sorry misread your question.are you a serious audiophile? have you put time in with an ipod down at your local electronics store?. i'd be inclined to go with the nh1 for the removable media, recording options & batt life [not a significant as before tho]. if you are having buyers remorse before the ourchase maybe you need to do more research Edited January 4, 2005 by atrain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjsilva Posted January 4, 2005 Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 Hey Benjammin,Don't worry about it. Even if the iPod does provide better sound (which would most likely be due to higher mW output than higher quality), it is not as if the NH1 has poor sound. The NH1 is just fine for listening. If you use the Sony MDR-E888 (or similar) I'm sure you'll be very pleased. And since the majority of iPod listeners will be using the default earbuds, your NH1 would sound better! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenJammin Posted January 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 do you like it though? just 'cause bhangra is a little down on it, don't let it effect your usage unless it really gets to you***edit***sorry misread your question.are you a serious audiophile? have you put time in with an ipod down at your local electronics store?. i'd be inclined to go with the nh1 for the removable media, recording options & batt life [not a significant as before tho]. if you are having buyers remorse before the ourchase maybe you need to do more research←Let's put it this way, I've heard enough iPod to know I am not that impressed with its audio quality. That's why when I heard NH1 is superior, I grew interested. But now I am starting to worry.But putting all other benefits aside of the HiMD I am really curious is bhangra's statements about sound quality are considered accurate amongst those familiar with both devices. I already placed my order and the unit is on the way, so I am wondering what the deal is. I don't want to open it if its pretty well established that this guy is right. Is there a concensus amongst NH1 users here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenJammin Posted January 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 Hey Benjammin,Don't worry about it. Even if the iPod does provide better sound (which would most likely be due to higher mW output than higher quality), it is not as if the NH1 has poor sound. The NH1 is just fine for listening. If you use the Sony MDR-E888 (or similar) I'm sure you'll be very pleased. And since the majority of iPod listeners will be using the default earbuds, your NH1 would sound better!←Yikes I am a little confused. That doesn't sound comforting. I am not terribly concerned what the iPod users are hearing, just what I am hearing.What exactly does it mean that the mW output is higher and why would that make it provide better sound?For the record I am on my 3rd pair of MDR-E888 (thanks to various feline companions I've held over the years). If the NH1 meets the quality of the Sharp MT-77 I will be happy. But right now it is sounding like it is not.If you are saying I could be listening to an iPod and it will sound better than the NH1 (when using higher quality phones) then I am wondering why I got the NH1. Maybe there is a 3rd device that has the better quality that I'm looking for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenJammin Posted January 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 Seems like the same guy gives some more background to his opinion here, taken from this thread: http://www.t-station.net/forum/showthread.php?threadid=23690It seems his bottom line point is that the iPod mini provides a purer audiophile quality output, but that its limited in its adjustability (poor EQ and distorted base). Conversely, the NH1 has a far better EQ and at the end of the day could sound better when tweaked, given that the iPod mini would be ideal with a custom amp (something that negates it as a portable option). Bangra: I'm going to have to go through that once again. I'm racking my head for a more succinct and accurate way of describing my impressions.The Hi-MD is easily capable of sounding as 'nice' or 'nicer' compared to the iPod Mini on most low-end (sub-$100) phones. You have to remember that people on Head-Fi (and a decent percentage on iPodlounge for that matter) think nothing of dropping a couple of hundred on phones... yet I think the overall spend is much smaller for MD owners.'Nicer' refers to the overall flavour of sound. I was listening to some violin concertos yesterday with the PX200 with some subtle EQ to take out the lows and jack up the highs, and I couldn't find anything particularly wrong to say of the sound.However, the iPod Mini's sound is cleaner than the NH1, and is also more suitable for amplification. That's why it's 'better', i.e. technically superior. But, it's got this rather hopeless EQ... well, it's not entirely hopeless, but the lack of custom adjustments means that you have to experiment with some of the presets, and the bass distorts when you boost it.So with the Hi-MD, you have a slightly more muddled core sound but with an excellent degree of adjustability... but on the whole it's a pleasant flavour, rather like the Sharps are. On the iPod Mini, you have a cleaner, audiophile-friendly sound flavour, but with more limited adjustability.I did also forget to mention that the Mini has a much more powerful headphone amp and therefore you get more options for what phone you can use with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atrain Posted January 4, 2005 Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 i am familiar with the thread. what i'm saying is you'll probably like the nh1 as you like the atrac flavoured sound, aren't so keen on ipods overall & actually ordered the NH1. it's all about what you do with it - do you use higher end headphones? will you be recording with this away from a computer? do/will you own more than 8 gigs of music?do you like having all your music together or on removable discs?ask yourself the questions & you'll know which one you don't want anyway. btw there are a few positive NH1 reviews around too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jadeclaw Posted January 4, 2005 Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 BenJammin, I wouldn't worry much.I don't know, where you ordered it, but most e-tailers have a return policy, so you can safely try it out.Just make sure, that you don't dent or scratch it.So, when it comes, just pop in a disc and give it a try.I'm pretty sure, you will keep it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenJammin Posted January 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 BenJammin, I wouldn't worry much.I don't know, where you ordered it, but most e-tailers have a return policy, so you can safely try it out.Just make sure, that you don't dent or scratch it.So, when it comes, just pop in a disc and give it a try.I'm pretty sure, you will keep it.←Got it at Minidisco, same place I bought my Sharp MT-77 four years ago. I guess you are probably right that I will like it. It seems that to get the best out of the iPod mini I would need a seperate amp and even more expensive headphones. Also, in that thread I linked to (the 2nd one above) he goes on to state that the sound of the NH1 is like that of the old Sharps. So that is good news to me. If I were using one or the other for home listening in a quiet room then maybe I'd need to rethink the NH1, but clearly the point is portability and for that it sounds like its audio quality can beat the iPod mini due to its EQ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jadeclaw Posted January 4, 2005 Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 Plus, the NH1 has a coolness factor, that an iPod never can have... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenJammin Posted January 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 Plus, the NH1 has a coolness factor, that an iPod never can have... ←Ok I got it now and am listening to it. So far all I've been able to play is Bruce Springstein's greatest hits and some optically recorded U2 albums (Pop and Achtung Baby), the latter of which (u2 albums) I did not do such a great job of recording onto MD, so I don't want to judge it yet. Plus I am using new MDR-E888s (speaking of which, anyone know how to break these in?)So with that caveat, I am at the moment not optimistic, just comparing it to my Sharp MT-77. But like i said, new buds, not the greatest reference recordings, and I can't even play my MT-77 at the moment, I've lost my charger. So my judgement is highly couched. Maybe in 6 hours I'll feel differently. I suspect the newbuds are part of the issue.Give me another 36 hours and we'll see. It is nice looking though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted January 4, 2005 Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 What bit rates have you tried so far? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenJammin Posted January 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 What bit rates have you tried so far?←an original Bruce Springstein MD (as in released on MD) greatest hits, although that has lots of songs from old analog recordings, not musically a great exampleand an old standard MD that i made by optical CD>Sharp MT-77 at normal MD (no compression beyond normal MD). specifically Pop and Achtung baby.i really think its the new E888s. literally after 2 hours they sound fuller and richer. i've owned 3 pairs and i've found that always to be true.its getting better and better as i listen. plus it doesn't help i sit on a trading floor with 1500 people and ambiant noise is horrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted January 4, 2005 Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 You haven't tried recording with the unit itself yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenJammin Posted January 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 You haven't tried recording with the unit itself yet?←not yet why? i just got em hours ago and i'm at work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted January 4, 2005 Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 Oh, I see. Well, I'm just interested in your opinions of Hi-SP and etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenJammin Posted January 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2005 Oh, I see. Well, I'm just interested in your opinions of Hi-SP and etc.←ill be sure to post back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.