Related
Guys post your opinions on the audio quality of the device and if possible also a comparison with your previous phones.
Thanks.
Already quite heavily discussed...
Disappointed. Don't like the headset at all. got replacement and it's fine and waiting for the smart headset to come out.well hopefully it'll be the best, I love listen to music and this time I'm really disappointed with Sony for sure. (Sad Face)
Why disappointed? Everyone knows that standard headsets are bad.
Use your own, be happy.
chesterr said:
Disappointed. Don't like the headset at all. got replacement and it's fine and waiting for the smart headset to come out.well hopefully it'll be the best, I love listen to music and this time I'm really disappointed with Sony for sure. (Sad Face)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you expand a little - what exactly are you unhappy about? When you say you 'don't like the headset' - is it the sound quality or the ergonomics/comfort that you don't like? what aspects exactly are bad?
When we assess the audio performance of a phone, there are several separate aspects:
1. Audio output signal quality, i.e. the analog signal coming out of the phone jack. I would argue that this is superb, as can be witnessed by connecting it directly to a quality Hi-Fi system or high-performance headphones.
Has anyone noticed anything different in this respect - like distortion, noise or other defects? I haven't.
2. The audio quality in the main use of the device: as a telephone (unless we have forgotten that it can also make calls). Taken for granted most of the time, this audio quality was disappointing in my previous X10 - but on the X-S is significantly better. Call audio quality (including volume) is on par with the best phones I've used.
3. The sound quality when listening to music 'over the air', i.e. form the phone's built-in speaker. There are limitations how much loudness and/or bass you can extract form a tiny speaker in a tiny box - I hope nobody expects it to sound like a 500 Watt stereo system On speaker, the X-S is on par with the following models found around my household: Xperia X10, SE C905, SE C902, Nokia 5800. Differences are minor and, at this compromise level, not worth analysing. Subjectively, on built-in speaker the X-S sounds to me slightly but certainly better than the X10.
4. Audio quality via the standard headset provided in the pack. NOT (!) any extra /additional headphones - those are subject to your taste (and investment), see (1) above.
The kit headset is a hands-free unit optimised for making calls and not for music consumption. Yes, they certainly can play music (and many models do it decently, depending on the listener's audio culture and expectations) - but they absolutely must not be assessed and criticised as a musical device, they simply are not that.
Anyone who has the ears to hear the difference and values audio quality normally buys dedicated musical headphones. (Or already has them - as technology in them evolves slower than phones and they need less frequent 'updates'. I keep them over the life of 2-3 phones).
When we rely on the headset provided in the box, we voluntarily agree with the limitations - that those are a compromise, designed for making calls and also designed to minimise the cost of the bundle.
- - -
I'd like to think that we all agree with the above logic. Please feel free to prove me wrong (with facts) on any aspect of it. In this light, I would like to hear:
- What aspects of the audio is @chesterr (and others) unhappy about?
- If Sony disappoints, who else doesn't? What are you comparing the X-S with? What is your example of the ideal mobile audio experience (straight out of the box)?
Anyone could recommend a headset at, at max 50 dollars, for listening to music that works on it. Cable at least 1 meter and has to be in-ear.
Sent from Xperia X10 Mini Pro using CM9 by paul-xxx
Since my kplisch x10i won't work with the Sony @) I have gone back to my trusty denon ach 360's
Very nice warm sound in my opinion even though they are considered an older model.
http://www.knowyourmobile.com/accessories/earphones/301807/denon_ahc360_review.html
Sent from my LT26i using xda premium
Using Soundmagic E10s with mine and have to say I'm impressed - easily on a par with my iPhone 4s for audio quality - sounds pretty neutral to me and more than adequate for a phone imho.
maistora said:
Can you expand a little - what exactly are you unhappy about?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow man you're promoting Sony or something I thought that I was doing that..
well It's Sony dude they should've done more better than this, I don't blame it but I don't like the headset.Okay If you're telling me to be happy with what I get for the price that I paid for, Okay then.
BTW I'm waiting for their new Smart Headset. and Hopefully it'll be better and yes the call quality is to the maximum comparing to the other devices and they've done a pretty good job with the equaliser and with the xLoud.But I feel like I'm not getting enough Bass. Anyways I hope Smart Headset will be out soon to get
Included earbuds are always crap. If earbuds cost less than €50/$75 they are crap by definition. I've heard the audio output quality of the Xperia S is brilliant and amongst the best of all phones ever made.
chesterr said:
they've done a pretty good job with the equaliser and with the xLoud.But I feel like I'm not getting enough Bass. Anyways I hope Smart Headset will be out soon to get
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bass is very dependent on the headphones. I just tried on a pair of Sony MDR-EX81 and the bass is thumpin!
Tip: If you really wanna splurge, try the Sony balanced armature series...
I'm really impressed with the audio quality on the xs. I came from a Samsung Galaxy s2 which is a truly awful mp3 player.
The only criticism I can find with the Sony is that the highs and percussion are often more pronounced than vocals, but having said that the highs are very detailed and defined, and a pleasure to listen to!
This is the best performing phone for audio I have owned. That includes the Iphone 3gs...
Hi!
Could anyone compare the sound coming from the backside speaker to the Iphone 4 speaker output (music without headset).
Cause coming from the X10i and comparing to Iphone of my wife, x10i has a miserable sound (small tweeter behind speakerhole at the left side), Iphone4 has a much richer base when playing back music without headset.
Reading that SXS is "on par" with my X10i in that aspect is really not what i hoped to hear ....
Greetings,
Bax
Baxxx said:
Hi!
Reading that SXS is "on par" with my X10i in that aspect is really not what i hoped to hear ....
Greetings,
Bax
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi
When I compare the built in speaker of my XPS with my old x10 mini pro, the x10 mini pro has a better sound, but with stock hearphones I think XPS is better.
chesterr said:
Wow man you're promoting Sony or something...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, I'm not promoting Sony. Unlike Appleheads, I am not a blind fan - every time I am buying a new device I research all products in the market, from all brands and makers. I have a (rather complex) set of comparison criteria and carefully score all available options. The fact that my last few phones happened to be Sony (Ericsson) is not brand loyalty, they just scored top marks according to my criteria. As a rationally-minded (stupid engineer) I can only compare facts and measurable parameters. 'Cool' factor, fashion trends and media hype are not among my criteria - otherwise I always gave Apple a chance in my shortlists.
Talking of audio, I cannot completely ignore the fact that among all phone makers Sony is the only one that has been making audio equipment for more than half a century, including high-quality HiFi systems and components. That includes a (very) deep vault of patents, but more important - a wealth of experience and expertise that no other phone maker has, and no 'think different' genius can easily replace.
Talking about cameras (sorry about straying off-topic for a moment) - apart from Samsung no other phone maker has any experience in making 'normal' cameras, and even they started much later and excel at the cheaper end. Sony have been making (photo) cameras longer and long before that they were making professional TV cameras used by every major broadcaster in the world. That counts for some (deep) understanding of electronic imaging that no one else has. In fact, Apple respect this and have chosen not to reinvent the steam engine, but have built a Sony camera in their phone. There can hardly be a higher recognition.
- - -
No 'Sony-heads' and blind fans here, just noticing objective facts and using my head, not my 'heart' (or other body parts).
To everyone in this forum (you must already have Sony phones, since you are here?) - and on topic: Enjoy the Sony sound, it's objectively better than others!
Sony actually include the package with livesound in malaysia .
The best bounded earphone i ever have inside phone box for the phone i brought .
Having moved from an iPhone 4 to the Xperia S I would say that the audio quality is ok but nothing special.
Listening through decent headphones (Klipsh Image X10s) the Xperia produces a good sound but I don't think it is as good as the iPhone. It is perfectly serviceable but the iPhone does a lot better in my view, especially with lossless files where you can really hear the difference on the iPhone and on the Xperia it is marginal at best compared to 320Kbps mp3.
I've no complaints about the Xperia and it beats the iPhone in most other respects but I think audio quality is an area where it could be improved.
I guess it comes down to the quality of the DACs used within it. Sony's audio experience may help but it cannot compensate for lower quality audio circuitry at the end of the day.
The output is also noticably louder on the iPhone and the Xperia may struggle to drive some headphones at a decent volume level. Its ok with mine but I find I am using 85% volume on the Xperia to get the same sound level as my iPhone running at around 70%.
Great phone though.
The sound quailty of the phones speaker is good.
The bundled headphones are poor.
The sound output via analogue is okay but not great.
The call quality is very good.
I moved from iphone 4 to xperia arc to samsung s2 to samsung note to xperia s.
Xperia arc's noise level is too high and both samsung s2 and note sounded too soft.
If lack of low frequency is not a concern to you, iphone obvious has a more open and detailed mid-range frequency reproduction (e.g. vocal voices). However, I still prefer XS for the more balanced sound.
output volume from XS is too low... hope it will be fixed by firmware upgrade.
anyway, XS is the best music player among all mobile phones i've ever had.
btw, I am using Shure 425 earphone and 840 headphone.
I don't think xs has good quality of sound indeed, I heard that there is a deficit for android or Qualcomm chips dealing with 48k (or 44.1k sound ). I am not sure about it but the default music player does improve music quality a lot.
Sent from my LT26i
Seeing as I'm a big music fan, a major bullet point on the SIII vs the E4GLTE is sound quality. I know the SIII has the wolfson DAC which is supposed to be pretty damn killer (if it makes it to the Sprint version), but what about the Evo? I know they have that pos beats audio global EQ, but how's the DAC itself? And is there anything special for it like supercurio's voodoo sound?
Thanks
And I'm pairing em to Ultrasone DJ1 Pro headphones, so I will hear the difference.
I'm also pretty curous about this.
So far all I've gathered is that the international One X didn't have great sound quality but the One S had great sound quality. Slightly better than the iPhone4s according to a GSMarena review.
(gsmarena.com/htc_one_x-review-747p5.php)
So I was curious how the US variants would work.
I've read random forum posts that claim the DAC is built into the SoC of the phones. The AT&T One X and the EVO 4G LTE are using the S4 snapdragon which is what the One S was tested with.
So hopefully the sound quality on these phones will rival that of the One S and not the international One X.
But all of this is based on speculation of other posters...
I'd imagine a sound review of the AT&T One X would be a solid comparison to how the EVO 4G LTE will sound but I have yet to find a detailed review of such performance.
sinfiery said:
So far all I've gathered is that the international One X didn't have great sound quality but the One S had great sound quality. Slightly better than the iPhone4s according to a GSMarena review.
(gsmarena.com/htc_one_x-review-747p5.php)
So I was curious how the US variants would work.
I've read random forum posts that claim the DAC is built into the SoC of the phones. The AT&T One X and the EVO 4G LTE are using the S4 snapdragon which is what the One S was tested with.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
.011 THD on the One S can't touch the 4S's .0068, but it's still impressive and probably negligible. If the DAC's are built into the SoC, then the Sprint SIII will probably share the same DAC, since this claims the SIII will have the S4 because of the Exynos doesn't have native LTE support. So maybe slightly different implementations between the two?
The difference between the two for me is slowly coming down to screen, and internal memory. Cause if the DAC awesome, I'll probably grab the 64GB SIII then cram in a 64GB SDXC so I can load in straight FLAC's.
Caladbolg said:
.011 THD on the One S can't touch the 4S's .0068, but it's still impressive and probably negligible. If the DAC's are built into the SoC, then the Sprint SIII will probably share the same DAC, since //theandroidsoul.com/sprint-galaxy-s3-specification-mined-out-before-official-announcement-its-the-return-of-the-qualcomm-s4-processor/"]this claims the SII will have the S4[/URL] because of the Exynos doesn't have native LTE support. So maybe slightly different implementations between the two?
The difference between the two for me is slowly coming down to screen, and internal memory. Cause if the DAC awesome, I'll probably grab the 64GB SIII then cram in a 64GB SDXC so I can load in straight FLAC's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what I read from one random forum thread while I was researching this, but I have yet to find any true confirmation so take that information with a grain of salt.
But yeah, Sprint's SGS3 would most likely have the same SoC and presumably the same DAC for that reason.
From a thread on here, you should be able to use a 64GB SDXC with the EVO too. The only difference would be the 48GB internal difference, but I assume you might end up paying anywhere from $100-175 more for those variants.
From what I've read, screens comes down to personal preference. The SGS3 is pentile, but for real world use, word is that would be largely irrelevant.
Do you prefer AMOLED or SLCD2? Depends on the person.
The biggest factor for me is that this phone can be in my hands in 13 days, and the SGS3 hasn't even been announced for any US retailer. Hard to compare it to a phone that is potentially months away.
Edit:
(Cant post links yet)
forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=25852281&postcount=45
Back to square 1..
As it stands, Samsung said June for the LTE variant.
For the screen though, it doesn't really matter to me, though I read AMOLED uses far less power than SLCD except with full white screens.
Caladbolg said:
As it stands, Samsung said June for the LTE variant.
For the screen though, it doesn't really matter to me, though I read AMOLED uses far less power than SLCD except with full white screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed
Battery life should be better if watching movies for the S3, if browsing the web for the EVO.
Also:
forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=25852281&postcount=45
Back to square 1.
But as you said, it has been confirmed the SGS3 will have great a great DAC so that's a start..
It would be nice if the thing has decent ear piece loudness without having to use a hacked kernel to boost it.
My question is with the audio jack. When I plugged in my EVO to the car, I could hear a high pitched squeel in the background.
An iPod did not do the same thing. It was crystal clear, which leads me to believe it was a generic audio jack.
Anyone have any news regarding this?
mcwups1 said:
My question is with the audio jack. When I plugged in my EVO to the car, I could hear a high pitched squeel in the background.
An iPod did not do the same thing. It was crystal clear, which leads me to believe it was a generic audio jack.
Anyone have any news regarding this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See, now I always thought it was my new amp that was causing it. Wish I could check and see if it was just the OG Evo, but my head unit is fried.
mcwups1 said:
My question is with the audio jack. When I plugged in my EVO to the car, I could hear a high pitched squeel in the background.
An iPod did not do the same thing. It was crystal clear, which leads me to believe it was a generic audio jack.
Anyone have any news regarding this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Generally a squeal in the background, is feedback from the alternator. (Not always) But if you can accel/rev the engine, the frequency should change - proving it is indeed from the alt. You can add an in-line filter for such noise, the iPod may filter that on its own - I have no idea, dont use one.
Traceamount said:
Generally a squeal in the background, is feedback from the alternator. (Not always) But if you can accel/rev the engine, the frequency should change - proving it is indeed from the alt. You can add an in-line filter for such noise, the iPod may filter that on its own - I have no idea, dont use one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting information for sure.
How about Bluetooth a2dp audio quality? Sense 3.x is pretty bad, does the evolte/sense 4 fix the low bit pool/rate?
mcwups1 said:
Interesting information for sure.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ground feedback loops are a common issue for aftermarket stereos, but damn well shouldn't happen with a stock radio. Could be the Evo, might not.
Caladbolg said:
Ground feedback loops are a common issue for aftermarket stereos, but damn well shouldn't happen with a stock radio. Could be the Evo, might not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't hurt to have clean grounds. I used to have terrible feedback on am stations, I cut all my grounds, used a sanding disk on a angle grinder to clean up the metal, tossed on new ends and never had a problem since.
Saneless One said:
How about Bluetooth a2dp audio quality? Sense 3.x is pretty bad, does the evolte/sense 4 fix the low bit pool/rate?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BT should be fine, as far as I'm aware this has BT 4.0 and Apt-X codec support like the One X/S. Bluetooth 4.0 gives you higher audio bandwidth over bluetooth and Apt-X gives you lossless BT audio up to ~370kbps for stereo sound according to the developers at CSR. In blind A/B testing with my international One X via a wired connection and the Samsung HS3000 they sound the same to me for 320kbps mp3, and slightly worse for FLAC encoded files which were unlistenable on earlier BT versions).
Hi Xperia users!
I've been doing some basic research into which of the 2012 Xperias have the best audio quality, as tested on sites such as
http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_xperia_sola-review-766p5.php
The tests that this site does focuses on: Frequency response, Noise level , Dynamic range, THD and IMD Noise and stereo crosstalk.
I've tried pasting results here but it becomes a mess. If you have one of these phones already, you can click on your phone from here: http://www.gsmarena.com/sony-phones-7.php
and click on skip to review of music player to find out how your phone performs. From what I can see, Sony's 2012 phones on the whole, don't compare well. The audio output through the speaker is generally excellent, but through the earphones there is a significant drop in quality across the board. If you look through the results, you can compare a phone with almost anything you like, but I focussed on the Xperia S, Arc and all the Apple iPhones and the latest iPod classic. A key element in performance seems to be not performing well in just one area, but across all of them, which the reviewers from the site claim is what makes Apple products the best in the business.
Any comments? Any notes?
I'm in the market for a newer Xperia, but unfortunately, I'm not sure there is a good iPod replacement in this list. The more mid-range Go beats the S and Sola high end phones. I would love to hear Sony's reasoning for this. Also, one of my 2011 phones, while not expensive, beats all of the 2012 phones according to these tests which I don't understand. Any guidance or perspective? I really appreciate the results of tests like these which overcome human bias and subjectivity with terribly overused words such as 'crisp' and 'clear sound' etc. but on the other hand, I realise that numbers in a test don't indicate audio pleasure...so personal and practical use is relevant. :victory:
Are these results reliable do you think? Anything else to consider?
XS: the DAC (think 'soundcard') is great, the headphones themselves are ****ty. Get something better and you'll have really nice sound.
i am also interested in this. i am planning to but Xperia S in saturday but have my worries about the sound quality. its using the same sound chip with sensation xe and the sensation. i can tell that from the frequency graph of them all. they all have same vibrating between 1K 10K.. but when i look at the dynamic range (the ability of pruducing the most differet notes at the same time) and the noise level (basicly the loudness without losing the clearity) are worse than sensation brothers. we can adjust them easily with software (because the difference is something like %1).
but the most important part is the distortions. i mean you can listen your music with %1-2 less volume but no one would want to listen any distorted sound. sony seems like doing better on the IMD+ values but the most important is Total Harmonic distortion and it is very high on the xperia S. however, by looking at the positive values of the sensation XE i believe this problem can be sorted out with software too..
in real life? with a lossless music or comparison sound file we can feel the difference by listening to both an ipod and sony xperia s with the same earphones. and luckily we can change our sound chip software by flashing new mods. and we also can use cyanogenmod which enchances the sound capabilities of many devices.
so there is no way of measuring what we can do with a fully sound tweaked sony device (maybe we can ask gsmarena to run their regular test on a tweaked sony device) but there is room for development in sound department too for sure
That's a really interesting point about tweaking devices. I'm not totally sure I can rely on it though - my last Xperia phone had great audio tweaks but on my latest Xperia phone, all of the audio mods that I've tried detracted from quality, not added so I uses stock audio options.
Good to see someone else in the market for a new phone on the same line of thought as me. I was almost definitely going to get the Xperia Sola but the audio tests on that site indicate it is WEAK with audio! Other phones like the GO which are not marketed as multimedia devices have much, much better results. I cannot buy the Sola if the audio is that bad.
I was going to ask can there be any compromise on the performance indicated; there were around 5 criteria tested, would you buy a phone that ranked poorly on one of them, two of them?
K900 said:
XS: the DAC (think 'soundcard') is great, the headphones themselves are ****ty. Get something better and you'll have really nice sound.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have the Xperia S?
This is the first thing that i felt when i moved from Lg Optimus Black to Sony Xperia S: a drop in sound quality. I use a Koss Porta Pro in everyday listening.
I think the Xperia S has excellent sound quality. To give you some context, I used to own a Creative Zen Vision:M MP3 player, which sounded better than all the iPods and iPhones I compared it with (up to iPhone 4). I wasn't expecting my Xperia S to replace the Zen, but to my surprise it actually sounded better to my ears. The general frequency response is a bit flatter and it's a lot clearer.
I also compared it with a Cowon Z2 (which many people believe to be the best-sounding MP3 player out there) and there was very little difference. Believe me, the Xperia S is a very good music player indeed. The review on the site you posted said it: "A solid overall performance, which should please anyone but the most demanding audiophiles."
As the review states, the only limitation is a bit of distortion at higher volumes, but we're talking deafening volumes here. There's also a way around it, if you're really serious: a portable headphone amp (I use a cheap but very good Fiio E6), enables you to take the clean lower-volume signal from your phone and amplify it cleanly through your headphones. However, I can assure you it sounds fine without an amplifier.
That is very interesting ^^
I was hoping there might be people who take the holistic view too; looking at the stats but also just listening to what your ears tell you. I'm truly open to these ideas. I was particularly looking at the Sola, but of all the 2012 phones it's stats are the worst. Is that really something to worry about? That info. on the S really changes things...:fingers-crossed:
p.s. I found another site that does these tests. Some of the results differ a little, I guess different testing equipment and earphones. There are 3 very different results for the iPod 6th gen. With that kind of variance, maybe the results for the 2012 Xperias is one snapshot - and not definitive?? For anyone interested,
here's the list of devices tested: (no Xperias unfortunately) http://www.markuskraus.com/RMAA/rmaa complete - html.html
Here is the 6th gen iPod Classic: http://www.markuskraus.com/RMAA/iPodClassicFiiOE1/data.htm
The iPhone 4S: http://www.markuskraus.com/RMAA/iphone4s/data.htm
Also, on this site: http://macintoshhowto.com/itunes/which-ipod-has-the-best-audio-quality.html they keep talking about the audio chip used in devices. They mention that certain iPhones and Galaxies use the Wolfson audio chip, which seems to very highly regarded.
Here is a great article on smartphone audio, audio chips and stats comparison: http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...ne-x-isnt-amazing-at-all-even-by-the-numbers/
SharpnShiny said:
That is very interesting ^^
I was hoping there might be people who take the holistic view too; looking at the stats but also just listening to what your ears tell you. I'm truly open to these ideas. I was particularly looking at the Sola, but of all the 2012 phones it's stats are the worst. Is that really something to worry about? That info. on the S really changes things...:fingers-crossed:
p.s. I found another site that does these tests. Some of the results differ a little, I guess different testing equipment and earphones. There are 3 very different results for the iPod 6th gen. With that kind of variance, maybe the results for the 2012 Xperias is one snapshot - and not definitive?? For anyone interested,
here's the list of devices tested: (no Xperias unfortunately) http://www.markuskraus.com/RMAA/rmaa complete - html.html
Here is the 6th gen iPod Classic: http://www.markuskraus.com/RMAA/iPodClassicFiiOE1/data.htm
The iPhone 4S: http://www.markuskraus.com/RMAA/iphone4s/data.htm
Also, on this site: http://macintoshhowto.com/itunes/which-ipod-has-the-best-audio-quality.html they keep talking about the audio chip used in devices. They mention that certain iPhones and Galaxies use the Wolfson audio chip, which seems to very highly regarded.
Here is a great article on smartphone audio, audio chips and stats comparison: http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...ne-x-isnt-amazing-at-all-even-by-the-numbers/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just get the Sola, then get the Wireless Bluetooth Pro Sony headphones which have the new Wofson decoder which is about the best mobile decoder around. I have done that and it is great. Best of both worlds.
mrsatan said:
Just get the Sola, then get the Wireless Bluetooth Pro Sony headphones which have the new Wofson decoder which is about the best mobile decoder around. I have done that and it is great. Best of both worlds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I only seen the promo yesterday, she is a sexy beast! :highfive:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVS36ggZz1o
hey,
just trust your ears, don't see bad or good depend on testing etc...
i have xperia s, arc, w995, aino, iPod nano 4
the best sound quality for me is
1.W995 (but lack of FLAC)
2. XS (can play FLAC)
3.Aino
4. Arc
5.iPod. ipod sounds great, but after i used itu 2 years, becomes crap sound (don't know why) maybe bad capacitor?
i used FLAC or WAV in my phone (85%)
Which phone do you have now? FLAC eeh? That must burn up the battery! Do you still have an iPod now too? Which one? The iPod I'm using now is the 6th generation Classic. I'll almost definitely have a new phone next week.
SharpnShiny said:
Which phone do you have now? FLAC eeh? That must burn up the battery! Do you still have an iPod now too? Which one? The iPod I'm using now is the 6th generation Classic. I'll almost definitely have a new phone next week.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
how can one get better once one've had the best? lol.. imo, FLAC is the best audio compression right now the battery drain isnt that much.. but the quality of the audio, is that much .. remember when talking bout audio, it's "garbage in, garbage out.."
and yeah, just trust your ears, and dont forget that synergy made better sound than all that graphs and frequency.. and what i meant in synergy is the hardware (dac, dsp, etc), the software (in sxs: walkman and its sound enhancement ), and of course the output (earphone, headphone, speaker, etc)
i did a quick test in flac-listening in SXS (unknown dac , walkman) and SGS3 (the so called wolfson dac, stock audio player), with Yuin PK3 (imho, a decent earphone), and i found out that SXS did sound better. well, i've seen there are mods for sgs3's audio, but didnt try them, both phone are at default (in terms of audio )
m1st3r1 said:
how can one get better once one've had the best? lol.. imo, FLAC is the best audio compression right now the battery drain isnt that much.. but the quality of the audio, is that much .. remember when talking bout audio, it's "garbage in, garbage out.."
and yeah, just trust your ears, and dont forget that synergy made better sound than all that graphs and frequency.. and what i meant in synergy is the hardware (dac, dsp, etc), the software (in sxs: walkman and its sound enhancement ), and of course the output (earphone, headphone, speaker, etc)
i did a quick test in flac-listening in SXS (unknown dac , walkman) and SGS3 (the so called wolfson dac, stock audio player), with Yuin PK3 (imho, a decent earphone), and i found out that SXS did sound better. well, i've seen there are mods for sgs3's audio, but didnt try them, both phone are at default (in terms of audio )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its many Sony's software and optimizations that make it sound good. Wolfson is the best DAC when tested, while Sony uses a run of the mill snapdragon DAC. Just goes to show Sony knows sound.
FLAC actually doesn't drain more battery because it uses less calculations to decode.
K900 said:
FLAC actually doesn't drain more battery because it uses less calculations to decode.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think we should not consider "compressed" music files like zip or rar files. because they are compressed in an unusable way and needed to be unzipped to become usable again and once they are uncompressed there is no loss in the actual data. so in order to be able to use (listen/watch/execute) a compressed data you need to make lots of procceses through CPU.
however that is not the case in the compressed audio. when compressing a lossless (just recorded the way it was played in real life) audio the codec (or whatever it is that has the alghoritm to compress) listens and analysis the audio and decides which sound to combine. for example; imagine 3 different waves are present at the same time and the alghoritm creates a 4th wave which has the very similar sound of those 3 played at the same time and it records that 4th one only instead of the first 3. and there are some certain signals that give the impression of surrounding when applied to human ear. finally the alghoritm writes these signals on to the "simulated" waves.
so, basically when we listen an mp3 or any other compressed audio we have the impression of hearing everything but actually we hear a replicated sound which is very very much similar to the total amount of the original sounds for the human ear.
since both FLAC and the mp3 formats are both read only and there is no real time compressing and uncompressing every time the, load on the CPU (or the DAC) should be measured by the "waves" or "codes" that needed to be read. according to this we can say there is much more signal to read and convert to analog in FLAC files..
_delice_doluca_ said:
i think we should not consider "compressed" music files like zip or rar files. because they are compressed in an unusable way and needed to be unzipped to become usable again and once they are uncompressed there is no loss in the actual data. so in order to be able to use (listen/watch/execute) a compressed data you need to make lots of procceses through CPU.
however that is not the case in the compressed audio. when compressing a lossless (just recorded the way it was played in real life) audio the codec (or whatever it is that has the alghoritm to compress) listens and analysis the audio and decides which sound to combine. for example; imagine 3 different waves are present at the same time and the alghoritm creates a 4th wave which has the very similar sound of those 3 played at the same time and it records that 4th one only instead of the first 3. and there are some certain signals that give the impression of surrounding when applied to human ear. finally the alghoritm writes these signals on to the "simulated" waves.
so, basically when we listen an mp3 or any other compressed audio we have the impression of hearing everything but actually we hear a replicated sound which is very very much similar to the total amount of the original sounds for the human ear.
since both FLAC and the mp3 formats are both read only and there is no real time compressing and uncompressing every time the, load on the CPU (or the DAC) should be measured by the "waves" or "codes" that needed to be read. according to this we can say there is much more signal to read and convert to analog in FLAC files..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know how it works. Yet, due to specifics of the implementation, FLAC is faster to decode in the specific case of Android.
Ok.. after reading this thread, I decided to compare the audio quality of my SXS with my good old Samsung wave (having wolfson DAC), and my cousin's ipod nano. I am no audiophile here, but to my ear the SXS sounds the best with wave & ipod definitely sounding louder (but bit harsher). I used the default music players and philips shp 2700 to compare them. Tbh my eyes (wrt camera output) n ears (wrt sound quality) really don't go along with the gsmarena test results! Thats just my opinion.
BTW, has anyone tested the auido quality through bluetooth? since i ll be using it with my cars bluetooth i wonder if i ll get any problems with the audio quality or the bluetooth itself..
Dpk1 said:
Ok.. after reading this thread, I decided to compare the audio quality of my SXS with my good old Samsung wave (having wolfson DAC), and my cousin's ipod nano. I am no audiophile here, but to my ear the SXS sounds the best with wave & ipod definitely sounding louder (but bit harsher). I used the default music players and philips shp 2700 to compare them. Tbh my eyes (wrt camera output) n ears (wrt sound quality) really don't go along with the gsmarena test results! Thats just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for sharing your results! I was beginning to wonder which devices everyone has here, we could mention which you think works best for you and run with it.
I've been using and testing music on various Xperias and iPods over the last few years. My nanos beat my classic and yet my 2011 Xperia has clearer sound with less hissing, especially at higher volume.
As I've been exploring on another thread, to get the best out of your Xperia on Android, it seems we need better class SD cards (I'm now looking at only class 10) to overcome the longer 'distance' that the data has to travel (computer, cable, phone, SD vs iPod 'distance' of computer, cable, iPod) and such an SD would boost transfer speed of course. I want to get each piece right; quality of audio on phone, better SD and perhaps cable and better earphones.
Hi guys,
I have been looking all over the Internet for the audio specs of the Z... with no luck.
Does anyone knows which DAC is used in the Z?
or if Hi-Res audio is supported, or which level?
Last, if APTX is also supported?
This is keeping me from getting one, as my Z3 is slowly dying, and I would like to keep a good sound quality.
Thanks in advance.
Joe
If you look at the Pocketnow review, they show that the signal to noise ratio/harmonic distortion of the Moto Z is about equal to the LG V10 (and slightly better than GS7 and G5). Unfortunately, I don't think Moto is supporting aptx anymore on its phones (possibly not for a couple years now?).
And if you think you need "hi-res" (a marketing term) audio, then go read Monty Montgomery's articles and watch his media primer videos until you figure out why you don't. (Sorry, I can't link)
Alright so far this device have been undoubtedly the most perfect for it's price, however it's still has some parts that need upgrading, and one of those sections is the audio recording (and camera, although they made huge advancing from the axon pro and the camera is pretty awesome, but if they started with the right sensor, the axon would be the best cameraphone)
I convinced myself that manufacturers don't even care about audio recording DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEY ADVERTISE THEIR DEVICES AS HIFI DEVICES
I mean only the v20 is doing great on that section, 24 bit 192khz FLAC omni-dimensional audio recording with audio recorder app that has features like audio focus and 24bit 96khz lpcm for videos but at the cost of 700-800 dollars for a new one, it is far from what people like me consider for a smartphone.
As for the rest, it's a disaster, lg v10?? it records 44kbps (YES because that's what hifi sounds like, perfect sampling rate! bravo! ironically it records better with video with a samplingrate of 156kbps max and has audio focus) I don't know about other hifi devices, my axon 7 records 352kbps pcm when you set it to WAV (which is the only available setting there, lol), that's.... just ok, still way behind the v20.
Let's get to the spicypart, video recording, your device can record 352kbps pcm but you choose to put a cheapo codec that doesn't support that, instead it is 96kbps, even worse, when you try cinemafv5 you'll find that it can record 156kbps with AAC-LC, that's fine, but the output would be MONO!!!
Wth was zte thinking when they did this?? seriously? why you give me 156kbps...but make it mono, why??
Please note that I'm not saying axon 7 recording is bad (although some people here who tested htc 10 would say due to bass clipping issues, whatever) but it could've been miles better!
for that price I am still convinced that recording is good, but if ZTE happen to make another Axon, they better take care of that.
NOW let's move on to my most important critic from this post:
there are 2 cases to this situation
Case1:
ALL OF WHAT HAVE BEEN SAID WAS A STORY, AND ZTE ADVERTISING WAS ANOTHER WHOLE STORY! ZTE FALSE-ADVERTISED THE AXON 7!!
As you can see from the picture below Zte advertised their device can record "32 bit depth with 96khz sampling frequency" which is not the 44.1khz sampling frequency and the 16 bit 352kbps sample rate, Just compare it to the upper statements of vidoe and audio, I'd definitely call that false advertising , if there is one thing I hate it is false advertising and it's unforgivable, even for a great quality product like the Axon 7 I am rolling my eyes at what Zte have done, first was the battery capacity (although battery life is great) then this!? Audio?? it's the reason I bought it in the first place, do they realize that they can get sued for false advertising?
Case2:
MAYBE the Axon 7 can actually record like that but lacks the codes to do it, like how it turned out that aptx-hd can be ported in this forum, so can we get a genius dev who can figure it out (for both video and standalone recorder) with a codec or something??! any volunteers?
Let's hope we get a response from ZTE officials to clarify if Axon 7 meets what they advertised or not.
I guess you don't want to hear that the sound output is truncated to 16 bit no matter what you play. I have no idea if that's just the music app which does that (the only app which I know definitely uses the Hi-Fi DAC despite other claims here), or if it's somewhere in the firmware. I contacted PocketNow (since they pointed it out) through several mediums to ask and I never got a response. Real professional.
Cyrus D. said:
I guess you don't want to hear that the sound output is truncated to 16 bit no matter what you play. I have no idea if that's just the music app which does that (the only app which I know definitely uses the Hi-Fi DAC despite other claims here), or if it's somewhere in the firmware. I contacted PocketNow (since they pointed it out) through several mediums to ask and I never got a response. Real professional.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely not, I disagree, there is something called the quantization noise and it would be present for higher bit depth as it is for lower bit depth, secondly, no, it uses the dac on most music players (hence switching between standard and super audio quality gives the same factor on most music players like poweramp, and super audio quality option gives equal output on poweramp to my trained ears, otherwise the difference would be obvious)
Over the past months I've seen a lot of clueless people who claim "my hifi device only uses the dac on the stock music player and snapdragon dac for others" all over xda, and same for the axon 7 we see these people on ztecommunity, just because the v10 did with lollipop the past year, on the v10 people could figure that out due to them instantly observing the difference, but if there is no difference, why you have to create one? maybe because people disliked the device (which is subjective).
EDIT: Ok you're partially right, I figured that ages ago when I used neutron, what they meant is the speaker output, for some reason it is limited to 16 bit 44.1Khz, FOR SOME REASON, yes thanks I wanted to point that out, it is kinda forgivable due to small speakers, we are talking about a smartphone speaker lol
.but with headphones the dac works perfectly
I'm not sure if you misread what I wrote or if I don't understand what you're saying. The first part has nothing to disagree with. It has been tested and for a fact sound output is truncated to 16 bit.
PowerAmp 100% does NOT use the AKM DAC. Selecting 24 bit output on that uses the SD 820's DAC, which contrary to what some people here believe, is not magically missing from the SoC. It's there. Not to mention it sounds distinctly different (worse) than the AKM DAC. You can go to the PowerAmp forum and ask the creator himself and he'll tell you it doesn't make use of the AKM DAC. Or you know, you could use your ears. It clearly sounds different, if you can't tell then you're using poor headphones or have some level of hearing impairment (which is natural with age).
Overall I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say, you need to fix your post, I'm assuming English is not your first language.
Cyrus D. said:
I'm not sure if you misread what I wrote or if I don't understand what you're saying. The first part has nothing to disagree with. It has been tested and for a fact sound output is truncated to 16 bit.
PowerAmp 100% does NOT use the AKM DAC. Selecting 24 bit output on that uses the SD 820's DAC, which contrary to what some people here believe, is not magically missing from the SoC. It's there. Not to mention it sounds distinctly different (worse) than the AKM DAC. You can go to the PowerAmp forum and ask the creator himself and he'll tell you it doesn't make use of the AKM DAC. Or you know, you could use your ears. It clearly sounds different, if you can't tell then you're using poor headphones or have some level of hearing impairment (which is natural with age).
Overall I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say, you need to fix your post, I'm assuming English is not your first language.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No offense but I'd like to point out that you're so misinformed about : Axon 7 and audio in general.
I just watched the whole video of Pocketnow, there was no method to confirm that it was truncated, he only showed the frequency spectrum, please read on bit depth here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_bit_depth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(signal_processing)
the human ears can hear up to 22hz, thus manufacturers cap their headphones lower than 22khz to limit the rest which is noise most of the time, it's called ultrasonic filtering. bit depth has nothing to do with the frequency spectrum, instead it's about data, number of values to be exact, referred as resolution sometimes. infact sampling frequency does effect the frequency response but that's not even what sampling frequency is all about, for example the device can have an ultrasonic filter while still having high resolution audio setup. modern headphones still do it actually. long story short: sampling frequency and bit depth have 0 things to do with the bandwidth/frequency range.
"Poweramp does not" I am not sure what poweramp does, what you're referring too was an issue of 701 alpha, if you download this version on a dac-fixed lg v10 (lg v10 lollipop with dac fix app or simply lg v10 running mm) it would show the same thing, that it uses "Variant: 24 bit snapdragon" my friend tested that out himself.
the newer alphas have options for the output showing the sampling frequency only. I don't use poweramp tbh and I don't know why people pick poweramp over Neutron which has freescale EQ.
As for high res support for poweramp, this might be true, I guess.
As a guy who performed abx, yes, the super quality switch still works, meaning the dac is working.
"Overall I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say, you need to fix your post, I'm assuming English is not your first language"
even though I didn't make such crude mistakes as you mentioned, this was very irrelevant considering that you tried to dismantle each point I mentioned, I was just helping. I'd say that was a bit rude.
Sebastian Fox said:
No offense but I'd like to point out that you're so misinformed about : Axon 7 and audio in general.
I just watched the whole video of Pocketnow, there was no method to confirm that it was truncated, he only showed the frequency spectrum, please read on bit depth here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_bit_depth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(signal_processing)
the human ears can hear up to 22hz, thus manufacturers cap their headphones lower than 22khz to limit the rest which is noise most of the time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They quite literally said in that video that it's truncated to 16 bits, their exact words, whether or not they're wrong, and they're not clowns to have the sound output limited by headphones. I seriously doubt they recorded the sound coming out of headphones for the test. Even if they did, most headphones go well past human hearing. And for the record almost no one, except for very few extremely young children, can hear up to 22KHz. Most people by their 20s can't hear past 17-18KHz, less if they've been to concerts which are dangerously loud or worked in loud environments. I've been careful with my hearing and I hear almost nothing past 18KHz.
Sebastian Fox said:
As a guy who performed abx, yes, the super quality switch still works, meaning the dac is working.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know what you mean by this. ABX? But PowerAmp, even in the latest alpha, is most definitely not using the AKM DAC. It sounds very different. Are you sure this Neutron player is using the DAC?
Sorry to break in, but I'm pretty sure that the latest beta of Poweramp actually used the DAC on marshmallow. I own an A2017G and I think I could get 192KHz on B05.
Now I'm on 7.0 and i can't get past 48 kHz. Where does it say which DAC is in use? (the Variant: Snapdragon thing)
EDIT: ignore everything said before, after long investigation and flashing, the stock firmware plays HIFI correctly, Using audio_flinger to check, the resolution was correct, however with a custom ROM it gets harder.
As for Pocketnow spectrum analysis, it makes no sense at all since audio_flinger doesn't lie, and all audio players are pointing that our device can play 192khz without downsampling with the Dac patch.
Choose an username... said:
Sorry to break in, but I'm pretty sure that the latest beta of Poweramp actually used the DAC on marshmallow. I own an A2017G and I think I could get 192KHz on B05.
Now I'm on 7.0 and i can't get past 48 kHz. Where does it say which DAC is in use? (the Variant: Snapdragon thing)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It wasn't our device, max simply didn't make poweramp support our audio libs.
As for neutron, it's working fine
Same for usb audio player pro
And bothnare imo way better than poweramp.
Ghostface009 said:
It wasn't our device, max simply didn't make poweramp support our audio libs.
As for neutron, it's working fine
Same for usb audio player pro
And bothnare imo way better than poweramp.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
huge bump lol. Well since the new beta it works with 192KHz and all. (i have to add, proven with media.audio_flinger). And honestly I believe Poweramp's sound engine is way superior to Neutron's, but you know, that's just opinion
Choose an username... said:
huge bump lol. Well since the new beta it works with 192KHz and all. (i have to add, proven with media.audio_flinger). And honestly I believe Poweramp's sound engine is way superior to Neutron's, but you know, that's just opinion
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe, you need to consider neutron despite it's ugly ui, that thing has freescale eq, low latency settings and amazing dither, with dither neutron sounded better than poweramp and usb audio pro imo.
Ghostface009 said:
Maybe, you need to consider neutron despite it's ugly ui, that thing has freescale eq, low latency settings and amazing dither, with dither neutron sounded better than poweramp and usb audio pro imo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well, you said it: imo.