Nice audio test on the BBC

9designs2 · 24 Sep 2010 at 18:23

Well time for people to throw away their iPod dock.....

Heck, I think they even did it as a double blind test !!!!

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/working_lunch/8351921.stm

alx · 24 Sep 2010 at 18:57

It's not really fair seeing as the ipod is using compressed audio and cd well...doesn't!!!

I'm not saying ipod docks have amazing speakers (they don't generally) but at least if you're going to test old and new equipment use the same audio source...

Westyfield2 · 24 Sep 2010 at 19:05

Separates system wins - No surprises there then!

manbearpig · 24 Sep 2010 at 19:06

sh4rk said:
It's not really fair seeing as the ipod is using compressed audio and cd well...doesn't!!!

I'm not saying ipod docks have amazing speakers (they don't generally) but at least if you're going to test old and new equipment use the same audio source...

Thats far too complicated for the BBC

snow patrol · 24 Sep 2010 at 19:55

i use a dock which cost 50 quid. I basically do it because i'm not an audiophile, it's very convenient and can be easily carried from room to room. It sounds pretty good to my ears and is nice and loud as well. Obviously a separate system is going to sound better but i think most people these days would consider it overkill. Especially in the compressed mp3 generation that we live in!!

9designs2 · 24 Sep 2010 at 19:58

sh4rk said:
It's not really fair seeing as the ipod is using compressed audio and cd well...doesn't!!!

I'm not saying ipod docks have amazing speakers (they don't generally) but at least if you're going to test old and new equipment use the same audio source...

Actually it would have little to do with compressed music, unless they used the lowest level. People often hide behind that excuse, when in reality it's the electronics and the speakers that are the bigger weakness.
In most cases the equipment isn't good enough to reveal the difference in compression levels.

You an can play mp3's on my streaming system and get very good sound.....
An excellent example of compressed music can be heard on the Linn radio streaming service, 24bit/44.1Khz 320K mp3 stream..... sounds excellent.

9designs2 · 24 Sep 2010 at 20:00

snow patrol said:
i use a dock which cost 50 quid. I basically do it because i'm not an audiophile, it's very convenient and can be easily carried from room to room. It sounds pretty good to my ears and is nice and loud as well. Obviously a separate system is going to sound better but i think most people these days would consider it overkill. Especially in the compressed mp3 generation that we live in!!

Then I think people should give up listening to music !!!!.......
The point of music is to enjoy it, and be emotionally moved and satisfied, not just have some "noise" polluting our lives..... mini rant over

Amp34 · 25 Sep 2010 at 13:25

Yeah, well some people just love loud... Louder the better and the more base the better...

I don't, I'd rather hear the song properly, including a nice bit of bass if the music is supposed to have it. Quiet or loud, it shouldn't matter though.

thepeganator · 25 Sep 2010 at 13:36

Interesting test, especially considering you could replace the CD player by an iPod and a 3.5mm-RCA connector.

Slogan · 25 Sep 2010 at 14:15

Option B sort of removes the convenience part for the customer, although the fact it sounds better is hardly surprising.

MagicBoy · 25 Sep 2010 at 14:23

I can see the point, however it would be a fairer test if the iPod was also connected to ye olde separates.

One of the lads at work asked me for a recommendation for an iPod Dock earlier in the week for his new iPhone 4. I told him to buy an Apple dock and a proper stereo. Said he tried that and the Mrs veto'd the idea. On the upside she wants a Zepplin rather than a £50 Argos special.

Bloody WAF!

Marsman · 25 Sep 2010 at 14:38

These docks have their place, but to spend £150 on one as a non portable music system, is silly, given that the same money will buy a decent amp and speakers to which the iPod can be connected. Source may not be as good as a CD player, but the amp and speakers will be far superior, and wont strain when the volume is cranked up like tiny little speakers will.

A £50 one, maybe as a more portable consideration is good enough.

Funny isn't it, some people want awesomely big TV's with amazing picture quality to enjoy their HD films on, yet they go and buy some cheap speaker system for their music. They would not put up with an average TV, for their Blu-ray movie watching, why put up with average speaker system for music?

9designs2 · 26 Sep 2010 at 00:53

Marsman said:
Funny isn't it, some people want awesomely big TV's with amazing picture quality to enjoy their HD films on, yet they go and buy some cheap speaker system for their music. They would not put up with an average TV, for their Blu-ray movie watching, why put up with average speaker system for music?

Exactly, .................because people are easily lead by marketing !?!?!

Bubba · 26 Sep 2010 at 12:26

Thats a pretty good seperates system, is that an old nad 3020 amp I see, a pretty awesome amp even by todays standards, I dont think anyone should be suprised that the old seperates system was better than the ipod dock.

And comparing 2nd hand to new? Not really fair either, pretty stupid test all round.

Im not really sure what they are comparing either, is it old technology vs new? 2nd hand vs new? MP3 vs CD? All in one vs seperates?

9designs2 · 26 Sep 2010 at 18:17

Bubba said:
Thats a pretty good seperates system, is that an old nad 3020 amp I see, a pretty awesome amp even by todays standards, I dont think anyone should be suprised that the old seperates system was better than the ipod dock.

And comparing 2nd hand to new? Not really fair either, pretty stupid test all round.

Im not really sure what they are comparing either, is it old technology vs new? 2nd hand vs new? MP3 vs CD? All in one vs seperates?

Well go watch it again, the point their making is in the first 35 seconds.

Yes it is a NAD 3020, it's not awesome today, nor was it ever, what it was, was a very good BUDGET amp, the 1st step on the ladder to "proper" Hi-Fi. The CD player is very average/poor, they all were at they era, and the speakers ok, nothing amazing....... Which kind of puts even more into context how bad the dock must have sounded to those people....

So the question is why do people listen to music ?

BF-Bert · 26 Sep 2010 at 19:07

I agree with the point they are trying to put across but by the same token a second hand separates system would beat a brand new separates system. Would have been better if they'd used the ipod as the source in both systems.

Marsman · 26 Sep 2010 at 23:45

BF-Bert said:
I agree with the point they are trying to put across but by the same token a second hand separates system would beat a brand new separates system. Would have been better if they'd used the ipod as the source in both systems.

True, but then the cost difference is closer. The test would have been fairer if an iPod was used for both systems, but the point is to shock the average clueless joe. Bigger the price gap, bigger the surprise when revealing the cost of the better system.

Bubba · 27 Sep 2010 at 23:03

9designs2 said:
Well go watch it again, the point their making is in the first 35 seconds.

Yes it is a NAD 3020, it's not awesome today, nor was it ever, what it was, was a very good BUDGET amp, the 1st step on the ladder to "proper" Hi-Fi. The CD player is very average/poor, they all were at they era, and the speakers ok, nothing amazing....... Which kind of puts even more into context how bad the dock must have sounded to those people....

So the question is why do people listen to music ?

Maybe awesome was an overstatement but they are a very nice amp for the price, my dad sold his a few years back and got exactly what he paid for it 30 years ago which isnt bad going.

The thing is you can connect up the ipod to that seperates system which will produce similar sound to the cd player and still be just as convenient, and if you bought the ipod second hand or even a cheaper mp3 player it wouldn't cost much more.

You could also go out and buy a small all in one system which accepts cds for a similar price to the ipod dock with speakers and the sound would still be crap compared to that 2nd hand system.

Point I am trying to make is that its not a fair comparison in any way shape or form.

MikeHunt79 · 27 Sep 2010 at 23:10

I don't have an iPod dock or an iPod.

I do however have an MP3 player that plays Flac files and various active speakers of mixed quality... So much for the BBC not using brand names!

9designs2 · 27 Sep 2010 at 23:26

I think people are still missing the point, the comparison was to highlight people go out to buy equipment that is to play music.... but what they are buying is chosen on convenience not it's ability to play music !!!....... You wouldn't buy an oven that always burnt your cakes, just because it had nice handles on the door !!!!

The point show's less money could be spent on some old cast off second hand gear and it would give more musical enjoyment.... and by all means plug a "pod" into it, makes no difference to the point being made....... That is people have no idea what they are doing or why when they walk into a shop with the idea that they want some sounds to be played.... It actual shows the customer today is less informed and knowledgeable than some 20 - 30 years ago...... progress hey !

The bottom line, you listen to music for the emotional and audible enjoyment it brings, so why not chosen the equipment by how well it achieves that task ? ...... For the general guy on the street that penny has dropped yet !!!

Oh I'm an i free zone as well ....