Audio Quality

[monkeypimp]

I consider myself to be an audiophile. In what circumstance does one need Audiophile listening from a cellphone? I use my cellphone to listen to music when I am busy doing things, like mowing or doing other chores. Sure I use it in my car but again that is not an audiophile environment. Listening to vinyl on a Tube amp via some Grado headphones is an audiophile experience. Listening on a home system with a processor, amp, vinyl and tube amp, or some SACD's, DTS audio discs,cd's or streaming Flac files with some killer speakers is an audiophile experience. A phone is not an audiophile device and people who think it is aren't Audiophiles in my opinion.

 

[ggendel]

Thanks for this! Surprisingly enough, I thought all the samples were just fine, and was all over the board in my choices. I guess this means I either am a person that can't discern quality audio or I need better headphones lol.

Don't be concerned. The best they do is CD quality and the engineering on these are particularly bad (instruments are unnatural and flat). I picked out the uncompressed wav files almost every time with mid-quality speakers. Some of the tracks are ridiculously easy to compress for mp4 so they won't add much in the way of audio artifacts.

Many moons ago I did pioneering work on MPEG-2 compression, specifically motion estimation. It ruined TV for years as I became overly sensitive to the video artifacts. Fortunately, things have gotten much better. I created the first low-cost digital cinema system and would get clips of various movies to test with. Some of the war scenes were so real it was frightening. Then again, i had to see the first 6 minutes of Legally Blond about a hundred times which still haunts me.

 

[I800C0LLECT]

I think it's indicative of the music industry in general though. There aren't too many artists as serious about recording quality as Michael Jackson for instance. Last I heard pitbull or some other current favorite it wasn't really any better than that test

 

[hpilot]

I consider myself to be an audiophile. In what circumstance does one need Audiophile listening from a cellphone? I use my cellphone to listen to music when I am busy doing things, like mowing or doing other chores. Sure I use it in my car but again that is not an audiophile environment. Listening to vinyl on a Tube amp via some Grado headphones is an audiophile experience. Listening on a home system with a processor, amp, vinyl and tube amp, or some SACD's, DTS audio discs,cd's or streaming Flac files with some killer speakers is an audiophile experience. A phone is not an audiophile device and people who think it is aren't Audiophiles in my opinion.

TMI. I just want better audio quality - that's all...

 

[monkeypimp]

TMI. I just want better audio quality - that's all...

Explain what "Better Audio Quality" means. A phone with earbuds can only be so good.

 

[Rumblee1]

No wonder people are buying a LG V20. its because they want that 1st Class audio experience. ^_^
I know people who own Pixels and they seem to be happy with them. Maybe its just because they haven't heard any better?

Personally for me, its a very small issue. i don't make phone calls often and music is generally played through the radio. But for some i can see it being a hassle.

If you think the lgv20 sounds good, go listen to an axon 7 from ZTE. Incredible.

 

[ggendel]

Explain what "Better Audio Quality" means. A phone with earbuds can only be so good.

Actually, they can get pretty good. There is no reason that a phone can't compete with dedicated portable music units. I use a Fiio X1 at the gym. I've run the gambit of earbuds from Etymotics, Shure, Zipbuds, and others. The Etymotics were the best, but they and the Shure units didn't last long with the abuse I gave them at the gym. The Zipbud slides are acceptable quality, a bit weak at the high end, but rugged and tangle free. There is nothing particularly special about the Fiio units that couldn't be put into a phone. It just has superior DACs and output stages. I like the 12hours of play per charge as well.

 

[hpilot]

Explain what "Better Audio Quality" means. A phone with earbuds can only be so good.

Forget the earbuds - that is a variable I can control. What I can't control is the sound quality output of the phone. Unless your contention is that quality is the same in every phone, there is therefor a continuum from worst to best among phones. Unfortunately this phone is not best on that continuum. It is certainly acceptable, but it would have been nice if Google had made it a priority to be the best.

 

[I800C0LLECT]

I think he brought up ear buds because they don't typically play to 20hz without rolling off 20 decibels first

 

[akin_t]

Explain what "Better Audio Quality" means. A phone with earbuds can only be so good.

Don't presume to be daft. You know full well that audio quality differs from phone to phone.

Whether or not phones have the audio fidelity of a vinyl player paired with tube amps is immaterial. People want the best audio they can get from a cellphone because their phones are always on them. Ever heard of convenience? Or do you take your vinyl player with you to the gym and to work?

Same thing with cameras vs DSLRs. I own about $5000 in photography equipment yet you don't see me being a ***** to people who want better cameras on their phones.

 

[anon(470989)]

Don't presume to be daft. You know full well that audio quality differs from phone to phone.

Whether or not phones have the audio fidelity of a vinyl player paired with tube amps is immaterial. People want the best audio they can get from a cellphone because their phones are always on them. Ever heard of convenience? Or do you take your vinyl player with you to the gym and to work?

Same thing with cameras vs DSLRs. I own about $5000 in photography equipment yet you don't see me being a ***** to people who want better cameras on their phones.

This is a dumb argument as you can't even appreciate great sound quality if you are listening while at work or at the gym. Music in these cases are used as stimulants to improve the activity you are currently doing. To truly appreciate "quality music", you would want to be a in a quiet environment with a quality setup and your main activity is to be actively listening to your music, nothing else. At that point, if you are using your phone as your music player, of course you want it to be good. But work and the gym are poor examples imo. Most any smartphone will be more than adequate in these cases, such as the Pixel.

 

[monkeypimp]

Don't presume to be daft. You know full well that audio quality differs from phone to phone.

Whether or not phones have the audio fidelity of a vinyl player paired with tube amps is immaterial. People want the best audio they can get from a cellphone because their phones are always on them. Ever heard of convenience? Or do you take your vinyl player with you to the gym and to work?

Same thing with cameras vs DSLRs. I own about $5000 in photography equipment yet you don't see me being a ***** to people who want better cameras on their phones.

My question wasn't meant to be a D***. I seriously want to know how you quantify "better audio qualtity" Sure when I sit and ACTIVELY listen to one phone versus another I can decide which one I think sounds better. But as you said I don't bring my turntable to the gym, but when I am at the gym finding those qualities that make one phone sound better than another doesn't happen. There is outside noise that interferes, I am also not devoting my full attention to the audio so the subtleties that make better audio quality are lost. I am not noticing the placement and separation of the instruments in the sound stage, I don't notice the fingers sliding on the strings of the guitars or the breaths that the singer is taking. "Better Audio Quality" is entirely subjective.

To me Better Audio Quality is when I as though I have the band present in front of me playing. I can place where the drummer is sitting, the singer is standing, the backup singers are standing, where the guitars are. I can hear the fingers sliding down the strings, the spit in the corner of the singers mouth, etc. But without active listening this doesn't happen. I could use a high-end system at home but If I am vacuuming or playing a game with the kids I am not getting many of the gains a higher end system has compared to a mid-range system. So if that was the only times I listened to home audio I would never spend money on a high end system.

 

[I800C0LLECT]

Those are my sentiments as well. Wearing headphones I feel like in in the middle of the stage where as I prefer to recreate the stage in front of me as if I'm in the audience.

In my car, my stage is above the dashboard. People are mesmerized because they physically see the speakers but the sound is clearly on my dash. They even touch the speakers to see if they're on

The sub really blows their mind since it's in the trunk but they don't perceive anything coming from behind. My tweeters are in the pillars, midrange in kicks, mid bass under seats.

 

[miyanc]

This is almost the same type of discussion I had about the screen, compared to the n7 or n5 or whatever.

The real question is broken down into 2 categories. Single user function and personal choice. So does the item work, or how does it compare in my opinion to other items. Does a Mcdonald's hamburger fill me up better then burger king? or which one tastes better. So you can't eat both at the same time and compare, but you can have one today or the other tomorrow. But the questions are did it do what it was suppose to do (I am not trying to discuss the merits of fast food, just an easy reference)? Am I full consistently while eating meal A or B?

So most people will listen to there phones without contrast and maybe like it or not. In reality most people are not venturing to far from the ear buds that came with something you purchased in the last 4 years (but not the pixels). Being concerned over sounds quality in a smart phone is more like a question about the taste of Mcdonalds or Burger King. Maybe you like Morton's steak house, or can only eat good food while balancing it with a 76 Moscato (not a wine drinker and had to google that). It sounds a lot like this is an argument about whether or not we can call it champagne.

So does the phone sounds good enough as a music player to fill the need? It is after all a phone. All aspects of these devices are improving. No phone does it all perfectly. And in the real world Most of us don't own 5 different phones or the capability to compare them all. So we usually have our own likes and dislikes and this phone to my last.

So is the pixel xl the best audio quality I have ever heard, no, but also not the worst. In using my headphones of various brands and levels of quality, it is equal to the g4, n7, s7e, n7, iphone 5s. These being the phones I have used in the last few months.

Sound is to subjective to compare in most cases, just like food. I bet most people who eat food, don't act like every meal needs to be prepared by the iron chef. But for those that do, I bet they are not using there phones to eat with.

So yes maybe one phone does something better then the other, but for those people who will never read a single AC forum comment, it really doesn't matter. For those of us that care enough about such things, thankfully, there are many hamburgers out there and as if you couldn't tell I am quite hungry.

 

[akin_t]

This is a dumb argument as you can't even appreciate great sound quality if you are listening while at work or at the gym. Music in these cases are used as stimulants to improve the activity you are currently doing. To truly appreciate "quality music", you would want to be a in a quiet environment with a quality setup and your main activity is to be actively listening to your music, nothing else. At that point, if you are using your phone as your music player, of course you want it to be good. But work and the gym are poor examples imo. Most any smartphone will be more than adequate in these cases, such as the Pixel.

Except they don't. My HTC 10 does way better than my Moto X when listening to music at the gym or at work.

I guess I also shouldn't bother with buying higher quality headphones unless I'm listening to a tube amp paired vinyl player in my soundproof studio

 

[akin_t]

My question wasn't meant to be a D***. I seriously want to know how you quantify "better audio qualtity" Sure when I sit and ACTIVELY listen to one phone versus another I can decide which one I think sounds better. But as you said I don't bring my turntable to the gym, but when I am at the gym finding those qualities that make one phone sound better than another doesn't happen. There is outside noise that interferes, I am also not devoting my full attention to the audio so the subtleties that make better audio quality are lost. I am not noticing the placement and separation of the instruments in the sound stage, I don't notice the fingers sliding on the strings of the guitars or the breaths that the singer is taking. "Better Audio Quality" is entirely subjective.

To me Better Audio Quality is when I as though I have the band present in front of me playing. I can place where the drummer is sitting, the singer is standing, the backup singers are standing, where the guitars are. I can hear the fingers sliding down the strings, the spit in the corner of the singers mouth, etc. But without active listening this doesn't happen. I could use a high-end system at home but If I am vacuuming or playing a game with the kids I am not getting many of the gains a higher end system has compared to a mid-range system. So if that was the only times I listened to home audio I would never spend money on a high end system.

So you have a higher standard for what's considered 'good'. Congratulations, I guess?

People can buy a phone for audio for more than one use case. Phone calls, music at home, music at the gym etc.

They can buy the best they can afford because they enjoy listening to music and they can tangibly appreciate the differences between low end and mid end.

You don't have to understand it, just as I would never understand anyone who still wastes their time with analog audio.

 

[hpilot]

This is how I compare sound quality: When I wanted to replace my Sony mp3 player a few years ago, I bought an iPod Touch. I put exactly the same music file on both players. Then I did an A/B test using exactly the same earphones. My old Sony had a much better sound (to my ears) than the iPod Touch, so I returned it. I really didn't need graphs and charts and test equipment.

 

[miyanc]

Except they don't. My HTC 10 does way better than my Moto X when listening to music at the gym or at work.
I guess I also shouldn't bother with buying higher quality headphones unless I'm listening to a tube amp paired vinyl player in my soundproof studio

better speakers always trumps better stereo. I would also say media source content also trumps stereo.

to me saying something is the worst, or the best for that matter, in this matter is unrealistic in the terms of the regular person. although most people wouldnt notice a difference, they can read, especially read only titles, and this would unfairly influence someones choice.

 

[popkurn611]

I have trouble hearing people on it like I did on my Note 4 and my sister commented today that I sound like I am on my 4 again. It's nowhere near as clear sounding as the Note 7.

Thought maybe I had a faulty unit but hearing from others that the in call volume sucks makes me feel better. I returned mine and defaulted back to my s7 which has amazing audio in ear

 

[hpilot]

better speakers always trumps better stereo. I would also say media source content also trumps stereo.

to me saying something is the worst, or the best for that matter, in this matter is unrealistic in the terms of the regular person. although most people wouldnt notice a difference, they can read, especially read only titles, and this would unfairly influence someones choice.

This isn't some great social movement or life-altering consequence for cell phone buyers. Why is fairness a part of this discussion...