All Things Android - Apps, Phones, Tablets - Discussion

Dis gonna be good.

 

Well, if you could stoop down to the AE2 level, try a pair with a Nexus 4 and then a Galaxy S3 INTL. If you can't hear a major difference, I hereby revoke your audiophile card... permanently.

Plus, I really don't get the hate on the AE2's. They're better to my ear than most of the "professional" sets I've tried. Plus, unlike every Sennheiser I've tried, the AE2's don't bleed the bass over into the treble at higher volumes.

 

Oh all right then.

It's very likely that you're not comparing like for like if it's *that* apparent: Either the codec on one handset is louder, or has a different default EQ.

I don't have an audiophile card. I do have professional measurement gear and artificial heads, as well as a habit of not listening by eye when I'm critiquing.

Which Sennheisers, would be the question. I don't know of many certainly around the AE2's price range that would exhibit that kind of behaviour.

The AE2's get their 'it seems accurate' sound from the way too tipped-up trebles. They've also tightened up the bass over the indistinct AE, leading to the impression of a more incisive sound overall. Absolute accuracy is not bad but it's not a stand-out in any way in the price bracket, they've worked on the durability issues of the AE, comfort+lack of weight is class-leading, isolation is OK, and they're totally socially acceptable to walk around with.

The real merits of the AE2's are more about those last physical attributes - fit, comfort, low profile look, etc - than the sound, though as I said they're not that bad. But to believe that the AE2's level of accuracy and frequency depiction lets you hear the difference between codecs - that is pure audiophile (in the traditional, misguided sense) delusion.

 

Well, until you try them, we'll just put a pin in that.

About the Senn's... HD518, HD558, HD580 (older, but decent), and the HD598 all do it. I'm not spending $499 on a set of Senn's (HD650) when all the pairs I've heard so far have been mediocre at best. They're extremely laid back, and they all have great imaging, but when there's a bass line and I can hear it audibly distorting the treble, that's a no for me. (EDIT: I should also say that's with no EQ.)

And yes, the AE2's have sparkly treble... sometimes they CAN be sibilant. But all in all, if you account for that with EQ, I like their sound signature a LOT more than anything else I've heard.

 

Nope, it's an absolute I'm afraid.

As for the sound signature - yes, it's designed to appeal to consumers. You don't think Bose doesn't do it's homework, do you? But as I said, the ability of the drivers to render detail? About a $60 closed headphone median level.

 

And this is what I don't like about audiophiles.

 

As I said, I'm not an audiophile. It looks like you are though

 

A while ago I was thinking that creating a thread dedicated to audio in the OT section would be a welcome addition. Maybe not.

 

Yup.

10ears

 

As you said, yourself, you have equipment that tells your ears what they are hearing, rather than just letting them hear what they hear. I don't think there's any better definition of an audiophile.

I've listened to flat, impossibly flat, then Etymotic flat... and I find them all impossibly boring for one. Two: whether you believe it or not, there is quite a discernible difference in the two aforementioned DAC's with just about every headphone I've tried, SANS EQ of any type (and I've made sure of this as I'm the one that compiles my own kernels with my own customized .c's and .h's). The response straight out of the DAC is as flat as I can make it, then I EQ it in software how I like... or with Wolfson DAC's, hardware parametric.

So, berate if you must, but it really doesn't matter one way or the other. I hear a difference. If you can't, that's not my issue.

 

"I hear a difference. If you can't, that's not my issue."

And that's the problem with discussing audio with those who believe they can.

I mix subjective and objective comparisons - however, when doing subjective tests I still control the results: I measure the frequency response to make genuinely sure no EQ is being applied before the listening test, and above all I control the levels that I compare with by matching them before I do any listening.

You could do worse than starting from there - since it's pretty obvious you don't control at all.

 

You have different approaches to audio. That doesn't make either of you wrong. Some prefer audio to be fun and engaging; others want it cold and analytical. As for me, I can't relate to DACs having no impact on audio or Sennheiser being poorer at keeping lows seperated from highs than Bose.

 

The problem for me is that when you start talking about "better" you need a valid yardstick. You can write about your listening experiences and how you feel about them, but without some degree of control it's just writing about an experience.

From there on it often just becomes a battle of egos - which is why, despite owning test gear that's newer / higher-spec than those used by the likes of Tyll Hertsens (if you know who he is), I don't even pick my battles in the careful way that he does - I don't bother getting involved at all.

When I say "it's what I hear that counts" - and first of all, I wouldn't say that since I know human hearing memory is all too fallible - it'll be down to a mix of controlled testing and objective measurement. But it's an experience that I can't share with a lot of people, because a lot of them believe that their totally uncontrolled results are authoritative.

But from my side, my benefit to me is that having done that, *then* I can turn off that analytical side and go listen to some music, with the reasonable assurance that what I have is somewhere near objectively decent.

I will on occasion deliberately choose euphonic equipment that's technically inferior to the best that I have if I want to relax for example, or if I need to make an ergonomic compromise (e.g. for long periods of wear I'll pick a headphone that's comfortable, and I would be prepared to compromise on the sound), but I would not go around calling it 'the best or 'better'.

 

You certainly have a point there but what should the yardstick be? To keep everything neutral and true to nature? Measuring distortions and frequency range is one thing. Taste is another.

 

But that's what audio is... an experience.

That's why audio quality is so hard to discuss.

 

No, you can't account for taste - but that's not actually the point. And as I've been hinting at, it's less about the measurements than your approach to comparisons.

You can insert controls into your comparisons to give you better, more consistent evaluations from unit to unit where you try and make sure that what you're hearing different is the peculiarities of the unit, and not some other variable. You shouldn't rely on audio memory - which is why I keep copious notes, and if I want to know how something new sounds in comparison to something I had before and it matters to me, I'll actually buy the equipment again (and for the same reason, I keep selected recent-past computers in storage that I can dig out for e.g. GPU comparisons in visualisation software). Maybe the last thing is not something everyone is prepared to do, but descriptive listening notes from a controlled listen (e.g. the same sound level measured at the earcup across *all* of the phones you listen to, as well as double-checking for a flat signal as outlined above) is a useful lasting record.

If more people do something along the lines of this, then the real commonalities between the experiences of more people become more readily apparent and you can then work around taste that way - and as a result the merits of the unit itself (as opposed to how everyone was feeling when you listened to it) also becomes more objectively quantifiable.

Simply put, if you're going to call something 'better' then you need to place yourself in a situation that 'better' is not a completely nebulous factor based on a listen under random circumstances. Which where you are as of now, H.A.L.

 

WHY?!? OH, WHY!?

Why would they put an actually decent DAC in an LG? That's like putting the LS9 engine from a Corvette Z06 in a VW! WHY!?!??!?

 

Because LG pulled all the stops on their new flagship phone?

 

Potentially relevant:





(Okay, so it's not a Chevy small block, but still)

 

With all the money they invested in engineering a phone with such breakneck hardware, you'd think they'd actually put a decent (i.e. AOSP) version of Android on it instead of whatever they hell the call their custom UI.

A Golf with a rice rocket engine? Tsuname's gonna behead you for posting those photos.

 

No, it's a Golf with a Bentley engine. Seriously, it's a mid-engine-mounted twin-turbo twelve-cylinder engine from a Bentley Continental (VW owns Bentley). It's a driveable concept, not a production car, but still, insanity on wheels.

 

A B..Bb..Bbb...Bentley engine...in a VW!? Them Germans still think them's can do anything, don't they? Put a Bentley V12 in a Golf? JA! Put a curved barrel on an M3? Ja Bitte! Sew a pigeon and rat together?



Es ist getan!

 

Well all I know as far as audio, is from the headphones I own. Bose QC3 which don't have a big sound stage, but extremely good for plane rides which I do often. Bose IE2 where comfort is phenomenal for It's, though a small sound stage and don't sound quite as good. And a set of Sennhieser MM 500x. Great sound stage and comfort. Next set will probably be a set of Beyerdynamic DT880s. I just enjoy clarity. I don't get too into the whole objective aspect. Purely subjective. If it sounds good to me, that's all I care about. The Bose headphones I've had for 5+ years. If I'm going to be wearing them for hours, they have to be comfortable.

As for DACs, I've tried others alongside Wolfson, and Wolfson just sounded better to me. Like the Galaxy S, and 5th Gen iPod. I'll definitely give the LG a listen when I get home.


Sent from my DROID RAZR/JB CM 10.2 via Tapatalk II

 

Leaked Android 4.4 KitKat screenshots make the rounds - GSMArena.com news

 

As much as I love the look of the dialer and the message app, they are fake, as confirmed by AndroidPolice.

 

I'd rather see new actual useful features vs changing the aesthetics. Plus I prefer black backgrounds for better battery life. Even if it is minimal.

Sent from my DROID RAZR/JB CM 10.2 via Tapatalk II

 

I don't think it's an either/or proposition with new versions of an OS. I wouldn't be surprised if KitKat had a more flat aesthetic design--Google's recently leaked a flatter "Google" logo and iOS has already followed WP down the path of flat design--but that doesn't mean it won't also have utility advancements.

 

Ah that's a shame, I was hoping 4.4 would inherit more of the Play Store's UI elements throughout the OS.

 

If you have to tell someone you're not an audiophile, you're an "audiophile". The word really doesn't mean anything anymore though.

 

I agree. Those leaks also look too good to be faked, so I really hope that they come out true. That dialer is beautiful, looks like the new Skype. I prefer white vs black, as it's more alive, whereas black is more depressive, at least in my opinion.

 

With my old Windows Phone 7 phone, you could choose between a light-on-dark theme or a dark-on-light theme, and the design was chromeless/flat/Metro either way. I don't see why Android, known for having massive menus of settings options for the user, doesn't include a simple toggle for light-on-dark or dark-on-light design for the core functionality (messaging, dialing, address book, notification shade, settings menus, etc). I know light-on-dark is more utilitarian but I prefer the look of dark-on-light.

 

You're right. It should really be 'subjectiegophile'

 

That dialler screen - thank god it's fake. Does everything have to be 3-year-old friendly these days?

 

Well... the current dialer is almost too friendly for 2 year olds (and younger).

 

Besides the dispute about whether it's priced right, the most common complaint about the Moto X was the camera. Well, Motorola is listening:

AnandTech | Moto X Update Dramatically Improves Camera Quality

This pushes the Moto X back into #1 for my next phone when I'm due for an upgrade (first half of next year). I don't care about eight-core processors or pixels so small I can't see them; a lightweight, well-made, ergonomic, 4.7" HD phone with good software onboard straight out of the box is more my cup of tea.

 

Interesting how Amazon keeps packing the pixels into their Kindle Fires:

Amazon debuts Kindle Fire HDX 7- and 8.9-inch tablets, we go hands-on

1920x1200 in a 7" screen is pretty dense. Too bad still no SD card support.

 

Nexus 7 gen 2 has the same screen resolution?

 

My friend got his Moto X in about 2 weeks ago. It's an awesome phone, but he thinks it's a gift from god lol.. I've heard "ok, Google Now" about a billion times now. And i know he plugs his phone into aux in his car, just so he can say something about how it knows he's driving, and it knows he listens to music when he drives so it knows to start playing music at full blast. To each their own...

My gf picked up a HTC One this past weekend and she loves it. I knew she was going to be happy with whatever she got after coming off of a Nexus S, but it really is a stylish and solid phone (after installing power toggles)..

Bored with my Note 2. I downloaded the latest Jedi X and PACman, but I haven't gotten around to installing either. Any other suggestions? Rumor is that the Nexus 5 may be announced around the 14th of next month.. Maybe worth purchasing if I sell my Note 2 and my old iP4S (assuming my mother uses her upgrade next month)..

 

Creepy ...

 

Rumors of a Sony Xperia Z1 Mini suggest that it would have nicer hardware than "Mini" phones from Samsung, HTC, and Motorola (plus Sony still has a habit of including microSD storage, unlike HTC and Motorola):

This could be Sony's Xperia Z1 'mini': a 20.7-megapixel camera and Snapdragon 800 in a 4.3-inch package

If this is made available internationally (i.e., not just in Japan), it could be the perfect answer for people who like Android and want a high-end device but want something more iPhone-sized than Galaxy Note-sized.

 

Details on Samsung's benchmark-software shenanigans:

Note 3's benchmarking adjustments inflate scores by up to 20 percent

This crosses the line to consumer fraud in my opinion.

 

The Verge's Galaxy Note 10.1 (2013) review is beyond sad. I've officially stopped taking any of their reviews seriously.

I mean, as big of an update as the new Note 10.1 is, you'd expect something a tad bit more in-depth.

 

I tend to read The Verge reviews for subjective gut reactions, but put much more trust in ArsTechnica reviews. The willingness of Ars reviewers to actively and vigorously participate in the discussion following the review is also really nice.

 

Ars reviews are much better, indeed, but I'm still an ardent Anandtech supporter. Highly technical, standardized tests, and VERY in-depth. But the Ars reviews are the best general consumer reviews... they do a very good job without getting too technical, and the comments section is actually productive conversation.

The Verge is useless.

 

Apparently Tapatalk is now free judging from the update Tapatalk did to my Sig. :/ Not sure I am a fan of the new interface. It'll take some getting used to, but we'll see how I like it in a week.

Sent from my DROID RAZR/JB CM 10.2 via Tapatalk II now Free

 

What's a good way of marketing your phone? With phony benchmark results of course!

 

The app isn't free (i've seen the updated sig on other sites before breaking down and buying Tapatalk II...amazon appstore's giveaway version got on my nerves), adding Tapatalk functionality to your website is.

That's pretty shady but I wonder if other brands also do this. They might but might be smarter about hiding it.

Still, it's further evidence that benchmark results tend to have little significance on real world performance

 

This sort of thing isn't that hard to find once you know what to look for. I'm sure Samsung's fans would have found evidence that LG/Sony/HTC/Motorola/Apple (especially Apple) were doing it too if, in fact, those companies were.

They're useful for comparison purposes for processor-intensive tasks (like gaming) so long as everyone plays by the rules. Like EPA fuel mileage estimates, they're not a perfect predictor of total user experience but they're still useful comparison purposes (as long as everyone followed the same rules in having the tests performed).

 

Ahhh gotcha. Now just gotta figure out how to remove that crap off my Sig.

Sent from my DROID RAZR/JB CM 10.2 via Tapatalk II now Free

 

Should be in Tapatalk settings.