There’s no doubt that the fourth generation iPod nano is the best so far. The design is beautiful, even by Apple’s high standards, and the user interface is as intuitive as it always was. Crossfade is superb, and makes listening on shuffle even more enjoyable, but the nano still lacks some of the features seen on competing devices, like an FM tuner. The nano also looks a little pricey on paper compared to other players, but then no other player is as thin, light and stylish as this one.
Sound quality isn’t quite up there with the best players available, but I’m sure that the vast majority of non-audiophile users will be more than happy with it. Pair the nano with a pair of Klipsch Image earphones and you’ll have the perfect combination of small, light and comfortable mobile listening. My trips to the gym just won’t be the same once Apple picks up the nano.Read full review
Hey Riyad, do you by any chance own an iPhone? You should probably mention it four or five more times, y'know, just to avoid confusion.
Nice review, though with all the drawbacks you mention I'm a bit dubious as to the headline score. Would you have been as generous if it came in a Technika box?
iTunes and sound quality are the deal breakers for me, though it is very pretty.
I don't know how others but I use mp3 players, while commuting, taking public transportation or traveling. I must admit that for commuting I do not need all my music. In the last then years I spent a lot on mp3 players from Creative, Apple, Iriver etc... Once I tunes ruined my music library since than I keep all my music on a dedicated hard drive ( even iPod classic would be to small anyway...)Since most mid class cell phones have mp3 players I happily marched out from the stand alone media player business! Your phone has it anyway, no missed calls, less gizmo in your pocket! I used Sony and Samsung phones and I was glad with them, I might risk the new touch screen Nokia, btw iPhone contracts are just plain for the birds at least here in Hungary, how it is on the "Islands"?))
Tim - with the iPhone being the halo product for Apple right now, it seemed to make sense to compare where necessary. Besides, I wouldn't show off about my iPhone since it's only a 1st gen, which means I have to stand in the car park to make a phone call :(
The scores reflect the fact that most consumers out there are more than satisfied with the sound quality offered by an iPod, and most of them are still using the bundled earbuds! Yes I personally hate iTunes, and would rather be able to drag and drop my music, but I'm not the average consumer, and I suspect that neither are you :)
localhero - I agree with much of what you're saying, which is why I use an iPhone. It allows me to listen to my music without missing any calls, and doesn't make me use a horrible interface like most so called music phones. However, if I'm going for a run, or to the gym, the iPhone is a bit big and heavy, so something like a nano is preferable. And of course, I don't want to answer the phone when I'm at the gym!
You're assuming the overall scores are an average, which they aren't. Moreover, we frequently award products "Recommended" awards with an 8/10 score.
For example, the Creative Zen Stone averages 7.67 and has a recommendation.
I don't think it's a good idea to be telling people you rip all your music to 320kbps MP3s. MP3 is really getting on now, and isn't a smart choice for quality. In a blind listening test I found AACs at 192kbps offered a similar level of quality to 320kbps MP3s, and that a 320kbps AAC was close to indistinguishable from the source. Of course, blind listening is all dependant on the person, the headphones/speakers, amplifiers etc. I personally blind tested on some Shure SE420s plug in to an Auzen X-FI Prelude with an in line attenuator, as I was going to be using the Shures with the AAC compression in my iPhone; my music is all ripped to my desktop in Apple Lossless (I found flac, either in the encoding or decoding, was changing to dynamic range compared to the source CD). I would advise everyone blind tests when deciding what encoding to use, and there are a number of free programs to do so.
I'd question whether most people's mobile phones have a better screen. It's QVGA, few mobile phones (with the exception of smartphones) get higher than that.
Stephen - you're missing the point. I was saying that I rip everything at 320kbps MP3 because it's the best quality format that I know is supported by EVERY device. The library that I have on my NAS box at home, will also be encoded in FLAC, but I need a version that I can play, no matter what device I'm using.
Take in-car stereos for instance. The majority of them will now allow you to use CDs loaded with MP3 files - not AAC, not WMA, not FLAC, just MP3. So if you want to listen to your music in your car, you're going to need a version of it in MP3.
Sockatume - Yes, most mobile phones have the same resolution as the nano, but many of them have a larger screen that will be better for looking at photos.
Good review & I agree with most of it. It's not on everyone's wish-list but an FM tuner would be a very welcome addition next year.
I didn't want to spent too much on headphones and I believe the excellent Sennheiser CX 300's are exceptional value at around £18 from the likes of Play & Amazon. I thought I'd recommend them to those not wishing to spend a fortune...
We're sorry. We were unable to report abuse at this time.
We limit the number of reactions an individual user can submit over a given period for quality reasons. You have currently reached that limit. Please try resubmitting your abuse report again later.
Comment is too long. Enter 500 characters or less.
Comments
User reviews
There are currently no reviews for this product.
Read more reviews >
To add your own review log in or sign up