Does Rockbox affect sound quality for the BETTER?

[On Da Real, Yo!]

I was having a discussion with a friend about installing rockbox in our h320's. He says he likes the sound signature of his player as it is and doesn't want to tinker with it.

This got me thinking.

Firmware can't really affect the player's "sound," can it? I always assumed that the quality of sound is purely a hardware issue. I asked some people I know online how their h320 sounds with rockbox, and some said it sounds a little bit better.

I think it's a placebo effect.

Any answers?

[Kingnog]

Well, it doesn't affect it for the worse.

When I first started using rockbox, I noticed that the bass was slightly deeper, frequencies that the iriver firmware wasn't producing. This was on 18db bass boost for both.

To answer your question though, there is no hardware change so the 'sound quality' shouldn't really change. The only difference is the mp3 decoder, which is very good and shouldn't produce any noticeable negative change at all, if any.

[splinter6]

equalizer does affect the sound quality. The quality of the FM radio in rockbox is poor and the recording of the FM radio in rockbox is even worse.

[Llorean]

Equalizer is hardly what this person is asking about, since they're asking if the *firmware* affects the sound signature.

In response:
No, if you're playing WAV files there should be no sound signature difference at flat settings. Playing MP3 it is conceivably possible that differences in the decoder used could cause some difference, but since the Rockbox decoder has been rather thoroughly tested and produces output within the requirements of the standard, it would actually mean there were a bug in the iRiver decoded. As it is, nobody's been able to definitively show a difference between the stock firmware and Rockbox at flat settings except when Rockbox has had playback bugs (and those get fixed when properly reported).

[spikey]

by far the biggest reason for using rockbox is features rather than sound quality. in terms of functionality it is far better but i cant telll any difference other than the eq qith sound quality

[MartinP]

If you read up about the design of expensive CD players, such details as the design of the firmware could certainly have some effect on the sound quality.

Certainly such gross facts as whether the CPU speed is boosted would affect the "spare power" available from the battery, which could affect the sound (especially if the battery is low).

Whether this would actually have an effect on the SQ with the Hxxx is another matter.

cheers, Martin

[aproyouknow]

I know I need to install the EQ presets that are on this site and I will do that in the next few days. BUT. Oh man RockBox does not come Any where near the Stock firmware sound. I mean Dude! I have played with the EQ settings and I just cant get it. It is not really bad in that it stops me from using Rock box. At this time I need the Batt life way more then I need Super crisp sound. What do I mean "crisp sound." Well when I play with the EQ using the stock firmware I get the sound I like for the music that I am playing. Hip Hop WAY more Bass. Rock more Treb a lot less Bass. Jazz the right mix and match of both. With rock box the only thing I can do is keep it from Clipping.

I will check back with the EQ presets that work for me. It is the end of Summer and I have been playing hard time to get back to the Grind! So I really need my Tunes.

P.S yes I tried the advice that the Mods have given, it did not work for me.
TIme is money so I am off to make some more time!

[andrewmel]

Originally Posted by aproyouknow

BUT. Oh man RockBox does not come Any where near the Stock firmware sound.

Tests over at Rockbox by Febs show that the sound is *identical*.

What you are probably experiencing is the placebo effect.

Find a friend who can boot your player to Rockbox, and stock. Make sure all EQ is off. Listen to them both. Then, when you cant see, or tell what they are doing, have them toss a coin, and use that to decide which to boot to.

You then try to pick which you are listening to.

If you can pick 5 out of 5, then come back and tell us.

a

[traut]

Yes, firmware may effect sound quality.

First of all, encoding may be improved in order to be faster or provide better sound quality - this shows why some mp3 encoders are significantly better than others.

But the main application is decoding. I'd guess that the algorithm does not have a major influence here - although I guess there may be a certain effect.

But even if you turn your eq to zero, you can't be sure whether firmware has a different default setup for the equalizer.

So it's very easy that different firmware will sound different. It's up to you to decide which one is actually better.

But apart from the placebo effect, you'd have to do real comparisons to find out, which one is more real, which one is more natural or which one sounds better (and it's not necessarily the most real which sounds most natural or best).

[PsychoAssasin]

The only difference bewtween the two, other than the posibility of a better decoder on rockbox, is that that iriver firmware, after your go over 14db bass boost, everything begins to muddle and thus, less treble, but this added bass isnt all bass, the muddled effect comes from the raise in db of the midtones aswell. On rockbox however, this does not happen. Raising the bass boost from 2-24 on rockbox has no effect at all on the treble, or the midtones, and thats why u seem to get a deeper sounding bass, not just "false" bass from the mid tones like the iriver firmware. This is why rockbox sounds "crisper" try it for yourself

[RTYUI333]

hmm I like RB better than the original...
since you can really boost bass

[Febs]

Originally Posted by PsychoAssasin

The only difference bewtween the two, other than the posibility of a better decoder on rockbox, is that that iriver firmware, after your go over 14db bass boost, everything begins to muddle and thus, less treble, but this added bass isnt all bass, the muddled effect comes from the raise in db of the midtones aswell. On rockbox however, this does not happen. Raising the bass boost from 2-24 on rockbox has no effect at all on the treble, or the midtones, and thats why u seem to get a deeper sounding bass, not just "false" bass from the mid tones like the iriver firmware. This is why rockbox sounds "crisper" try it for yourself

There shouldn't be much of a difference in the bass boost, because this is a feature of the hardware.

[musichound]

FEBS Lives!

[iriverflow]

I just want to say that I am enjoying the placebo effect that I am getting from ROCkbox. I think ROCkbox sounds better and “cleaner” then the Iriver firmware. Real or imagined it's all good here on ROCkbox.

[Llorean]

That is one thing:

The placebo effect *is* a real change in sound signature. Because the mind can hear what it wants to hear, if you believe they sound different, then for all practical purposes they do. For you. Which is good enough.

[PsychoAssasin]

Like i said, try it Febs the second you go over 14 bass boost on iriver firmware everything is muddled, u can notice alot if ur playing something and change from 14-16 everything becomes more quiet. Then try it on rockbox, go from any range of 0-24 there is no change at all except for stronger bass.

[alejandro]

This is an interestign discussion. Anyone done an official double-blind test on this?