or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › iPad takes top J.D. Power honors for the second time in a row
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iPad takes top J.D. Power honors for the second time in a row

post #1 of 31
Thread Starter 
J.D. Power and Associates released its most recent study on customer satisfaction in the tablet segment this week, with Apple's iPad taking the top prize for the second consecutive time.

ipads


Volume 1 of the the J.D. Power and Associates 2013 U.S. Tablet Satisfaction Study was released this week, showing Apple at the top of the pile both in overall ranking and significantly outpacing competitors in terms of overall quality. Apple's iPad scored 836 on a 1,000-point scale of owner satisfaction and an industry-best five out of five on the J.D. Power Circle Ratings for Consumers, rating it "among the best" for tablets, a descriptor given to no other manufacturer.

Close behind Apple in terms of customer satisfaction was Amazon, which scored 829 on the Overall TabletIndex Rankings. Both manufacturers were above the industry average of 828.

Samsung, Asus, and Acer rounded out the top five manufacturers with scores of 822, 818, and 784, respectively.

The study looked at tablet owners who have owned their tablet for one year or less. J.D. Power used five key factors to evaluate satisfaction. Performance was the most important, followed by ease of operation, styling and design, features, and cost.

This week's release marks the second time in a row that Apple's iPad has taken the top spot according to J.D. Power. The previous study, issued in September, found Apple and Amazon in the same positions as this time, though both had slightly higher scores.

The study also looked at tablet owner behavior, finding that 51 percent of tablet owners share their device with at least one other person. That sharing appears to be tied to greater overall satisfaction, as users that share their tablets with four or more persons reported satisfaction 28 points higher than users that didn't share their devices. The tablet also appears to be a better means of browsing the Internet, as tablet owners who have smartphones reported spending 36 percent more time web browsing on tablets than on their phones.

Apple, of course, is no stranger to the top of the J.D. Power list. The company's iPhone has won the top spot nine times in a row, most recently in March of this year. The iPad maker isn't shy about showing off those awards either, listing its J.D. Power rankings among what it calls the many reasons customers love the iPad and iPhone.
post #2 of 31
To nobody's surprise. Once again, as usual, Apple leads the way and people are speaking with their dollars & loyality. The also-rans can only hope to have Apple's numbers and awards like this.
post #3 of 31

Well done Apple. Well deserved award for iPad.

post #4 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCProfessor View Post

I'll give Apple #1, but brands two through five are pure b.s. The Nexus 10 wipes them. But again I guess J.D. could only get access to tablets at discount stores.

Aren't they rating the consumers' experience - not performing device reviews? If that's the case, I'd surmise the #2 brand is a pretty popular, stable and featureful for that target consumer.
post #5 of 31
The Galaxy Tab didn't win?

Not cool.
post #6 of 31

Of course they top the D.J. Power charts, look at how superior the audio/music apps offering is on iOS compared to Android!

 

Oh it's J.D. Power...

post #7 of 31
Originally Posted by GTR View Post
Not cool.


By law. And now popular demand!

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #8 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCProfessor View Post

I'll give Apple #1, but brands two through five are pure b.s. The Nexus 10 wipes them. But again I guess J.D. could only get access to tablets at discount stores.

There's not much useful software for Android for business and creative professionals. 

 

For musicians/music production/video production, there's just more and better apps and hardware for the iPad.

 

I honestly think that Android products are sold to those that are budget minded and just do basic needs computing and think that they have something that's better. If you are a musician and you see something like the Mackie DL1608, I don't know how one can even consider any other platform of tablet.   What Mackie did is a brilliant piece of hardware/software.  For musicians, when you see what's available for tablets at NAMM Show, there was basically very little for Android and all of the major companies are iPad/iPhone centric, only scraps for Android and I mean scraps, almost to the point where you would think that Android didn't exist.  It's kind of funny.

 

I think Android's biggest problem stems from the fact that there are too many variations in terms of screen sizes, resolutions and variants of OS and it's just flat out too expensive to develop, test and support from a developer's standpoint.  Plus, most Android users don't spend much money on apps and hardware, they are basically into the Free For All concept.  Oh well.

 

I can't wait for 64 bit ARM processors to hit Apple and we'll see some drastic improvement in the apps/OS and what these things can really do.

post #9 of 31
I'm curious why they didn't get a perfect score. HW, SW, media, apps? I think it's telling that the knock-off devices fall just short. Why innovate when you can just pull into second place with the equivalent of a copy machine.
post #10 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

The Galaxy Tab didn't win?

Not cool.

The Galaxy tablet didn't win because it's not that great of a product and there isn't much you can really do with it.   Lack of apps/hardware and too much malware on the Android platform is hurting Android customer satisfaction.  Plain and simple. The way they update their OS isn't that great either, it takes too long to get an OS upgrade, especially on their phones.


The other thing is a lot of people hate those capacitive buttons.  Every time I check out an Android phone or tablet, those buttons seem to just be a nuisance to use.  One of the many reasons why I never really liked the Android OS.  

post #11 of 31
But it's overpriced with iPad 2 innards.
Doesn't have a retina screen.
Steve would never have released a 7" tablet.

Did I miss anything?
post #12 of 31

Powers ranks devices using these criteria:

 

26% - Performance

22% - Ease of operation

19% - Styling and design

17% - Features

16% - Cost

 

They noted that the iPad scored well on the first four items, but not on Cost.

 

Would love to see the raw scores before things like "Styling" got more credit than "Features" and "Cost", and shifted the points up or down.

 

Whoever above said that Android tablets were probably used mostly just for games and mail and social apps and web surfing is probably right.  It is the post-PC era, after all, and those are popular post-PC activities.  No need to pay more than necessary to get those capabilities.

 

In my house, we have no OS preference, and everyone easily moves between iOS and Android tablets, since they have the same core apps we like:  Flipboard, Mint, Netflix, Optimum TV, browser, etc.

 

I do think that for more specialized apps, the iPad is tops.


Edited by KDarling - 4/27/13 at 7:33pm
post #13 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifij775 View Post

I'm curious why they didn't get a perfect score. HW, SW, media, apps? I think it's telling that the knock-off devices fall just short. Why innovate when you can just pull into second place with the equivalent of a copy machine.

Because of the "cost" category. Some people will think they are too expensive. Remember these are based on customer reviews, not reviews from techies. And there are always some people who have issues with devices or have negative experiences so it's very difficult (near impossible) to get perfect.
Apple definitely deserves top prize though. Their overall quality and excellence exceeds every other product
post #14 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Would love to see the raw scores before things like "Styling" got more credit than "Features" and "Cost", and shifted the points up or down.

It says 'Styling and Design.' That's quite different form just 'Styling'.

Also, when you say "... things like..." you're talking about precisely two attributes, 'performance' and 'ease of operation'. Many people will argue that they are the most important attributes in any product.
post #15 of 31

On a scale of 0-1000:

 

836-> 829 -> 822 -> 818 -> 784  doesn't really sound like any kind of major blowout.

 

I would still think Apple is a little further ahead than the score indicates because they do have the better dedicated apps, but cost must have dragged them down some.

 

Android tablets are very good in many aspects but they do need a little focus on the high end apps.  I think that is not far off as sales of the tablets have picked up dramatically and developers now have a larger market.

 

I think Android is getting by even without the high end apps largely because to many a tablet is still a gaming/reading/email device.  Even on the iPad the 'killer' tablet specific apps for the most part are very watered down versions of anything available on a PC or Mac.  No professional is ready to give up actual Photoshop or music apps for the limited comparative capabilities of  'Photoshop ultra ultra light' for tablets.

 

Tablets are great for many things but its going to be another 2 to 3 generations away before they can actually perform computation intensive applications up to snuff.

post #16 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

Android tablets are very good in many aspects but they do need a little focus on the high end apps.  I think that is not far off as sales of the tablets have picked up dramatically and developers now have a larger market.

 

 

Sales have nothing to do with it. When you have a range of tablets with varying screen sizes, resolutions, DPI, processors and graphics capabilities it makes it difficult to create a "high-end" App that runs properly on as many devices as possible. Oh, and then there's that little problem with different versions of Android on all of them. Android sales have long passed iOS, yet developers till favor iOS. I don't see that changing, especially in tablets where Apple is still dominant (as opposed to phones where Android has higher market share).

 


I think Android is getting by even without the high end apps largely because to many a tablet is still a gaming/reading/email device.  Even on the iPad the 'killer' tablet specific apps for the most part are very watered down versions of anything available on a PC or Mac.  No professional is ready to give up actual Photoshop or music apps for the limited comparative capabilities of  'Photoshop ultra ultra light' for tablets.

 

Tablets are great for many things but its going to be another 2 to 3 generations away before they can actually perform computation intensive applications up to snuff.

 

I don't know how you can say iPad Apps are "watered down versions" of PC/Mac software when so many iPad Apps are not available of PC's. Not because there aren't PC/Mac programs that perform similar functions but because the iPad versions take advantage of the interface to make something unique and useful.

 

You're not thinking like a developer trying to create something new - you're thinking like a developer going "how can I port this over". That's a poor way to think when developing for the iPad since the paradigm is so different from the usual keyboard/mouse/shortcut methods of interacting with software on a PC/Mac.

 

I have owned numerous Nikon DSLR's over the years and have a significant investment in lenses. However, I still take a lot of pictures with my iPhone. I don't always need to carry around a full-frame sensor DSLR with a couple lenses and flash when an iPhone will suffice. Likewise, an iPad is very useful for many things in many situations. It allows a beginner to get into music recording (for example) for very cheap and yet have the ability to produce some great results. Nobody is going to release an album that was recorded/edited on an iPad, but many musicians will use them for demos or getting their ideas down.

 

The iPad gives you those options. Android doesn't.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #17 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

On a scale of 0-1000:

 

836-> 829 -> 822 -> 818 -> 784  doesn't really sound like any kind of major blowout.

 

I would still think Apple is a little further ahead than the score indicates because they do have the better dedicated apps, but cost must have dragged them down some.

 

Android tablets are very good in many aspects but they do need a little focus on the high end apps.  I think that is not far off as sales of the tablets have picked up dramatically and developers now have a larger market.

 

I think Android is getting by even without the high end apps largely because to many a tablet is still a gaming/reading/email device.  Even on the iPad the 'killer' tablet specific apps for the most part are very watered down versions of anything available on a PC or Mac.  No professional is ready to give up actual Photoshop or music apps for the limited comparative capabilities of  'Photoshop ultra ultra light' for tablets.

 

Tablets are great for many things but its going to be another 2 to 3 generations away before they can actually perform computation intensive applications up to snuff.

 

That's why this ranking is pure bullshit. All other should be behind by at least few hundred points.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #18 of 31
Quote:
EricTheHalfBee "....Nobody is going to release an album that was recorded/edited on an iPad, but many musicians will use them for demos or getting their ideas down....."

Not true. The Gorillaz recorded and released an album made entirely on an iPad:

http://www.loopinsight.com/2011/04/04/album-recorded-entirely-in-garageband-for-ipad-released/
post #19 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Amhran View Post

Not true. The Gorillaz recorded and released an album made entirely on an iPad:

http://www.loopinsight.com/2011/04/04/album-recorded-entirely-in-garageband-for-ipad-released/
I knew about the Gorillaz album. There are people who've recorded movie footage on an iPhone too, but there would have to be some specific reason to do so (like being able to claim you were the first), not because it's the best tool for the job. Outside of a publicity stunt I see no reason to rely on an iPad to produce an album.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #20 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post


Outside of a publicity stunt I see no reason to rely on an iPad to produce an album.

 

I see no reason not to.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #21 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

 

Sales have nothing to do with it. When you have a range of tablets with varying screen sizes, resolutions, DPI, processors and graphics capabilities it makes it difficult to create a "high-end" App that runs properly on as many devices as possible. Oh, and then there's that little problem with different versions of Android on all of them. Android sales have long passed iOS, yet developers till favor iOS. I don't see that changing, especially in tablets where Apple is still dominant (as opposed to phones where Android has higher market share).

 

 

 

I do develop for Android.  It is a pain.  I understand that.  Having to define three different screen sizes and hoping what you come up with works on all 10,000 different variations out there stinks.  I think Tim Cook's recent statement that there might not be a big screen Apple product any time soon because Apple won't release it because there are 'too many tradeoffs'- that is one of the huge obstacles for Apple.  Apple developers can use absolute references on UI's.  That is 'super-easy' mode and terrific for them.  When there was only one iPhone screen size pixel 200,400 was in the exact same spot on everyone's screen.  If Apple releases a big screen phone their developers will need to learn the pain of relative UI's instead of absolute ones.

 

In short, I'm not even going to argue developing for Android has its challenges.  Different versions/fragmentation are mostly a non-issue on tablets.  Develop for ICS and you are going to reach 100% of the Android *tablet* market.

 

My point in saying developers will follow the market is still absolutely true.  There are a *few* really good apps out there for Android.  Nowhere near the amount on the iPad enjoys.  Creative developers with super ideas really want to build those great apps.  The high end ones take teams of people and thousands of people-hours to develop.  The biggest barrier for the last few years has been that Apple has @80-85% of the user market share.  Despite their desire to make a great product, nobody is going to go through that time and effort for 15% of the market.  Call it inverse 'Mac in the 90's syndrome'   With recent Android sales growth my point is that that barrier is gone.   There are now tons of Android tablet users and the number is growing at a pace that should be alarming to Apple.  Those developers who wanted to make a great Android app, but couldn't justify it financially because they'd only be reaching 15% of the market, are going to start building great Android apps.  That is great for Apple users as the competition will drive improvements- but not so great for Apple itself.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

 

I don't know how you can say iPad Apps are "watered down versions" of PC/Mac software when so many iPad Apps are not available of PC's. Not because there aren't PC/Mac programs that perform similar functions but because the iPad versions take advantage of the interface to make something unique and useful.

 

I have owned numerous Nikon DSLR's over the years and have a significant investment in lenses. However, I still take a lot of pictures with my iPhone. I don't always need to carry around a full-frame sensor DSLR with a couple lenses and flash when an iPhone will suffice. Likewise, an iPad is very useful for many things in many situations. It allows a beginner to get into music recording (for example) for very cheap and yet have the ability to produce some great results. Nobody is going to release an album that was recorded/edited on an iPad, but many musicians will use them for demos or getting their ideas down.

 

The iPad gives you those options. Android doesn't.

 

I think the above actually kind of supports what I was saying.  If you're an engineer designing a circuit you are going to use PSpice on a PC/Mac.  Not a nifty tablet substitute.  If your an architect or industrial engineer you might use an AutoCAD grade piece of software- not a tablet version.  There are decent versions of those applications for tablets that are going to be fun to work with and good for convenience' sake.  Maybe update an idea on your iPad during a flight- but for any serious computation work tablets are simply lacking in horsepower.  That isn't Apple's or anyones fault- its just a current reality.   It is a little like the early days of PC's where the hardware presented a barrier seemingly around every corner.  PC's advanced amazingly fast and that is largely what is hurting their sales.  The average PC has so much more computation power than most people need that, well, people are realizing they don't need that power.  If they can do everything they want to do with *wwwwaaayyyyy* more ease and convenience- that's what they will pick.  Tablets are going through the same thing and in another 2-3 years (maybe a little longer) they similarly are going to be far more capable and competent devices than today's tablets.

 

I agree with you that there are many dedicated apps that are better on a tablet.  No arguments there.  When your kids or friends are playing in your back yard, grabbing the iPad and snapping then editing pictures is both convenient and fun.  When Sports Illustrated calls and tells you you're shooting the Wimbledon finals (or the swimsuit issue) I'm guessing your bringing the iPad for the flight and the DLSR for the serious work.

post #22 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Also, when you say "... things like..." you're talking about precisely two attributes, 'performance' and 'ease of operation'. Many people will argue that they are the most important attributes in any product.

 

I would argue that each person should be able to decide what is most important to them, without JD Power or anyone else artificially skewing the results.

 

For example, many people would rank App choice as a higher priority than performance or looks, yet it's not even on the Power list of what is important.

 

Something else interesting in that report:

 

"The study finds that 51 percent of tablet owners share their device with at least one other person. While the incidence differs across brands, tablet manufacturers may benefit from promoting shared usage as a selling point, as satisfaction increases when more people use one tablet device. When a tablet is only used by one person, overall satisfaction is 824 (on a 1,000-point scale), 28 points lower than when a tablet is shared by four or more persons (852)."

 

In other words, if  everyone in a four person family had to share a single tablet because it cost too much to get more tablets, that pumped up that tablet's score by 28 points.  So which tablets got extra points for that?

 

Without one of us buying the full report, we'll only ever see the headlines, which like any of these reports, is intended solely to publicize the report company.


Edited by KDarling - 4/28/13 at 6:35am
post #23 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post


Outside of a publicity stunt I see no reason to rely on an iPad to produce an album.

 

Audio and audio apps on the iPad have come a long way since the first iPad was released, and I don't see why somebody couldn't record an entire band or orchestra straight into their iPad onto multiple tracks.

 

I wouldn't mix on an iPad just yet, as it is not yet powerful enough to handle many simultaneous plugins at once, but tracking audio on an iPad seems ideal and very convenient. So, I wouldn't rely 100% on an iPad to produce an album, but the iPad could certainly play an important role in the project, covering many tracking duties.

post #24 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

In short, I'm not even going to argue developing for Android has its challenges.  Different versions/fragmentation are mostly a non-issue on tablets.  Develop for ICS and you are going to reach 100% of the Android *tablet* market.

 

My point in saying developers will follow the market is still absolutely true.

 

 

I think the above actually kind of supports what I was saying.  If you're an engineer designing a circuit you are going to use PSpice on a PC/Mac.  Not a nifty tablet substitute.  If your an architect or industrial engineer you might use an AutoCAD grade piece of software- not a tablet version.  There are decent versions of those applications for tablets that are going to be fun to work with and good for convenience' sake.  Maybe update an idea on your iPad during a flight- but for any serious computation work tablets are simply lacking in horsepower.  That isn't Apple's or anyones fault- its just a current reality.   It is a little like the early days of PC's where the hardware presented a barrier seemingly around every corner.  PC's advanced amazingly fast and that is largely what is hurting their sales.  The average PC has so much more computation power than most people need that, well, people are realizing they don't need that power.  If they can do everything they want to do with *wwwwaaayyyyy* more ease and convenience- that's what they will pick.  Tablets are going through the same thing and in another 2-3 years (maybe a little longer) they similarly are going to be far more capable and competent devices than today's tablets.

 

I agree with you that there are many dedicated apps that are better on a tablet.  No arguments there.  When your kids or friends are playing in your back yard, grabbing the iPad and snapping then editing pictures is both convenient and fun.  When Sports Illustrated calls and tells you you're shooting the Wimbledon finals (or the swimsuit issue) I'm guessing your bringing the iPad for the flight and the DLSR for the serious work.

 

I still don't buy that Android will have better Apps because of market share. The developers are only one part of the equation. The other half is the consumer. Right now Android customers are not spending money on Apps or content. The most likely reason for this is people with low-end phones/tablets don't use them to their potential and don't spend money. It doesn't matter if the market share is higher if a large portion of that market would never spend real $$$ on a high-end App. iTunes is selling about 6X the digital content of Google despite Android having more devices. Developers gotta eat and they'll go where the money is.

 

I'm not sure why you're bringing up PSpice or AutoCAD in talking about tablets lacking the horsepower to do "high-end" work. Those are programs that an extremely small portion of customers would ever use. 99.99% of the population will never use that type of software, so why bring them up as an example of what tablets can't do?

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #25 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

I still don't buy that Android will have better Apps because of market share. The developers are only one part of the equation. The other half is the consumer. Right now Android customers are not spending money on Apps or content. The most likely reason for this is people with low-end phones/tablets don't use them to their potential and don't spend money. It doesn't matter if the market share is higher if a large portion of that market would never spend real $$$ on a high-end App. iTunes is selling about 6X the digital content of Google despite Android having more devices. Developers gotta eat and they'll go where the money is.

I'm not sure why you're bringing up PSpice or AutoCAD in talking about tablets lacking the horsepower to do "high-end" work. Those are programs that an extremely small portion of customers would ever use. 99.99% of the population will never use that type of software, so why bring them up as an example of what tablets can't do?

Look at Windows v Mac apps. It's hard to find a comparable Windows app that looks, feels, and runs with less total resources or crashes than on the Mac. The only such examples would be from developers that have cornered a market and have ignored Mac altogether, but that's not a fair comparison since that make it either a null comparison as they haven't ever supported the Mac or haven't done so in a long time, or they are only recently supporting the platform despite many years to decades supporting Windows.

The bottom line is Android's development platform simply isn't as nice, refined, or as well-rounded as Xcode, not to mention the App Store and its user base. It's much like Apple's brick-and-mortor stores compared to the old Gateway stores.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #26 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

 

I still don't buy that Android will have better Apps because of market share. The developers are only one part of the equation. The other half is the consumer.

 

Again, I think you're partially making my point.  Android tablet apps right now I would rate between 'fair' and 'good'  I'd give Apple an 'excellent' rating.  Android consumers don't spend as much as Apple consumers (they are not forced to shop in only one expensive store)   Agreed.  But it is exactly the consumer side of the equation that is currently growing rapidly.  Even if they don't spend as much as their Apple counterparts, if the current Android ecosystem got to where it is now despite only having 15% of tablet users- it is going to get much much better as the numbers grow to beyond 50% of the market.  I don't think Android apps are going to get better than Apple apps in the near future (maybe that's what started the confusion), I think Android apps are going to start getting much better than Android apps are currently.  The consumer side of the equation is exploding- the developer side will follow.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

 

I'm not sure why you're bringing up PSpice or AutoCAD in talking about tablets lacking the horsepower to do "high-end" work. Those are programs that an extremely small portion of customers would ever use. 99.99% of the population will never use that type of software, so why bring them up as an example of what tablets can't do?

 

I'm using those examples because they are the extreme cases to highlight the point.  My original point was that if the iPad apps were so good that they could do those above things well and Android tablets could not do them- it would be absolutely crippling to Androids chances for success.  A lot of people cite Apples 'killer tablet apps' as a reason Android tablets won't gain traction.  I think there was a post where someone listed 15 or so killer iPad apps and challenged Android fans to come up with equivalents.  I don't think there were many takers because Android currently doesn't have the equivalents.  I think you'd have to be guilty of 'wishful thinking' to think that they won't be arriving soon.  Of those 15ish Apps listed none really had any bearing on my tablet usage-  I would not use the vast majority of them because while they are nifty and convenient, the PC versions of those Apps are dramatically superior.

 

I'm not saying that Android doesn't want or need those Apps, or to say that the Apple versions aren't pretty awesome.  I'm just trying to come up with a reason why Android tablets are able to gain so much market share from Apple *despite* not yet having those apps.  I'm not a big believer in the 'Android people are stupid' arguments that tend to gain a lot of traction here.

post #27 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Povilas View Post

I see no reason not to.

 

...except possibly:

 

sound quality

reduced complexity at the expense of increased difficulty

lack of provision for monitor mixes

severely limited I/O (try tracking the whole band at once, or even just a drum kit)

imprecise editing

clumsy mixing interface

inability to conveniently integrate outboard

no comping tools

 

...but other than that, no reason not to. Except for the ones I didn't think of off the top of my head.

 

I can probably shoot and edit a movie with an iPad, too. I'm just really, really glad I don't have to!

post #28 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

 

...except possibly:

 

sound quality

reduced complexity at the expense of increased difficulty

lack of provision for monitor mixes

severely limited I/O (try tracking the whole band at once, or even just a drum kit)

imprecise editing

clumsy mixing interface

inability to conveniently integrate outboard

no comping tools

 

...but other than that, no reason not to. Except for the ones I didn't think of off the top of my head.

 

I can probably shoot and edit a movie with an iPad, too. I'm just really, really glad I don't have to!

 

Wrong. You obviously know very little about audio on the iPad since you're stating things that are flat out wrong.

 

Why do you claim sound quality, when there are apps that work at 96khz,24 bit?

 

And yes, somebody can track a whole band at once, or even just a drum kit into the iPad, using the right interface.

 

There are a number of audio interfaces available which can be used with the iPad, ranging from low end to high end.

post #29 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Why do you claim sound quality, when there are apps that work at 96khz,24 bit?

 

Did I miss something? Weren't we talking about using Garageband? But even assuming we include other software (which you're right, makes much more sense), there's a helluvalot more to sound quality than sample rate and word length. The analog design of the interface itself would probably rank Number 1, then probably the processing algorithms and summing math of the software.

 

While I suspect, admittedly without investigating, that most multichannel stuff for an iPad will fall into the M-Audio quality range, maybe there really are high quality interfaces and well-written software for the iPad. I haven't bothered looking because I can't imagine a scenario in which working that way seems desirable. YMMV.

 

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

And yes, somebody can track a whole band at once, or even just a drum kit into the iPad, using the right interface.

 

You're saying an iPad is capable of tracking 10-20 channels at once? Color me skeptical.

 

Even if it could, how are you going to provide monitor mixes to the musicians?

 

I'm sure there are lots of audio applications for which an iPad is an excellent choice. I just don't see tracking and/or mixing an album being one of them, but if it works for you and the talent are okay with it, screw what I think and do what makes you and them happy.

post #30 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

 

Did I miss something? Weren't we talking about using Garageband? But even assuming we include other software (which you're right, makes much more sense), there's a helluvalot more to sound quality than sample rate and word length. The analog design of the interface itself would probably rank Number 1, then probably the processing algorithms and summing math of the software.

 

While I suspect, admittedly without investigating, that most multichannel stuff for an iPad will fall into the M-Audio quality range, maybe there really are high quality interfaces and well-written software for the iPad. I haven't bothered looking because I can't imagine a scenario in which working that way seems desirable. YMMV.

 

 


 

 

You're saying an iPad is capable of tracking 10-20 channels at once? Color me skeptical.

 

Even if it could, how are you going to provide monitor mixes to the musicians?

 

I'm sure there are lots of audio applications for which an iPad is an excellent choice. I just don't see tracking and/or mixing an album being one of them, but if it works for you and the talent are okay with it, screw what I think and do what makes you and them happy.

 

The audio quality obviously depends on the interface, but the same is true if somebody is using a Macbook Pro or even a Mac Pro. 

 

Yes, I'm saying that an iPad is capable of tracking 10-20 channels at once. Providing monitor mixes would be no different than when using a DAW on a desktop, external hardware would be required.

 

Here's a list of audio interfaces that all work with the best multitracking app for the iPad, which is called Auria. I have the app, and it's basically like having Protools on your iPad.

 

With the ability to play 48 mono or stereo 24bit/96 kHz tracks simultaneously, record up to 24 of those tracks simultaneously (through a supported USB multichannel audio interface), and edit and mix with familiar tools and full parameter automation, it’s clear Auria sets a new standard for iPad multitrack recording.

 

http://auriaapp.com/Support/auria-audio-interfaces

post #31 of 31

That's why I bought a BMW and not a KIA. That's why Apple is the best, better quality

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › iPad takes top J.D. Power honors for the second time in a row