Creative rapped over 'better than CD quality' claim

 

Gallery

Posted on 13 Apr 2007 at 09:10

Creative cannot claim that its Xmod audio processor can enhance MP3s so that they sound better than CDs, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has ruled following a complaint by an audio engineer.

The portable media player and speakers manufacturer released Xmod late last year, claiming that it cold 'upconvert' compressed music in formats such as MP3, AAC and WMA by enhancing the low and high frequencies while improving audio dynamics to create a cleaner, richer sound. In a subsequent marketing email it claimed 'An Experience Beyond Studio Quality' and 'audio that sounds ever better than CD quality in seconds'.

The complainant told the ASA that he thought these claims were misleading, because MP3s, like AAC and WMA, lost elements of sound quality through compression that could not be replaced by any subsequent processes.

Creative told the ASA that it had not claimed to that it could restore MP3 audio to an exact replica of the CD or studio master from which it originated, but that they intended to take music back to a natural listening experience. It did not claim to restore lost sound, 'but simply provided an experience that sounded better than the CD format', the ASA said.

ASA explained that Creative said its Xtreme Fidelity (X-Fi) technology, around which the Xmod is built, employs two methods for enhancing sound.

'First, X-Fi 24-bit Crystalizer technology converted all content to 24-bit 96kHz, which was the same bit quality as studio quality sound; it then worked to enhance the audio by reversing the compromises that had affected the sound quality during the compression process, using Creative's intelligent algorithms to restore the lost dynamics,' the ASA said. 'Second, they said X-Fi CMSS-3D technology up-mixed tracks from stereo format to surround sound, which centred the vocal content without affecting the left/right stereo balance, and used ambiance extraction techniques to provide subtle but effective natural ambient surround, based on the inherent reverbs of the source material.'

The ASA accepted that 'the bit rate and frequency used by the Xmod were higher than that of standard CD quality, and the Xmod converted stereo audio to surround sound' and noted Creative's assertion that the offending email had contained a typographical error: 'audio that sounds ever better' should have read 'audio that sounds even better' [our italics].

Nonetheless it concluded that this did not necessarily mean that the email breached the advertising code of practice.

'While we appreciated that the sound effect created by the Xmod might be preferred by some listeners, we considered that we had not seen evidence to show that the sound it delivered was better than CD quality,' the ASA said.

However it did not uphold the complaint regarding the 'Experience Beyond Studio Quality' claim.

'We considered that the claim "An Experience Beyond Studio Quality" focused on Creative's view of the listener's experience and noted it did not state that the product delivered sound beyond studio quality,' the ASA ruled. 'We concluded that the claim was unlikely to mislead.'

Author: Simon Aughton