Google Pixel 8 Pro Audio test

We put the Google Pixel 8 Pro through our rigorous SBMARK Audio test suite to measure its performance in both recording audio using the built-in microphones and playing audio through speakers.
In this review, we’ll break down how it performed in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Overview

Key audio specifications include:

• Two speakers (top center, bottom right)
• No Jack audio output

Playback

Registration

With a SBMARK Audio score of 142, the Google Pixel 8 Pro performed very well in our tests and represents a clear improvement over its predecessor, the Pixel 7 Pro, with better results in both playback and recording. The built-in speakers sounded great, with a warm tone and excellent soundstage width. In playback, the device performed better when listening to music. Audio quality was also good when watching movies or playing games, but test scores were slightly lower for these use cases.

Audio recordings from the Pixel 8 Pro had a nice, natural timbre. Our testers found that the recording quality especially during noisy events, such as concerts, was improved compared to the previous generation of Google’s flagship. However, the audio zoom feature could have been more effective. Recording results were better when using the front camera but only slightly worse with the main camera app. Due to its mono output, there was a noticeable performance hit when using the recording app for reminders and similar uses.

Test summary

About SBMARK audio tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone audio reviews, SBMARK engineers perform a series of objective tests and undertake more than 20 hours of perceptual evaluation under controlled laboratory conditions.
(For more details on our playback protocol, click here; for more details on our recording protocol, click here.)
The following section brings together key elements of our comprehensive testing and analysis performed in SBMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations in the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

Listen to the playback performance of the tested smartphone in this comparison with some of its competitors:

Here’s how the Google Pixel 8 Pro fares in playback use cases compared to its competitors:

In our playback tests, the Pixel 8 Pro delivered overall decent tonal performance, despite imperfect tonal balance. The upper part of the spectrum lacked brightness and clarity, and the highs sounded slightly dull. The results of the perceptual evaluation were confirmed by the frequency response graph, which showed a lack of treble, specifically a lack of upper treble strength and treble extension. The midrange was pleasantly warm, however, despite a slight lack of information below 600Hz. This warmth was ideal for rendering vocal content and music. However, our testers noted a general lack of clarity.

Our experts found the low end to be strong and pleasant overall, but an emphasis on the upper bass meant the bottom section tended to be overpowered. This resulted in a perceived lack of depth. Depending on the content, the tonal balance may seem slightly boomy or boxy. But most of the time the sound was slightly dull or dark.

At low volumes, testers found that the lack of treble became more noticeable, while at the maximum volume setting, the upper midrange became slightly too prominent, with the tonal balance also sounding aggressive. It’s worth noting that when gaming the tonal balance was surprisingly different compared to music and movie apps. The muffled sound was gone, but the bass and low mids were still missing.

Dynamic performance was good overall. The attack was decent but lacked clarity and could have been snappier. This was exacerbated by the lack of information in the upper spectrum. At maximum volume, our testers found the attack to be compromised by significant distortion and overwhelming transients. Bass accuracy was good overall, with accurate bass attack. However, the support and release could have been more consistent. Both were weakened by resonances and had a tendency to sound slightly exaggerated. On the other hand, the punch was very good, thanks to the satisfying energy of the low-mid range. At the maximum volume setting, the focus on the upper-midrange caused a loss of energy in the rest of the spectrum, particularly in the lower-midrange. This resulted in a less incisive performance.

In our tests, the Pixel 8 Pro delivered good spatial results overall. The breadth of the projected sound stage was particularly good, thanks to an immersive stereo image that went beyond the physical confines of the device. Our testers found the distance rendering to be accurate and the balance well-centered. However, the localizability of individual sound sources in the scene was slightly blurry, mainly due to inconsistent treble rendering. Depth rendering could also have been better as it sounded a little flat, with little difference in perceived distance between distinct sound sources.

During volume testing, our audio experts found that the Pixel 8 Pro’s maximum volume setting was loud enough and that volume levels were evenly distributed. However, the minimum was too low, making it difficult to hear low-volume sections in highly dynamic content, such as classical music. It’s also worth noting that the difference in tuning between the music app and games also resulted in a difference in volume increases.

Here are some sound pressure levels (SPLs) measured when playing our sample recordings of hip-hop and classical music at maximum volume:

The following graph shows the gradual changes in volume going from minimum to maximum. We expect these changes to be consistent across the range, so that all volume increases match user expectations:

At maximum volume, our testers noticed excessive compression and found that timbre and dynamics were compromised by distortion. On the plus side, the Pixel 8 Pro has been designed in such a way that the speakers are unlikely to be covered by the user’s fingers while gaming.

Here’s how the Google Pixel 8 Pro fares in recording use cases compared to its competitors:

During recording tests, the Google device delivered excellent results in terms of timbre, with a natural and pleasant tonal balance that was consistent across all camera and recording apps tested. However, some parts of the frequency spectrum, such as the highs and low mids, showed some imperfections.

The treble performance was overall natural, despite a noticeable lack of brightness, caused by a lack of upper treble and a somewhat limited treble extension. These shortcomings seemed to be most noticeable when recording with the main camera. That said, the high-end extension seemed especially limited for recordings made with the Memo app. In both apps there was a lack of information between 3-4kHz.

The midrange had good clarity in all use cases, but lacked punch and body around 200Hz. This was especially noticeable on some of the male voices in our test scenarios. For the rest the performance was quite satisfactory, without any particular resonances. Bass performance lacked some punch overall, and low-end extension in particular. The results were still satisfying, but the lack of punch mentioned above, combined with a slightly weak low-midrange, resulted in a slightly thin tonal balance.

When recording loud concerts with the main camera, tonal balance was good overall, with sufficient bass rendition and low-end extension. The lower region may be a bit boomy though. The midrange slightly lacks presence, as well as some clarity. The highs were slightly dull and overall lacked brightness.

Recording dynamics performance was good. The envelope was accurate, with realistic rendering in all use cases. However, the attack lacked clarity overall, and particularly in vocal use cases where plosives sounded a bit flat. When recording concerts, the envelope was decent but affected by compression.

The signal-to-noise ratio was good in all use cases. The device applies some form of background reduction to recordings, which was quite subtle when recording with the main camera, but more noticeable with the front camera. That said, when using the Memo app in an urban environment, our testers noted that some quieter sentences could be drowned out by background noise.

The Pixel 8 Pro also scored well in the space test category. The localizability of individual sound sources was very good and the width of the recorded sound scene was good, although with the main camera it could have been even wider. This applies to all use cases except for the recorder app, which is limited to mono recordings. Distance performance was also good, but some voices could sound a little too distant.

Our testers found the overall recording volume to be average. Louder recordings wouldn’t have done any harm. Objective measurements showed good results, with excellent loudness levels and great resilience to high sound pressure levels, for example when recording noisy events such as concerts.

Here are the sound levels recorded in the audio and video files, measured in LUFS (Loudness Unit Full Scale); For reference, we expect volume levels to be above -24 LUFS for recorded content:

Unwanted recording artifacts were overall well under control, but recordings of loud concerts were affected by compression. A peak in THD+n (Total Harmonic Distortion Plus Noise) was observable in the lower treble, which coincided with a lack of information at high sound pressure levels in the same region of the spectrum. Like speakers, microphones don’t clog easily, and finger noise isn’t an issue either.

In this audio comparison you can hear how this smartphone handles wind noise compared to its competitors:

matrix(3) {
[“Google Pixel 8 Pro”]=> string(70) “resources/Google/Pixel8ProV2.2/GooglePixel8Pro_MicrophoneArtifacts.m4a”
[“Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra”]=> string(76) “resources/Google/Pixel8ProV2.2/SamsungGalaxyS23Ultra_MicrophoneArtifacts.m4a”
[“Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max”]=> string(74) “resources/Google/Pixel8ProV2.2/AppleiPhone15ProMax_MicrophoneArtifacts.m4a” }

Background performance was very good, with no unwanted artifacts. The underlying tonal balance was slightly focused on the midrange, but the quieter low-end and high-end helped the main signal stand out more. The background tone was pleasant overall.