Last week, as I was preparing for a business trip during which I'd finally have time to work on some of the many reviews I've started but not yet finished, I came across a file named "ces2008_winners_isolated.rtf," and realized I'd never posted my CES 2008 winners, which I said I'd do back in January (Doh!)--my sincere apologies for this oversight. We've been dealing with some serious changes at my workplace, and, for the last few months, the most I've done related to Head-Fi has been to listen to some pretty cool gear, including these, my belated choices for "Head-Fi.org Best of CES 2008." One advantage the delay has presented is having had serious ear-time with what I'm going to tell you about before I tell you about 'em. Also, though late--real late--this piece is, in a way, timely, as two of the products are very close to their official release dates. So, without further delay, here are my choices for the most Head-Fi-relevant products shown at CES 2008.
Now, before I discuss my choices for Head-Fi.org Best of CES 2008 and why I chose them, I wanted to first point out my choice for Head-Fi.org Best of CES 2008 Runner-Up: Sleek Audio's SA6 in-ear monitors. Though I didn't get to actually make it to meet with Sleek Audio in Las Vegas (due to the scheduling constraints that come with me having had only two days at CES), Sleek Audio was there, and I received a production SA6 to evaluate in lieu of an in-person CES meeting with them. And I did meet with the Sleek Audo team when they visited my office some time ago.
What's so special about the SA6? The ability to adjust treble and bass output independently, with the use of carefully designed, interchangeable treble tubes and bass ports (currently available with three versions each: minus, equal (neutral) and plus). 2008-04-14 NOTE: I believe there are even more tuning options available now, which I'll discuss another time. Though Sennheiser also came to CES 2008 armed with their upcoming IE 8 announcement--an IEM that will offer adjustable bass--Sennheiser didn't have a functional prototype available to listen to at the time.
To a diehard Head-Fi’er, at first blush, the SA6 might seem gimmicky, in concept. Many Head-Fi'ers are purists, with few of us using components in our audio rigs that offer things like bass and treble adjustments, equalizers, balance control, etc. To start, though, it's important to note that what Sleek Audio has done is to offer bass and treble adjustments without the use of electronics, instead providing the ability to change the acoustic properties of the earpieces mechanically (adjusting the physical filtering and internal tube diameters of the treble tubes, and/or the internal volume/driver back pressure with the bass ports). Great care, and much R&D, has gone into the design of the SA6, which I was party to witness to some degree through the use of a pre-production prototype, and, finally, a finished production version that shows greater refinement than the already very good prototype.
One thing that makes what they're doing possible is what sounds to me like a fine choice of balanced armature driver--there's only one in each earpiece, but yet it's able to achieve very good bass extension, and also nice, extended treble. I'm not sure which driver they're using (and I didn't ask), but I'm guessing it's either a newer driver, or one of the best implementations of a previously available balanced armature driver, as the SA6 is, in my opinion, one of the top single-driver balanced armature IEMs I've heard (so far, my favorite setting is "=" and "=" (bass and treble)), holding its own with its multi-driver universal-fit competitors. 2008-04-14 NOTE: I've since acquired a Klipsch IMAGE, and, like the SA6, it is an amazing single-driver, balanced armature IEM that makes me wonder even more what the heck is going on with balanced armature driver technology that one in each ear can pull off the kind of sound quality that I heretofore thought was only possible with multi-driver IEMs.
Additionally, Sleek Audio developed a very nice 360-degree swiveling detachable cable system. In addition to making it very easy and comfortable to turn the cables up over your ears to reduce microphonics, there's another potential benefit: Should Sleek Audio eventually choose to make the plugs available, don't be surprised to see higher-end replacement cables offered and/or DIY'd (especially if the SA6 sells well, which I imagine it will). What else might that new plug/jack configuration mean? Well, I don't want to jump to conclusions, but check out this line from Sleek Audio's website: "Since the cord is removable, you can easily upgrade your SA6 for future developments, like wireless applications." Hmmmmm...... Again, I don't want to jump to conclusions based on that statement, but it reads to me like there's potentially a wireless future for the SA6, and, if done correctly, that’s something I'd love to see. (No, I don't have any inside information, but I'm not sure how else to interpret that line.)
Simply put, Sleek Audio's SA6 bass/treble adjustability effectively and competently give a very good universal-fit IEM several distinct personalities--which means owning it is like owning more than one IEM, making for a seriously strong competitor and exceptional value at its price point of $249.99. So, for essentially being the first to offer a high-end universal fit earphone that, given its sound customizability, is actually several different excellent IEMs in one, Sleek Audio's SA6 is my choice for Head-Fi.org Best of CES 2008 Runner-Up.
Head-Fi.org Best of CES 2008, Co-Winners
For me, making my choices for best Head-Fi-related products at CES 2008 ended up being quite easy. Head-Fi.org started off as a mostly high-end headphone audio forum back in 2001--with a focus on achieving the best possible sound one could afford (and/or was willing to budget) in headphone audio. Discussion of high-end CD (and/or SACD) players, for example, was a more popular topic in Head-Fi's earlier days than it is now, which isn't surprising, given the fast-growing emergence of the iPod (and like products), and computer audio, both of which are increasingly becoming the ways people elect to store and play their music (and the corresponding flip-side's precipitous decline of CD sales). And from these developments comes the growing sense that we might be witnessing the death of hi-fi. As if to intensify the foreboding, we will be seeing (I predict) an even more gigantic growth spurt in the use of portable media players, due mostly to the growing popularity of media-playing mobile phones, the best known current example being Apple's iPhone, which burst onto the scene and continues to sell like hotcakes (as far as expensive smartphones go). I believe just over 100 million iPods (iPods, not iPhones) have been sold so far in total; but, at minimum, hundreds of millions of mobile phones are sold worldwide every year. Just as it is becoming increasingly difficult to find a mobile phone without a built-in camera, I think the same will eventually be true of trying to find a mobile phone without media player functionality. And good media player functionality is much less constrained by the mobile phone form factor than good digital camera functionality currently is (relative to their standalone counterparts), which means that products like the iPhone will obviate the need for a standalone media player for many of its owners.
Okay, so where am I going with this, and what does this have to do with my choices for Head-Fi-relevant Best Products of CES 2008? I'm getting there, I'm getting there....
With the eventual ubiquity of full media player functionality on mobile phones will come the day when far more people will be carrying portable media players than even today. <Cue the sound of hi-fi wheezing and coughing.> As these types of mobile phones find their way into virtually everyone's pockets and belts, there will be a growing demand for wireless means of listening to the audio from these devices (think of today's very common sight of Bluetooth earpieces affixed to our heads to talk on the phone). Have you ever heard Bluetooth stereo headphones? If so, did you cringe, too? Though certainly not on everyone's heads at this time, these bluetooth stereo headphones are becoming more popular, thanks to media-playing mobile phones. <Cue the sound of hi-fi's EKG flatlining. Or is it?>
My choices for Head-Fi Best of CES 2008 are two wonderful steps in the right direction--back to high fidelity. (There are other key steps, like high-definition digital music downloads, but I'll get to that separately, in another forum post or on my blog.) For me, there are two CES 2008 Head-Fi-relevant Best Of’s, both of which I find to be not just daring and innovative, but truly exceptional in terms of sonic performance.
Sennheiser MX W1 Wireless Earphones
As I said in my CES recap post, I was, like many of you, disappointed heading into CES 2008 with the knowledge (from pre-event releases) that I was not going to be greeted with a long-awaited new flagship headphone from Sennheiser. Yes, Sennheiser was entering the high-end universal-fit IEM market--that’s news, but not entirely surprising given their experience, and the growing popularity of the IEM form factor. But what I was bristling a bit at was the pre-event announcement of the MX W1--a $599 wireless earphone. "What?! Insanity! What insanity!" I initially thought. The best wireless headphone I had theretofore heard was the AKG HEARO 999 wireless headphone, which is actually a wonderful, musical product for what it is. The HEARO, however, is (1) a full-size system, consisting of a definitely-not-portable processor/transmitter unit with an outboard antenna, and a full-sized headphone (with antenna diversity); and (2) intended in large part for home theater use (but still sounds very good for music). What Sennheiser was announcing with the MX W1 was what I feared would be an expensive interpretation of a Bluetooth stereo headphone; and despite their obvious prowess with mobile phone Bluetooth earpieces (link 1, link 2), I hadn’t (and still haven't) heard a good, musical Bluetooth stereo headphone by any manufacturer, and am of the understanding that Bluetooth currently doesn’t have the bandwidth to transmit high quality audio (based on the standards of a serious Head-Fi’er anyway).
Click on the photo above to enlarge.
However, the MX W1, according to the first release I read, uses a newer, better wireless technology called Kleer by Kleer Coporation, which currently has a peak throughput (bit rate) of 2.37MB/second, which is enough to transmit full CD quality (16/44.1) stereo audio without compression, wirelessly. Still, with two completely untethered earpieces that look very much like a pair of mobile Bluetooth headsets, it was hard for me to expect much performance from the MX W1--that is, until I actually heard the MX W1 in action during one of Sennheiser’s pre-CES events. Once I had the earpieces properly in place and hit the "play" button on the portable rig I had with me at the time (a second-generation 8GB Apple iPod nano connected to a Ray Samuels Audio Predator via an ALO Audio iPod dock cable), I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. My immediate first impression was that there was no way I was listening to two completely wireless earphone earpieces. At our CES mini-Meet, Edwood had a similar response, and actually preferred the MX W1 to Sennheiser’s new (wired) IEM, the IE 7.
What further astounds me is how excellently Sennheiser executed the MX W1 as a whole little sytem. Keep in mind that the MX W1 is the first application of Kleer in a totally untethered stereo earphone configuration, and is the first real attempt that I can think of to create anything even remotely like this product--so that’s about as first-generation as it gets. Considering that Kleer transmission hasn’t yet been incorporated into any popular digital audio players (DAPs), the MX W1 requires a Kleer transmitter box (about the size of a matchbox) that plugs into the headphone output of your DAP or headphone amp, with the driving device adjusting the volume, just as it would with a wired headphone. The need to tote the transmitter dongle is the only significant downside of the MX W1 that I can come up with. If/when DAP manufacturers start incorporating Kleer transmission into their devices, however, the Sennheiser MX W1 earpieces will work with them without the separate transmitter box. (Even if and when this happens, we Head-Fi'ers who buy the MX W1 will almost certainly keep using the included transmitter box, so as to continue to avail ourselves the option to choose our one of our many favorite headphone amps to drive 'em.)
Other than the currently unavoidable necessity of a Kleer transmitter box, the whole MX W1 system is as close to perfect and refined a package as could be expected or wished for. The MX W1 system is very elegantly comprised of the following main parts:
- Two small, rechargeable wireless earpieces (that, again, look a lot like hip Bluetooth earpieces);
- One Kleer transmitter box with a 3.5-mm stereo plug, to plug into a headphone output;
- One cradle that serves as a carrying and storage unit for the earpieces and which itself is rechargeable, providing on-the-go charging for the earpieces;
- One very classy leather cover with magnetic closure and belt loop for the above cradle;
- One USB charging cable that splits off into a “Y” for charging both earpieces, or, more practically, to use one end to charge the cradle (which can concurrently charge both earpieces) and one end to charge the Kleer transmitter;
- An international AC adapter kit that enables the above USB charging cable to be plugged into wall outlets in most countries; and
- A fit kit, and various accessories (including bands to affix the transmitter to the back of your DAP or amp.
As for the sonic performance of the MX W1, I've been asked by many if the MX W1 sounds good for wireless, or just sounds good? My answer is that it sounds amazing for wireless, and very good, period. Like I said earlier, Edwood actually preferred the MX W1's sonics to the wired Sennheiser IE 7, which doesn't surprise me--not because the IE 7 doesn't sound excellent to my ears (it certainly does), but because, again, the MX W1 is sonically impressive, wireless or not.
For the MX W1, Sennheiser developed a new 14-mm driver that is made in their state of the art factory in Tullamore, Ireland. I've visited this facility, and it is amazing the technology they have at their disposal there, and it's no surprise to me why some of their best products are either made there in their entireties, or have key components made there. (Given the proprietary nature of their development, construction and testing setups and techniques, I was not allowed to take pictures of the inside of that facility during my visit a few years back.) I imagine one of the reasons they developed a whole-new driver set for this product is the very specific requirements of the MX W1's unique form factor. Given its technology and design, Sennheiser knew the MX W1 would be on the expensive side to start, and, from what I know about their people and culture, they would feel great responsibility to uphold high sonic standards at that high asking price. Though I don't know the specifics of the driver set in question, I would guess that it was designed first and foremost for sonic performance, but yet to be efficient and low-mass enough to be well amplified by a circuit powered only by a single lithium-ion button cell (in each earpiece). (Consider also that amplification isn't the only thing that has to be powered by the tiny battery, as each earpiece also has a Kleer receiver circuit in it, and an LED power/receiver status indicator.) Did Sennheiser succeed with the new driver? Oh, absolutely. I hope they incorporate this driver in future products, particularly in something wired, to see how it would compare to this wireless marvel. (Of course, I'd guess that a wired version of these drivers would have the advantage over wireless when fed by a good outboard amp, for obvious reasons.)
What are the MX W1's sonic characteristics? Before I answer that (and as a component of my answer), I have to first discuss Sennheiser's Twist-to-Fit system. Twist-to-Fit was introduced in some of Sennheiser's newer earbuds, starting in 2006. I like good earbuds, but find their biggest weakness is often the lack of good physical coupling between the ears and the buds--if you're one of those people who experiences sonic benefits from gently pressing earbuds into your ears while they're playing, then you know what I'm talking about. Twist-to-Fit adds a small, soft disk on a short appendage on each earbud, designed to be held in the folds that most of us have in common on the upper portion of our outer ear surface. When properly inserted, the earbud part of the Twist-to-Fit earphone is gently pressed into your ear by this extension. As a result of this, the user experiences two important benefits: (1) unlike typical earbuds, Twist-to-Fit earbuds will not only remain on your head, but gently pressed into your ears, even after somewhat rigorous head movement; and (2) because of the way the Twist-to-Fit earbuds stay pressed to one's ears, bass response is stronger and more consistent than with most standard earbuds. The reason I bring the Twist-to-Fit mechanism up is because I can twist the MX W1 into my ears both forward and back (the instructions suggest twisting the fit extension back to seat the earphones), and depending on which direction I choose, I get slightly different equalization results, particularly in the bass region. If I twist them forward, the MX W1's overall balance is actually quite neutral, as the buds are held with slightly less pressure against my ears than if I twist them back. Not surprisingly, then, twisting them back increases bass response, giving a slightly-more-than-neutral kick from the mid-bass down, and a little added richness to the midband, too. Treble extension is quite good for me in either front or back position, but more present in the forward position. Which position do I prefer? Most of the time, I prefer the suggested insertion position (twisted back) for its richness, better detail in the bass region, and the sense of heightened rhythm that can come from that. With bass-rich material, I tend to twist the earpieces forward to balance things out. Not everyone I've let try the MX W1 has been able to get both a twisted-back and twisted-forward position to stay--I'm fortunate in this regard with the MX W1.
While on the topic of Twist-to-Fit, I should bring up what I consider to be a minor con in a sea of pros: Sennheiser's Twist-to-Fit system does not work with all ears, even with its fit kit. In my experience allowing people to try on a couple of different Twist-to-Fit models (including the MX W1), the Twist-to-Fit system will work with most ears. One pair of ears that Twist-to-Fit didn't work with was with a friend of mine who has rather smooth, fold-free outer ears (read: shaped like small satellite dishes), and the fit extensions do require the upper ear creases that most people have. Another person who tried the MX W1 had the upper ear folds, but his ears were so small that the fit extensions (even with the smallest fit disks) went well above those folds. But, overwhelmingly most people I've let try the various Twist-to-Fit earphones were able to achieve a good fit. Long story short, if you're going to buy the MX W1 (or any other Sennheiser Twist-to-Fit model), I'd suggest purchasing from a dealer with a liberal return policy, just in case your ears are of the small percentage that Twist-to-Fit won't work with. (If you do buy the MX W1 system, and the earpieces do fit your ears--which, for most of you, they will--I'd be very surprised if you returned it.)
The MX W1's soundstage is quite impressive, probably due in part to its relatively open, earbud design. I'm able to get a more outside presentation with the MX W1, when driven by a good headphone amp, than I am with most of my IEMs (again, most likely because the MX W1 is not in-ear).
I'll be saying more about the Sennheiser MX W1 system (in the Headphone Forum and in my blog) as I continue to spend more time with it (and I've been spending more time with it in the three months since CES than any other headphone I currently have on hand), but it's already obvious to me that it's a home run hit way out of the park. Declaring the Sennheiser MX W1 one of the co-winners of Head-Fi CES 2008 Product of the Year is an absolute no-brainer. The fidelity it offers with the unparalleled freedom of a completely wireless form factor makes Sennheiser's MX W1 a technological marvel that I hope portends what we can expect of high-end wireless headphones to come.
Wadia 170 iTransport iPod Dock
To call Wadia's iTransport "an iPod Dock" is to call a Ferrari F430 Scuderia "a car." Yes, the 170 iTransport is an iPod dock, and the Ferrari F430 Scuderia is a car....oh, well, you get the point. The iTransport does what other iPod docks do, offering analog pass-through outputs and component and S-Video outputs (which not all docks do). But it has a trick up its sleeve that is currently totally unique to it, and which raises the performance potential of the iPod to such a degree as to make it a bona fide hi-fi media transport. How? By bypassing the iPod's internal DAC (digital-to-analog conversion) stage completely, and instead outputting bit-perfect digital to an S/PDIF coaxial output. If you're thinking, in response, "So?" then bear with me for an explanation of the significance of this. (For those of you who already get it, the few paragraphs that follow will constitute a minute or two of "duh.")
<begin audiophile duh>
For years, many audiophiles have used outboard DACs (digital-to-analog converters) to squeeze better sound from their CDs, typically using a CD player's digital output to feed the DAC. Why? Because good outboard DACs have carefully-engineered conversion and analog output stages that simply trounce the performance of those stages that come built into most typical CD players. In short, a good outboard DAC can turn even a mediocre-to-good CD player into one part of a very good digital source component, by limiting the CD player's role to that of a transport, completely bypassing the CD player's built-in conversion and analog output stages.
Over the years, however, CD sales have declined precipitously, and continue to freefall, as music listeners move to digital downloads in droves. And for many people, the first foray into ripping CD's and digital music downloading came with the purchase of an iPod, and the corresponding need to get music from those discs onto these hip little digital audio players. (I know there are competitors to the iPod, but the iPod has a remarkably commanding market share lead, owning more market share than all of its competitors combined.) Just given the fact that my lifestyle is somewhat mobile, it's probably safe to say I spend as much (and probably more) time listening to my iPods in portable rigs as I do listening to my CD players and DACs, and I know this is becoming increasingly true for many a Head-Fi'er. With the largest-capacity iPod currently able to store 160 gigabytes of media, being able to extract bit-perfect digital from it with the Wadia iTransport makes the iPod able to feed good outboard DACs, and, thus, one heck of a little media transport. When it comes to digital audio, the importance of the coversion and analog output stages can not be overstated; and by completely freeing audiophiles from the performance constraints of the built-in coversion and analog output stages of the iPod, the iTransport thus becomes of potentially giant importance in the world of hi-fi, given (a) the ubiquity of iPods, and (b) the growing ability to store more and more of our media. (For many, the ability to store one's entire music collection losslessly is already at hand with the 80GB and 160GB iPod models.)
Consider also that our world of diehard audiophiles and Head-Fi'ers is only a fraction of what makes the iTransport so important, as the iPod is owned by millions of enthusiasts of another hobby who aren’t necessarily diehard audiophiles and Head-Fi’ers, but who aren't timid about dropping the bucks on their rigs, and who'd understand the iTransport's value proposition--I’m talking about home theater enthusiasts (which many of us here also are), whose home theater receivers and processors are equipped with digital inputs and pretty good DAC circuitry.
If you didn't get the significance of the iTransport a few minutes ago, I hope you do now.
Thus endeth the sermon; and back to the already-late, regularly scheduled programming.
</end audiophile duh>
At CES 2008, Wadia was exhibiting the iTransport in a multi-kilobuck rig, the value of which likely came close to, or exceeded, the median individual income in the U.S. --and this constituted Wadia's primary exhibit system, which I thought a bold, bold statement of their confidence in the iPod/iTransport combination. Serving up the sytem's DAC functionality was a Wadia 781i CD/SACD player/DAC. How did it sound? If Wadia wasn't going out of their way to make very clear that what you were hearing was originating from an iPod, you'd never have believed it--I saw several people fiddling with the system to be sure it wasn't the Wadia 781i spinning a disc that they were hearing. As word spread throughout the CES audio community what was going on in Wadia's room, more and more people showed up to hear it for themselves, and, to a person (while I was there, and I was there quite a bit), all seemed wowed by the spectacle. I know I was.
But here's the thing: I don't have a top-of-the-line Wadia disc player or DAC. In fact, I don't have a Wadia anything at all, 'cept when I'm fortunate enough to be able to borrow something from Wadia. I also don't have Halcro electronics, and other pieces of some of the ultimate in audio esoterica that the iTransport had at its beck and call downstream. What I do have are some very nice, very capable rigs, however; and certainly more affordable than what the iTransport was hooked up to at CES 2008. I think this will be true for most people who will end up buying the $380 wonder, too. (2008-04-14 NOTE: Though it was originally announced at $350, there was a mild increase in price, as costs went up prior to final production.) So, with the blessing of Wadia's John Schaffer, I had the great privilege of borrowing an iTransport immediately after CES 2008 came to a close, to use with my more modestly priced rigs. (They only had three working units at the time, and they needed all three at their exhibit.) Now how fast do you think I trucked my butt to Wadia's headquarters, which, very fortunately for me, is within driving distance? Blink.
Right when I got home, I plugged the iTransport in, and fed it some digital juice, courtesy of an iPod Classic 160--all of this feeding a trusty MSB Gold Link DAC III / PowerBase combination, which, despite its age, still impresses me every time I listen to it. Stacked with a combination of mostly Apple lossless (ALAC) and WAV files (and some high-bitrate AAC files)--as well as an iTunes movie (The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy), to test its video output--my more real-world experience with the iTransport began. And from the word "go," what I was hearing blew me away completely. Did the combination make for the best digital component I'd ever heard? No. I've had some great gear come through here, and the iPod/iTransport/MSB combo certainly does not trump, say, Wadia's CD players and DACs. But I'll tell you this: I was hard pressed to be able to tell any difference between the iPod feeding WAV tracks to the iTransport to the MSB, and the Sony SCD-C333ES spinning a disc and feeding the same tracks to the MSB. In other words, wow--as part of a good team, the iPod is indeed a capable transport. Will I be buying an iTransport? Uh, yeah. So will a lot of you, I'm quite certain. And for those with good DACs--or those who're thinking of picking one up when you get your iTransport--satisfaction and amazement is almost certain, in my opinion.
How does it sound? If you already have a good DAC, and you're feeding it with a good CD player as transport, then you already know. That you can do it with an iPod is simply amazing. Again, I have a Sony SCD-C333ES player that serves as Redbook transport (and SACD player), and I picked it up for its carousel ability: Yes, even before the iPod, I occasionally enjoyed shuffling tracks, and could shuffle five discs worth with the SCD-C333ES. With an iPod Classic 160, however, I can shuffle through thousands of lossless and high-bitrate* tracks, without the need to handle a single disc, and without ceding any audio quality (to these ears) to my SCD-C333ES-as-transport (using Grado GS-1000 and Sennheiser HD650 headphones, being fed by either the fantastic new U.S.-voltage Luxman P-1 solid state headphone amp or Ray Samuels Audio Raptor tube headphone amp). (The next time I have a Wadia iTransport handy--which will hopefully be mine, mine, mine, all mine--I'll spend more time with it through loudspeakers and also playing video.)
NOTE: I did watch one iTunes movie (The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) with a colleague who was in town at the time--using the iTransport's component video outs--and was pleasantly surprised by the video quality that the iPod can output (the iTransport doesn't enhance the iPod's TV-output in any way, it just passes it through) to a big television screen. Again, I'll say more on this, likely after the production units are out.
In short, folks, the iPod--something millions of us carry around every single day--can now be truly hi-fi, thanks to Wadia and their 170 iTransport. And, for that, the iTransport is the other co-winner of my pick as Head-Fi.org Best of CES 2008.
So there ya have it--two amazing new, very Head-Fi-relevant products introduced at CES that are, to me, signs that the move to short-distance wireless transmission and the iPod aren't necessarily the harbingers of the death of hi-fi that we feared after all, but maybe instead the dawn of a new era in hi-fi that was hard for me to see coming before I'd actually seen and heard these stellar and important products for myself. Kudos to Sennheiser and Wadia for their bold, hope-filled new products, the MX W1 wireless earphones and the 170 iTransport, respectively.
* I don't rip everything to a lossless format. Sometimes, for my recordings that are of low enough quality that I feel the difference between 320 AAC and lossless would be negligible (or not exist at all, for being below the threshold of 320 AAC resolution), I'll rip to a compressed format, but never below 320 AAC. Sometimes, if I find an album on eMusic that I like to some degree, but not enough to buy its CD counterpart, I'll listen to eMusic's rips, which are all generally below 320 AAC quality (most actually at or below 256 MP3). A good outboard DAC can still benefit these types of compressed tracks, with superior conversion and (especially) superior analog output stages.
