Originally Posted by Pantocrator
I hope the pic doesn't quote too.
How well does this work for you? I'm considering that iPod... it would go to a powered amp in a head unit though, not a portable amp. Is it nearly audiophile quality, or would you recommend another player?
This rig works well for me. I have IEMs, but after a while, they get a little irritating in my ear canal, so I have to switch to the Denon cans to give my ear canals a rest.
The iPod touch gives very good audio quality through an amp. Directly out of the headphone out, the Denon AH-D1001 sound really anemic. My UE SF5EB sound less anemic as they're more sensitive .
All in all, I'm very happy with the audio quality from my Touch with or without the amp. I don't know if it's audiophile quality. Still prefer MacBook Pro --> (optical digital out) --> iBasso D1 --> any headphone. The Touch gives very satisfying audio quality with LOD --> amp, but is not the most cost effective way to do so. You get just as good audio quality with a nano or classic in its place, or one of the many FOTM MP3 players.
Consider the Touch only if you need the other features:
(1) WiFi - the browser works better than any other portable device out there
(2) Address book/calendar/Photo album
(3) Relative big screen - great for viewing podcasts, movies, etc
The Touch's control system would be hard to control without looking at it. Quite a misnomer because it's hard to control the Touch by touch - you have to control it by looking at it. Whereas other MP3 players that don't rely on a touch screen are easy to control 'blind' - probably a better choice if you are using it in a car.
SQ-wise, I prefer my 'ancient' iRiver IHP-120