Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › is the ipod classic the ipod of audiophiles?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

is the ipod classic the ipod of audiophiles? - Page 3

post #31 of 186

I've seen a couple of post of people referring to the 5th gen as 5th gen classic. There's no such thing as a 5th generation classic. 4/5/5.5 gen ipods are called ipod video. The classic line starts with the 6th generation. Now I've own an ipod video, iphone 3g, iphone 4, and 6th gen classic. I haven't listened to the current ipod classic and I hope it's a big improvement from the 6th gen because the 6th gen is the worst sounding ipod I've ever listened to. Even the iphone 3g sounds significantly better. The sound was dull and lifeless(to my ears). Of the ones I've owned, the iphone 4 has the best headphone out, and the ipod video has the best line out. Well, the best sounding line out. There is a little hiss, and the line out from the iphone 4 is dead quiet. But sound is so subjective, and like UncleErik said, non of them will compete with a good cd player or dac. Not even and imod. A modded ipod(and yes I have one) is better than a stock ipod video, but it doesn't transform it into an audiophile source. It comes close some budget cd/dacs, but that's about it. But take them for what they are. A very convenient, portable source where you can take your music with you and enjoy anywhere. And for that purpose, they are all great.

post #32 of 186

I thinks the ipod classic will never be considered an audiophile portable player. In traditional terms/context of an audiophile, oldie? audiophile will never choose an mp3 or digital format for listening at all. He/She will stick to vinyl or some unknown musical format.

post #33 of 186

I'm trying to determine if you're serious or being sarcastic. If you're serious then that statement couldn't be further from the truth. I know of at many many people on this forum who own setups in the 10s of thousands that have an pod. Even UncleErik stated earlier in this thread that he both owns and enjoy having an ipod.

post #34 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Erik View Post

iammedium, I think my last audio effort is going to be picking up a good portable rig. Aside from a quite a few parts that need to be assembled into amps, speakers and other goodies, I'm pretty much done with audio.

However, I'm probably going to pick up the JH13 and JH3A when the JH3A rolls out and has been in production for several months. That is the best portable rig I've heard. I'll probably drive it from an updated iPad - I would not be surprised to see it go to 128GB in an update. That would be enough to hold all of my favorite albums in lossless. For very portable use, I might pick up the JH5 and run them straight from an iPod with lossless files. That would be good enough, and the iPad/JH13 rig would be fine for taking to the office, hotel rooms, etc.


I am looking forward to your thoughts on that when you get it.

 

I must admit I do not fully understand the or JH3 concept so it will be good to hear some reviews to give me a better idea on what it does.

For me I think the last thing as far as portable goes will be the algo rythm solo sometime in the next few months. Like you I am not an early adopter, I much prefer the bruhaha to settle down and the real reviews that are more balanced come out. I think this is even more the case with the JH3 as I understand it has gone through significant changes since when folks got to hear the prototype.

 

For all the limitations of what I have now though I have to say I am just as absorbed in the music with this portable set up as I was years ago with my old moderately high end system that I owned when living in the UK and for me that is enough! I will though try my Ipad, I have the 64G version, wonder if my ALO LOD will work with it, must give it a try!

post #35 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilkoolaidman View Post

As far as Cowon vs. iPod, I believe both are very usable, but Cowons almost need EQ to sound their best, otherwise they sound very lifeless, so EQ'd Cowons are better sounding ; Non-EQ'd iPods are bettter IMO


 

This is pretty much my opinion. However, it's worth pointing out that it doesn't take more than a minute or two to find a good EQ for the Cowon, and it will sound much better at that point with good headphones.

post #36 of 186

is amping necessary with an ipod for low impedance earphones?

post #37 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilkoolaidman View Post
As far as Cowon vs. iPod, I believe both are very usable, but Cowons almost need EQ to sound their best, otherwise they sound very lifeless, so EQ'd Cowons are better sounding ; Non-EQ'd iPods are bettter IMO, and even for the x7, it's still $319, when I got my classic for only $200.

 


I think this is one of the important things and maybe it is an age thing.

I come from a hifi generation where EQ'ing was a sign of poor equipment, in other words, the point of source equipment was to be as neutral as possible.

 

It seems that a huge amount of positive comments about Cowon or other players comes after having to EQ them. In my experience, the ipod does not need eq as it offers me a fairly neutral source (but this is just my ears, most of you seem to find the opposite to be true which really makes me worry about my ears!) I have then balanced it all out with connector, amp and headphones to end up with a pleasing sound to my ears!

post #38 of 186

I completely agree with that. If you have to eq something for it to sound good, then it's not a good sounding source in the first place. You hardly ever see people eq'ing quality sources. So if it takes an eq to surpass and ipod, I would rather have an ipod. You could always rockbox an ipod video(or earlier) to get a quality parametric eq if you needed to. My ipod is rockbox and still don't bother trying to eq it because it sounds good enough as is.

post #39 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbluzb86 View Post

I thinks the ipod classic will never be considered an audiophile portable player. In traditional terms/context of an audiophile, oldie? audiophile will never choose an mp3 or digital format for listening at all. He/She will stick to vinyl or some unknown musical format.


Sigh.

 

Yes, we have a few holdouts who swear by their aging Discman/Phillips portable CDPs, but the vast majority seem to have accepted that the *compromises* associated with playing lossless audio from a DAP are worthwhile in terms of the overall entertainment value. I am happy for John Atkinson to sit in his basement in NJ surrounded by 350K worth of vinyl-based kit - it doesnt detract from the enjoyment millions of us gain from a DAP. This isnt about 'old-school audiophiles' vs the rest - there simply wont be a sustainable market for higher end if it's left to the greybeards with $3000+ cartridges and 10K record cleaning machines, and many in the audio press know that. Happiness is wherever you find it. 

 

post #40 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Erik View Post

That point seems to be lost on a lot of people who wrap their personal identity around the gear they own and the corporate image of the manufacturer. I like my iPod, but am pretty sure I would have enjoyed my music just as much with a Cowon, Sansa, Zune, et al. It's like the burrito truck where I can get a good asada burrito for $3.50. Not fine cuisine, but the $3.50 burrito makes me happy and the guy in the truck is nice, too.

So get the DAP that appeals to you and don't worry about whether you have the "best" one. Enjoy it for what it is and put more attention on the home headphone and/or speaker rig. That's where the money pays off. But like I said, I was out on a deck chair with the iPod and e3cs and was plenty happy.

 

Uncle Erik, like many of your posts, this should be one of the first things a newbie sees when he/she comes to this forum. DAP wars really do get old - its time we all just sat down and enjoyed our burritos without worrying about whether the guy next to us got a special sauce on his.
 

post #41 of 186

You know what they say: "One man's gold is another man's garbage" and I agree 100%. It's all about what's makes YOU happy!!!

post #42 of 186

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by swjones3 View Post

is amping necessary with an ipod for low impedance earphones?

 

Probably not.

An amp's primary (it not its only) purpose is to get your earphones loud without distortion. Most earphones are low impedance and suffer no distortion that I could hear out of, say, the average iPod's headphone jack anyway.

 

As for OP's question, I think it first assumes that within the iPod family, we can find at least one that is suitable for audiophile use. So, putting aside debates about whether iPods are "audiophile worthy" or not...

1. To carry digital music with as little compromise as possible on sound quality, we require either uncompressed or lossless files. For the latter, which is mostly agreed to be CD-quality, there is ALAC and FLAC. 

2. iTunes can do ALAC.

3. ALAC takes up a lot of space.

4. iPod Classics have the most storage space.

To my ears the Classic sounds neutral. If that is true, and given that audiophiles strive for neutrality, then yes, the Classic is indeed the iPod of audiophiles.

post #43 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by estreeter View Post


Sigh.

 

Yes, we have a few holdouts who swear by their aging Discman/Phillips portable CDPs, but the vast majority seem to have accepted that the *compromises* associated with playing lossless audio from a DAP are worthwhile in terms of the overall entertainment value. I am happy for John Atkinson to sit in his basement in NJ surrounded by 350K worth of vinyl-based kit - it doesnt detract from the enjoyment millions of us gain from a DAP. This isnt about 'old-school audiophiles' vs the rest - there simply wont be a sustainable market for higher end if it's left to the greybeards with $3000+ cartridges and 10K record cleaning machines, and many in the audio press know that. Happiness is wherever you find it. 

 


And then there is even the blasphemer class of Lame V0 aficionados. That's all I have on my iMod. To these aging ears, the diference from lossless on my portable rig isn't material.
 

post #44 of 186


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cooperpwc View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by estreeter View Post


Sigh.

 

Yes, we have a few holdouts who swear by their aging Discman/Phillips portable CDPs, but the vast majority seem to have accepted that the *compromises* associated with playing lossless audio from a DAP are worthwhile in terms of the overall entertainment value. I am happy for John Atkinson to sit in his basement in NJ surrounded by 350K worth of vinyl-based kit - it doesnt detract from the enjoyment millions of us gain from a DAP. This isnt about 'old-school audiophiles' vs the rest - there simply wont be a sustainable market for higher end if it's left to the greybeards with $3000+ cartridges and 10K record cleaning machines, and many in the audio press know that. Happiness is wherever you find it. 

 


And then there is even the blasphemer class of Lame V0 aficionados. That's all I have on my iMod. To these aging ears, the diference from lossless on my portable rig isn't material.
 


Agreed.....lossless can stay on my computer at home.

post #45 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by cooperpwc View Post




And then there is even the blasphemer class of Lame V0 aficionados. That's all I have on my iMod. To these aging ears, the diference from lossless on my portable rig isn't material.
 



I rip all my CDs to FLAC first, then a also make LAME V0 files. The FLAC files live on my various computers where I listen to them via a Dacmagic in one setup, and a Logitech Touch feeding a Anthem Statement D2 using it's DAC. But my three iPods and one Clip+ all have LAME V0 files. If that makes me LAME I accept. I prefer the sound of FLAC, but given the choice I'll accept the slight degradation in sound quality in order to carry a larger variety. I'd be fascinated to sit down in a double blind situation, just me and some of you golden ear types and see who can pick FLAC vs LAME V0 with better than 80% accuracy. I am not sure the difference between them is night and day to me. But when at home, I do listen to lossless.


In my world my 5.5 Gen Rockboxed iPod sounds better than my 160GB 7th gen iPod Classic which blows away my 6th gen 160 GB Classic. I feed a Piio E7 into Shure 535s with the 7th gen. It sounds swell. The 6th gen Classic is awful actually. The Rockboxed Clip+ really sounds sweet to me while I am working out and listening via Shure 530s. I used to use the 5.5 gen iPod for this purpose. The Clip+ seems to sound better now that it's got 50 hours on it. I think I'll give the 5.5 gen iPod a rest for the future.... And yes sir, my 54 year old ears may be easier to please.....

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › is the ipod classic the ipod of audiophiles?