[lilkoolaidman]

Quote:

Things I love about my iPod (5.5G):
 

1. Ease of navigation
2. High capacity (a rarity nowadays)

 
Things I don't like:

1. Really tied to one location. I can use iTunes in my work computer but I have to tell iPod to manually sync. So I can't put the music off of my ipod onto my work computer's library. This means to play music, I have to constantly have the HDD spinning.
2. Sound is good enough. Rockbox would make it better. But....
3. Playlists only work on iTunes. I wish I can export them for different players. I have quite a few playlist where the specific order I put the songs in are absolutely crucial.

 
So basically, if I find a DAP that will have higher than a 60GB capacity and can allow me to use my playlists somehow and can work on a mac, watch out.

Sharepod would fix all of that.
 

 

[kubus]

It isnt a no-go for audiophiles, since many audiophiles are audiophile about a one kind of audiophile stuff: portable headphone or home headphone or home speakers or caraudio stuff.
iPods dont sound bad, those sound good, but not very good if youre used to listen to high-end(lets say 1000$++) stuff.
An audiophile, truly audiophile can be very satisfied if the likes the sound signature of it, but he could be only satisfied.
If truly audiophile looks for audiophile dap, I would say iPod isnt the way to go...

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

It isnt a no-go for audiophiles, since many audiophiles are audiophile about a one kind of audiophile stuff: portable headphone or home headphone or home speakers or caraudio stuff.
iPods dont sound bad, those sound good, but not very good if youre used to listen to high-end(lets say 1000$++) stuff.
An audiophile, truly audiophile can be very satisfied if the likes the sound signature of it, but he could be only satisfied.
If truly audiophile looks for audiophile dap, I would say iPod isnt the way to go...

A true audiophile understands his own desires and needs, the limitations of gear, recordings, environmental factors and adapts accordingly.  Its a well educated and personal choice.  Its not being a fanboy or an elitist.  IMHO.

 

[tolkencatholic]

Quote:

An audiophile, truly audiophile can be very satisfied if he likes the sound signature of it, but he could be only satisfied.

Audiophiles can also be women! Don't forget this. You'll be excluding some members of Head-Fi, who may not be very happy at that 

 

[Mr Joboto]

I'm cool with my iPod. Can't wait till the next Touch comes out, I'm gonna snap one up

 

[stevenswall]

You are indeed 'cool' with your iPod... Because that is what Apple makes, 'cool' devices, known by everyone to be 'The Best' As to whether or not you think it is up to scratch as a 'Audiophile' device, you should do a comparison between it, and a home stereo, see which output sounds more full, less electronic... Or try another portable, a Sony, a Cowon, anything with a decent bass EQ, and notice how it doesn't clip or crackle... and how it can play FLAC, and how easy it is to use true drag and drop, and how cross compatible they are between different OS'
.

 

[rawrster]

Well I'll be getting a nano tomorrow so I'll see how it is compared to my clip+. I'm not big on the dap I use as long as it has decent battery and isn't too difficult to navigate and sounds decent. I am expecting it to be better than my clip+ however but I'll find out soon. I haven't owned an ipod in around 2 years so hopefully their sound has gotten better since.

 

[azncookiecutter]

I really don't get the iPod bashing around here. Yes, they popular, yes, they have its own sound signature, but for my purposes, I don't see the sound quality any greater or lesser than a handful of other DAPs I've listened to. I've had the pleasure of owning an iPod Touch for the last 2 years now, and I've found it quite usable and sounds great.
 
Would I call it audiophile quality? No, I won't. Hell, I won't even call myself an audiophile. Point is, for a pocketable player that has a wide array of usages that I personally find useful, it fits me perfectly.
 
EDIT: Yes, the EQ sucks, but ever since the iOS 4 update, they've changed how it works, I find it decent enough. I don't use EQ 99% of the time anyway, so it's really a moot point for me. If you rely of EQ, iPods are not for you, period. Go find yourself another DAP.

 

[ROBSCIX]

They are like any other player; they have their pros and cons, some like them and some do not.  There is no one product perfect for every user so it is good we have a variety of player options available.
Just because others don't like the player doesn't mean it is any lesser of a product.  To each their own...

 

[Happy Camper]

The day Ipod gives us a digital out for a portable dac, the world will be good. Until then, it still works for me cause I can carry all my music with me. Where I use it would waste reference quality anyway. That's for the home rigs.

 

[Satellite_6]

In my experience ipods sound worse than Cowons, Creatives, Zunes - they're certainly a no-go for me. Really sub-par sound IMO. 
 

 

[uofmtiger]

 
Quote:

Are iPods a no-go for audiophiles?

Yes, they are a no-go for audiophiles.  They simply aren't exclusive enough, have not been FOTM fodder on sites audiophiles frequent, and like someone said, your grandma probably has one.  I know that none of this has anything to do with the sound, but the sound isn't really all that important when you want to be out on the street with something that the average person has never heard of, but another member of this exclusive club will R-E-S-P-E-C-T. 
 
Also, when audiophiles want compressed lossless, they use FLAC files exclusively, so even though Apple Lossless is bit for bit exactly the same, it is not up to audiophile standards.
 
 
 Quote:

 They are like any other player; they have their pros and cons, some like them and some do not.  There is no one product perfect for every user so it is good we have a variety of player options available. 

 Or this post might make more sense...
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

[Young Spade]

Quote:

 
Yes, they are a no-go for audiophiles.  They simply aren't exclusive enough, have not been FOTM fodder on sites audiophiles frequent, and like someone said, your grandma probably has one.  I know that none of this has anything to do with the sound, but the sound isn't really all that important when you want to be out on the street with something that the average person has never heard of, but another member of this exclusive club will R-E-S-P-E-C-T. 
 
Also, when audiophiles want compressed lossless, they use FLAC files exclusively, so even though Apple Lossless is bit for bit exactly the same, it is not up to audiophile standards.

So because everyone has one makes it a no-go? If everyone and their mom suddenly got the s:flo2/T51 or the HiFi Man, would they be a nogo either? Granted it's not the greatest player but it's reputation should have nothing to do with it; only the way it SOUNDS.
 
But I don't understand why it matters so much to you if others have it. Not trying to make a point here, just wondering. 
 
EDIT: How can a codec not be up to "audiophile" standards? You should really get out of that mentality different = better. That's not what it's all about man; it's not about being the "best" or different.
 
Enjoyment of the music man; sure there are some people who are using Clip+s and grado cans and I'm sure that even with my rig s:flo2 // PB1 // Blue-Dragon K702s some people with the Clip/Grado rig ENJOY their music more than I do. 
 
But that's just my opinion. 

 

[stevenswall]

Quote:

"...I haven't owned an ipod in around 2 years so hopefully their sound has gotten better since."

It hasn't, they now use cheaper Cirrus Logic chips, instead of their previously tried and true Wolfson DAC.

 
Quote:

"They are like any other player; they have their pros and cons, some like them and some do not..."

Someone please name a flaw with a Cowon S9 running custom user interfaces! The hardware is great, and the custom tuning of the interface is out of every other companies league... If you don't particularly care for an interface (as they are all modular) don't worry, there are only 40+ more to choose from.

 
Quote:

In my experience ipods sound worse than Cowons, Creatives, Zunes - they're certainly a no-go for me. Really sub-par sound IMO. 
 

I completely agree, as I think most would after having done some actual comparisons.

 
Quote:

 
Yes, they are a no-go for audiophiles.  They simply aren't exclusive enough, have not been FOTM fodder on sites audiophiles frequent, and like someone said, your grandma probably has one.  I know that none of this has anything to do with the sound, but the sound isn't really all that important when you want to be out on the street with something that the average person has never heard of, but another member of this exclusive club will R-E-S-P-E-C-T. 
 
Also, when audiophiles want compressed lossless, they use FLAC files exclusively, so even though Apple Lossless is bit for bit exactly the same, it is not up to audiophile standards.

1. My Cowon S9 is not exclusive... anyone can buy it, anyone can use it on any operating system, any computer, and with many more software options than iTunes.
 
2. Sound is all important, and out on the street, I want to be able to let people hear a higher standard of quality, something better... not the next version of what they already have. I would hope that no one would respect something because it is exclusive... or because it is name brand... or because it is new. It should be respected because of what it can do, and how well it does it.
 
3. Why I strongly dislike Apple Lossless... It is only supported on one brands device, it is proprietary, so apple can discontinue its use at any time, it only works on 2 of three OS's, it takes twice the computer time and 4 times the CPU of FLAC to encode and decode, did I mention that you use it within iTunes, Yuck... I hate Apple Lossless.

 

[Satellite_6]

 
Quote:

So because everyone has one makes it a no-go? If everyone and their mom suddenly got the s:flo2/T51 or the HiFi Man, would they be a nogo either? Granted it's not the greatest player but it's reputation should have nothing to do with it; only the way it SOUNDS.
 
But I don't understand why it matters so much to you if others have it. Not trying to make a point here, just wondering. 
 
EDIT: How can a codec not be up to "audiophile" standards? You should really get out of that mentality different = better. That's not what it's all about man; it's not about being the "best" or different.
 
Enjoyment of the music man; sure there are some people who are using Clip+s and grado cans and I'm sure that even with my rig s:flo2 // PB1 // Blue-Dragon K702s some people with the Clip/Grado rig ENJOY their music more than I do. 
 
But that's just my opinion. 

I'm pretty sure he is being sarcastic.
 
 
 
uofmtiger,
 
I would just like to say that there isn't any conspiracy among audiophiles against Apple because people use them a lot, they're the only DAPs I've tried that sound truly bad. I am a nonconformist but if everyone had an ipod and they sounded good, I would gladly jump on the bandwagon.
 
There is no conspiracy against using ALAC either, FLAC is simply better. http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Lossless_comparison#Apple_Lossless_Audio_Codec_.28ALAC.29
 
Sure SQ is open to interpretaion to an extent but the points I mentioned above seem pretty absolute to me.