[TedGamble]

I previously owned an ALO Cryo iPod LOD and was quite pleased with it. I'm considering getting Moon's Blue Dragon LOD.

Any thoughts on which is better and why? My files are all 128 to 192kbs MP3's.

 

[skyline889]

Honestly, I'd consider buying some higher quality source material before spending any more on gear. 128kbps MP3 is awful.

 

[Pangaea]

True dat. The better the cable, the more obvious its gonna be that your files suck.

Going from 128 to lossless will give you way better SQ than any LOD or amp. And at a much cheaper cost.

 

[logwed]

You can think about a new LOD once you go lossless.

 

[oyjandrew]

You are using a predator for 128s O.o.

 

[Currawong]

Get some better music and, if applicable, some better headphones. The cost of those LODs is as much as a very decent pair of IEMs or even full-sized cans.

 

[skyline889]

Lol judging from his sig, he bought the LOD anyway.

 

[boomy3555]

I know that the 30gb can't hold as much as the 60 or 80, but don't ket them "Dis" your Ipod. I tried the rockbox and ended up going back to Ipod stock because I din't think it was worth it. i keep most of my file in .Wav, but I have a 60gb and 80gb so I have more room. The only upgrade I'm looking at now is maybe an "Imod", but that requires an entirely different LOD.

 

[skyline889]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boomy3555 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I know that the 30gb can't hold as much as the 60 or 80, but don't ket them "Dis" your Ipod. I tried the rockbox and ended up going back to Ipod stock because I din't think it was worth it. i keep most of my file in .Wav, but I have a 60gb and 80gb so I have more room. The only upgrade I'm looking at now is maybe an "Imod", but that requires an entirely different LOD.

No one is dissing his Ipod, we're saying that there's no point in spending a bunch of money on a LOD when you're using 128kbps MP3s as your source material.

 

[TedGamble]

For the record, I said that my files RANGE FROM 128 TO 192. About 75% of them are 192.

I realize that a 128 MP3 is a long way from perfect, and I also realize that I'm not getting every nuance of sq from a 192 kb file either. Right or wrong, better equipment provides better sound.

I'm sure there are plenty of hifi'ers here that have other "toys" from which we'll never come close to fully experiencing their full potential. How many Porche, M5, Corvette and Shelby owners do we have in this forum? Those cars have capabilities that far exceeds what street conditions will allow or accommodate. Does that mean we don't buy the good stuff? Hell no! We do it because we can!

 

[oyjandrew]

Actually, using "better" equipment might amplify distortion rather than provide better sound. It just doesn's make sense to spend so much when you dont evend try to improve your source

. And if you are buying equipment just because it looks good or just because you can, i think you are missing the point of this hobby.

 

[sochee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedGamble /img/forum/go_quote.gif For the record, I said that my files RANGE FROM 128 TO 192. About 75% of them are 192. I realize that a 128 MP3 is a long way from perfect, and I also realize that I'm not getting every nuance of sq from a 192 kb file either. Right or wrong, better equipment provides better sound. I'm sure there are plenty of hifi'ers here that have other "toys" from which we'll never come close to fully experiencing their full potential. How many Porche, M5, Corvette and Shelby owners do we have in this forum? Those cars have capabilities that far exceeds what street conditions will allow or accommodate. Does that mean we don't buy the good stuff? Hell no! We do it because we can!

Horrible analogy. Please, for the love of god, help the poor people in Darfur or Ghana or SOMEWHERE before throwing money into the toilet/snakeoil and ignoring everyone's suggestion(s).

 

[Currawong]

So Ted, you get more enjoyment out of starting at your gear than you do listening to the music. Fair enough.

 

[skyline889]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedGamble /img/forum/go_quote.gif For the record, I said that my files RANGE FROM 128 TO 192. About 75% of them are 192. I realize that a 128 MP3 is a long way from perfect, and I also realize that I'm not getting every nuance of sq from a 192 kb file either. Right or wrong, better equipment provides better sound. I'm sure there are plenty of hifi'ers here that have other "toys" from which we'll never come close to fully experiencing their full potential. How many Porche, M5, Corvette and Shelby owners do we have in this forum? Those cars have capabilities that far exceeds what street conditions will allow or accommodate. Does that mean we don't buy the good stuff? Hell no! We do it because we can!

Running a good rig off 128kbps would be more analogous to sticking a Neon block inside that M5's or that Porsche's engine bay; it has the potential to be good but its not. I have a couple of 128kbps MP3s and it's painful to listen to them on anything more than my earbuds. 192kbps MP3s are a little better but still not a match for the rig you've dropped your money into. But idk, its your money so whatever makes you happy.

 

[Likwid]

I actually just got one of the Elite Viablue LOD's from Whiplash Audio. I have owned Moon, Qables, and Whiplash LOD's in the past and I like the Whiplash cables much better. They sound better, they are flexible and sturdy and I have never had a problem with any of my 3 Whiplash LOD's.