[cmirza]

lutwey: You are not using the iPod as a HDD if you run the line out or have it iModded. All you are doing is bypassing any internal amplification. You still use the DAC (which is the most important factor in SQ on a DAP).

All those people out there spending the $200-250 on an RWA iModding must be under the 'Apple Spell' too, huh?

If any of the other DAPs out there sounded that much better, it wouldn't stay a secret on a site like this. An iRiver H120 connected to a MicroDAC (which is really transportable at best) aside, the iPod is competitive with any other DAP you can throw at it.

While there are a few iPods that don't sound as good as others (2G Nano or the Mini for instance), the 5/5.5G (the flagship iPod) is probably one of the best sounding DAPs available. And the 5.5G iMod is probably the best DAP SQ wise available.

It's fine to not like the iPod because of its popularity. But it's ignorant to claim it has 'bad' SQ, it doesn't.

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lutwey /img/forum/go_quote.gif whats up with the argument that ipod sounds good with a line out and a good amp??? i hope you wont take it as offensive as it may sound. but with thoose things your a just using the iopd as the hdd and not player. which means ipod still sounds bad but has a decent lineout

The iPod's line out is a true analogue line out, not a digital out. The only thing lineout bypasses is the headphone preamp circuitry, which is optimized for portable cans, not big home style ones. When you listen to the amped line out, you are hearing the iPod's DAC.

See ya
Steve

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falqon /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think you're going a bit overboard with that. The "perfect" act of transferring songs to the DAP with more than one computer is extremely flawed because of Apples embracing of DRM despite what they claim.

The iPod doesn't require DRM. Only tracks purchased through the iTunes store do. It's perfectly possible to enjoy the iPod and utilize iTunes without DRM. I do it every day.

See ya
Steve

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nelamvr6 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am convinced that most of the iPod haters hate it simply because it is popular.

I think they hate it because they wish they had an 80 gig 5.5g themselves.

See ya
Steve

 

[itsborken]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif The iPod doesn't require DRM. Only tracks purchased through the iTunes store do. It's perfectly possible to enjoy the iPod and utilize iTunes without DRM.

I think they refer to only being able to sync an iPod to one computer so it kind of is like DRM when compared to the bigger picture of loading/ripping CDs to multiple PCs.

 

[StevenBrouwer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nelamvr6 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am convinced that most of the iPod haters hate it simply because it is popular.

That isn't so strange. It's not good to see that a technological inferior player is selling better than a technilogical better player. That way the technological improvements will slow down. And companies would focus more on image and commerical matters. That isn't the best for the consumer.

 

[itsborken]

Quote:

Originally Posted by StevenBrouwer /img/forum/go_quote.gif That isn't so strange. It's not good to see that a technological inferior player is selling better than a technilogical better player. That way the technological improvements will slow down. And companies would focus more on image and commerical matters. That isn't the best for the consumer.

Consumers care about the User Interface, not the technology, and that goes from ripping to loading to usage. If the product plays music and looks cool they are happy.

Still, I have a problem equating miniturization with technical improvement and it's inherent trade-offs. Adding FM radios, recording capabilities, alarm clocks, calendars aren't technical improvements, it's just more bells and whistles.

 

[liquidfireboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falqon /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think you're going a bit overboard with that. The "perfect" act of transferring songs to the DAP with more than one computer is extremely flawed because of Apples embracing of DRM despite what they claim. Apple in no way seeks perfection, they weigh the user experience vs. money to be made. They are very good at it, I have to admit. Do I think they should almost feel bad for including such crappy headphones, absolutely. Does it make sense for a business? Yep. I was given a Nano and would have sold it except for the variety of toys for it. I love the nike+ kit.

yep, the one-ipod-but-many-computers limitation with iTunes is an unfortunate one. Agree with you on this.

 

[liquidfireboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gilency /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have exatcly the same set up and to my ears the sounds is great....granted, music sounds better if I listen with the earphones connected directly to a cd player, or if listening music at home with my B&W speakers......I just think i would be too difficult to carry them around! Ha ha....For portability, in my book, nothing is easier to use than the Ipod. Tried the Rios amongst other and they were a pain to use, and did not sound any better.

The 1G Shuffle sounds bigger. Besides, it has dedicated volume up and down buttons. Have to go to the Nano's "now playing" screen to adjust volume. What a pain. The only noticable advantage the Nano has is the ability to have playlists.

The Nano isn't a bad DAP. It plays MP3s without hiccups, no bugs as far as i can tell, simple usable UI too. It's just that the Shuffle has a simpler UI (no UI!) and sounds better. I use both regularly.

 

[liquidfireboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by itsborken /img/forum/go_quote.gif Consumers care about the User Interface, not the technology, and that goes from ripping to loading to usage. If the product plays music and looks cool they are happy. Still, I have a problem equating miniturization with technical improvement and it's inherent trade-offs. Adding FM radios, recording capabilities, alarm clocks, calendars aren't technical improvements, it's just more bells and whistles.

A better LCD, perhaps? AnythingButIpod forum members claim the Zen V:M has a better screen. For the purpose of watching movies, the ZVM does have the technical edge over the ipod video and possibly more enjoyment in this aspect...once you manage to ignore the hideous and bulky chasis of the ZVM

 

[hciman77]

I won an iPod in a raffle. I was an iPod skeptic - I hate Apple interfaces and design with a real passion, what sensible designer makes a floppy drive that needs the power to eject a floppy

and a non-user-replaceable battery - do me a favour - and I already owned a Creative Zen Xtra. I was very pleasantly surprised - through my speaker system it sounds very respectable ......

indeed so respectable that at a big HiFi show a couple of years back a well known high end speaker manufacturer (Wilson ?) used it as a source and convinced the visiting audiophiles that they were listening to a multi thousand dollar CD player. Now call me old fashioned but when a $250 DAP can masquerade as a megabuck CD player and nobody notices doesnt that indicate that it is pretty good , no ?

btw I still hate the interface, give me the Zen menu system day.

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vcoheda /img/forum/go_quote.gif ipods sound bad or not very good because the dacs are par or below it. if an ipod is your sole source then you are not really into audio. maybe music, but not audio.

Well Stereophile tested the iPod and it measured pretty well...

http://stereophile.com/mediaservers/934/index5.html



... jitter. The overall result is superbly low, at 225 picoseconds peak-peak.


The iPod's measured behavior is better than many CD players—ironic, considering that most of the time it will be used to play MP3 and AAC files, which will not immediately benefit from such good performance. But if you're willing to trade off maximum playing time against the ability to play uncompressed AIFF or WAV files, the iPod will do an excellent job of decoding them. Excellent, cost-effective audio engineering from an unexpected source

PS, isnt the music the whole point of the exercise - otherwise we would be just as happy to listen to test tones

 

[liquidfireboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hciman77 /img/forum/go_quote.gif indeed so respectable that at a big HiFi show a couple of years back a well known high end speaker manufacturer (Wilson ?) used it as a source and convinced the visiting audiophiles that they were listening to a multi thousand dollar CD player. Now call me old fashioned but when a $250 DAP can masquerade as a megabuck CD player and nobody notices doesnt that indicate that it is pretty good , no ? .

Was it made known to them that it was a 'multi-thousand dollar cd player' before or after they auditioned the thing?

 

[headphonejunkie]

I like my 20g 4g ipod. I think it is a great source. As a matter of fact it is probably the best source I have. I don't have anything over a $300 cd/dvd player though.

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by liquidfireboy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Was it made known to them that it was a 'multi-thousand dollar cd player' before or after they auditioned the thing?

http://stereophile.com/news/011004ces/

We also heard David Wilson's fascinating presentation of his conception of system hierarchy. He compared a pair of Wilson Sophias driven by a Parasound stereo power amplifier with a competitor's flagship speaker and an extremely powerful premium-priced amplifier. Not, as he explained, because he thought the Sophias sounded better, but to prove that meaningful comparisons could be made between systems assembled according to different priorities. This was a demo aimed at his hi-fi dealer clientele, after all (it's a trade show, remember?), but there's a kicker: after we all confirmed that we could hear meaningful differences, Wilson whipped a fake component shell off the digital source and revealed that with the Wilson speakers we weren't listening to the $20,000 CD player that had been used for the competitor's speakers, but an Apple iPod playing uncompressed WAV files

The point being that even with such sleight of hand a bunch of hifi dealers, audiophiles and pundits did not run screaming out of the room when listening to an iPod driven system.

This may be interpreted in many ways. It could be an example of the power of persuasion above ones own critical abilities , if so it makes sighted listening tests seem a bit less reliable somehow. If it really is that easy to persuade folks that they are listening to a high end CD player when they are not it makes me a bit more skeptical about hifi mag reviews and so on.

When just the appearance of a high end piece of kit is enough to foster the illusion that you are listening to a high end piece of kit it makes me wonder.

It could indicate that the iPod is actually a decent source through high end kit.