Is the Ipod good enuf for audiophiles?

[Voltraizer]

Is the Ipod good enough for audiophiles?

Forget about Ipit3 or MP3 & other lossy algorithm that degrades sonics. Storage issue also a

non-factor here given the fact that the new Ipodclassics offers 120-160 GB of music space (and even more in the immediate future?)

We are looking here into Lossless Coding or even wav files as the minimum standard.

Portability is a given fact , With the right headphone/headamp/ipod synergy, its lossless quality

music anytime anywhere.

The Entry of Big players like KRELL , WADIA & others into the ipod scene offering quality dock/transport/bypass for full audio capabilty giving the consumer his choice of external DAC is an indication already.
(of what?)


Will todays ipod be good enough for you?
(stated in another way) Will it pass your audiophile standard?
Wadyasay??

[bass_nut]

maybe some of the big boys knew where it is all going

re-posting here sir Atty Louie ... i hope it answers your inquiry

here is Chord Go Indigo ...attestation that iPod is audiophile grade music source

http://blog.stereophile.com/ces2009/go_indigo/
Chord demonstrated the absolutely stunning Indigo Advanced D to A ($15,000)

[aresti]

Certainly the iPod is good enough for me, although my "audiophile" standards are pretty low!

Let me explain:

I can appreciate music in any format, on any device. I liked jeepney sound with their 8-track cassettes, carry-all phono with covering speakers, my Tivoli radio, and even Dynaudio Evidence. What matters for me is the music and the means to enjoy them. I had the Walkman when it first came out, with the leather carry-case, and for me the sound was great as it allowed me to listen to my music wherever I went. I don't impose minimums or lowest limits on how I would enjoy my music. If a song sounds great (meaning the music is good to hear, not the sonics of it) in a station that the car radio can barely pick up, I would still enjoy it.

Recently, I downloaded flv files from youtube of music that I don't have the cds or records of (The_Peppermint_Rainbow_-_Will_You_Be_Staying_After_Sunday_, several Lenka songs [I saw her on TV and I liked her songs], Brooke White new songs) and I enjoyed playing them on my computer. Then, I converted the flvs to mp3s for my iPod, then converted the mp3 files to wav files, and I also enjoy playing them on my sound system...

So I enjoy anything and everything, if the music is good (for my taste), and certainly the iPod is good enough for me, even at 192 kbps to max the number of songs in my 160 gb Classic.

[insyte]

I think the ipod is the standard when it comes to portable sources as it is the standard used when rating other portable DAPs. SQ wise the ipod lineout is also used as a reference, when appraising the SQ capabilities of other DAPs. And from the very limited DAPs Ive heard, the ipod lineout is hard to beat SQ wise.

There are very few players out there that has a dedicated lineout, and the first one that comes to mind that I think can rival the ipod lineout is the iriver hp140 which has regained popularity because of the Ibasso D10's optical input. Anyway......

I also agree with the OP in that

Lossless --> Ipod Lineout --> synergistic amp --> synergistic revealing headphone = audiophile level sound quality (good enough for critical listening for me, YMMV )

So for portable use, for me its definitely a YES, the ipod is definitely an audiophile source

---------------

If we were talking entirely of portable setups, then the ipod wins hands down. I think its a whole new battle when it comes to desktop digital sources.

Before, the only available way to connect the ipod "directly" into a desktop amp was with the use of the ipod dock. Again some would argue that this is not "audiophile" enough, as it may seem to be very limiting. because we are forced to use the DAC of the ipod which is either the wolfson or the cirrus logic depending on the generation. For some this is not "audiophile" enough.........[a DIYMod, Imod or even an unmodified ipod on a modified dock is "audiophile" enough for me, heck I remember enjoying my own ipod on a normal dock connected to a preamp+Beta22 was enough to give me eargasms, again YMMV ].

For portable use, for me, the ipod lineout is the standard, but for desktop use, can the ipod do better? Is the ipod an audiophile desktop source?

During the last hi-fi show, there was this room which was spewing out good audio, and ironically, the source was an ipod Nano.

The nano was on a wadia dock. Wadia along with Krell has leveled the digital playing field by manufacturing ipod transports. It now depends on what DAC you are using, and of course the amp/headphones or speakers along the chain And what I heard from the Wadia room was a very well implemented digital system with the ipod as source.

So my answer to the question is also yes. The ipod can definitely be called an audiophile desktop source now because of these transports

[SMcTapa1]

TS could also have titled this addressed to audiophiles"an invitation to ipod"
different generations of ipods have passed already from 1 to 160 gb. before,
user of ipods are space conscious because of limited storage. the smaller the
musicfile the better without regards to loss of sonic quality . With todays
trend towards bigger storage, quality comes in handy with CD as the reference.
However, with the ipod masses who have stored thousands of songs in
lossy mp3s. as far as they are concerned thats it for them.
Hence , perception among those who plays exclusively vinyl or cd (or both)is that ipod quality
is not that good and these are toys not meant for the big boys (especially those around teenagers/kids with mp3 players).
Me, im music lover first and maybe gear lover next .however, i upgraded my ipod to the latest in order to
take advantage of bigger storage and to be able to store the highest quality compression available.
Owning an Ipod gives me the means to get connected to music anywhere i decide to listen.
(now in QUALITY lossless format)

[zenaudio]

Yes.

[insyte]

Yes.

Best answer

[Hyperion]

Not for me. Ipod on its own is not audiophile quality in my opinion. My various sony walkman from the 80s sound much better.

However ...

Ipod using Apple lossless Audio Codec + wadia iTransport + a good coax SPDIF cable + a good external DAC ... now that's another story. In this case, the Ipod is just storage and interface, while the actual audio components are the iTrasnport + external DAC so it would be inaccurate to give credit to the Ipod.

By the way, I setup that Ipod Nano + Wadia iTransport + Bryston BDA-1 DAC + Jeff Rowland Continuum 500 + Focal Electra 1037Be at the Hifi Show.

[kenckn]

Not for me. Ipod on its own is not audiophile quality in my opinion. My various sony walkman from the 80s sound much better.

Sayang X3.....I throwaway my 3 "sony" walkman many years ago because of it's poor SQ sayang I should have kept it maybe it's resale value is much higher than any Ipod now

[kenckn]

Doc Fer.....u have any "WALKMAN" for sale???

[insyte]

Not for me. Ipod on its own is not audiophile quality in my opinion. My various sony walkman from the 80s sound much better.

I sure hope you are talking about the Discman. If not then I would totally disagree that an 80's casette player sounds better than the ipod lineout streaming FLAC files.

Ipod using Apple lossless Audio Codec + wadia iTransport + a good coax SPDIF cable + a good external DAC ... now that's another story. In this case, the Ipod is just storage and interface, while the actual audio components are the iTrasnport + external DAC so it would be inaccurate to give credit to the Ipod.

I have to disagree with this statement, as the Wadia transport is useless without an ipod, it is still part of the chain. If I would use the logic in your statement then what we should be crediting are the lossless files in the ipod, it would also be inaccurate to give credit to the Wadia too. As the ipod and the wadia just serve as means to deliver bit perfect data into the DAC

By the way, I setup that Ipod Nano + Wadia iTransport + Bryston BDA-1 DAC + Jeff Rowland Continuum 500 + Focal Electra 1037Be at the Hifi Show.

So Im guessing you are the distributor for the wadia transport? Like I said in my previous post, this was a very good setup, I gained more respect for the ipod after hearing this

[accastil]

for audiophiles who are into it for the love of music, yes. for them, its the music that matters.
for audiophiles who are into it for the gears, the challenge, sonic perfection, the techy tweaks, no. for them, its the sound or the reproduction of music that matters more than the music itself.

there are many instances that we found ourselves one of these or both....

[Hyperion]

I sure hope you are talking about the Discman. If not then I would totally disagree that an 80's casette player sounds better than the ipod lineout streaming FLAC files.

Nope. I had a coupla discmans too and they sounded mediocre just like the Ipod. Same problem: weak dac, weak output stage. The sound was THIN and irritating even with "megabass" hahaha. (by the way, I also had a coupla Grado and Sennheiser cans and headroom amp at the time ... so cant blame it on crappy earphones etc) For all its foibles, at least the lowly casette never sounded thin or severely dynamically compressed - and a good metal or chromium dioxide casette is able to capture the "energy" of LPs when LPs are recorded into it unlike LP burned into CD.

I have to disagree with this statement, as the Wadia transport is useless without an ipod, it is still part of the chain. If I would use the logic in your statement then what we should be crediting are the lossless files in the ipod, it would also be inaccurate to give credit to the Wadia too. As the ipod and the wadia just serve as means to deliver bit perfect data into the DAC

Nope there is a BIG difference. The Ipod in this setup is just a storage and fancy user interface - no different from a pricey USB drive or a fancy memory stick or a little hard drive. With its internal DAC and output stage bypassed - it ceases to be an "audio component". The iTransport is useless without it, that is a given but it is the iTransport that feeds the DAC a good SPDIF signal and it is the only device in the market that can do so at the moment (at least to my knowledge anyway) which is why it is called a "transport" - and does a very good job at it which is why it is a bonafide high end component.

Note though that if someone can figure to feed the iTransport with say, a NAS which is in turn controlled by a portable PC ... then there would be no need for the Ipod.

So Im guessing you are the distributor for the wadia transport? Like I said in my previous post, this was a very good setup, I gained more respect for the ipod after hearing this

Yup. I sell iTransports (and yes I can also sell Ipods for the matter ). But that has no bearing in this discussion - I have the same opinion even if somebody else was the distributor.

You noticed that I did not try to AB the sound of the Ipod vs the Ipod + iTransport + DAC at that time - why? Because there was no need to - the latter is simply overwhelmingly superior to our idea and aural experience of Ipod sound quality after all.

[bass_nut]

Doc Fer.....u have any "WALKMAN" for sale???

yikes !!! many years ago i have those portable cassette players that i threw out the trash bin

dolby ON ==> ngongo SQ
dolby OFF ==> hissSSSS
not musical... lack detail... can not delimitate each instruments ... bass lacking or best is a quaggy LF

my cassette tapes are now on state of pejoration

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassette_player

<snp> Cassette equipment needs regular maintenance, as cassette tape is a magnetic medium which is in physical contact with the tape head and other metallic parts of the recorder/player mechanism. Without such maintenance, the high frequency response of the cassette equipment will suffer.

One problem occurs when iron oxide (or similar) particles from the tape itself become lodged in the playback head. As a result, the tape heads will require occasional cleaning to remove such particles. The metal capstan and the rubber pinch roller can become coated with these particles, leading them to pull the tape less precisely over the head; this in turn leads to misalignment of the tape over the head azimuth, producing noticeably unclear high tones, just as if the head itself were out of alignment.<snp>

http://www.loc.gov/nls/technical/casset ... nents.html
http://austv.hostforweb.com/cgi-bin/cgi ... als&mode=0
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... wanted=all

[kenckn]

I sure hope you are talking about the Discman. If not then I would totally disagree that an 80's casette player sounds better than the ipod lineout streaming FLAC files.

Yup. I sell iTransports (and yes I can also sell Ipods for the matter ). But that has no bearing in this discussion - I have the same opinion even if somebody else was the distributor.
You noticed that I did not try to AB the sound of the Ipod vs the Ipod + iTransport + DAC at that time - why? Because there was no need to - the latter is simply overwhelmingly superior to our idea and aural experience of Ipod sound quality after all.

I think it's only your point of view Sir Hyperion, fr me that thing u call "WALKMAN" never come close or sound better to Ipod!!!

[insyte]

I sure hope you are talking about the Discman. If not then I would totally disagree that an 80's casette player sounds better than the ipod lineout streaming FLAC files.

Nope. I had a coupla discmans too and they sounded mediocre just like the Ipod. Same problem: weak dac, weak output stage. The sound was THIN and irritating even with "megabass" hahaha. (by the way, I also had a coupla Grado and Sennheiser cans and headroom amp at the time ... so cant blame it on crappy earphones etc)

I guess its clear that in your opinion the ipod is not good, so I won't argue with that impression anymore.

For all its foibles, at least the lowly casette never sounded thin or severely dynamically compressed - and a good metal or chromium dioxide casette is able to capture the "energy" of LPs when LPs are recorded into it unlike LP burned into CD.

I'll just answer this with a quote from wikipedia shown below, as I don't want to turn this into an analog vs digital thread, or a casette vs cd thing. And I don't like participating in such threads because they can turn ugly from what I read here in wiredstate or in any other audio forum for that matter

Cassettes remained popular for specific applications, such as car audio, well into the 1990s. Cassettes and their players were typically more rugged and resistant to dust, heat and shocks than the main digital competitor (the CD). Their lower fidelity was not considered a serious drawback inside the typically noisy automobile interior of the time.

---------------

I have to disagree with this statement, as the Wadia transport is useless without an ipod, it is still part of the chain. If I would use the logic in your statement then what we should be crediting are the lossless files in the ipod, it would also be inaccurate to give credit to the Wadia too. As the ipod and the wadia just serve as means to deliver bit perfect data into the DAC

Nope there is a BIG difference. The Ipod in this setup is just a storage and fancy user interface - no different from a pricey USB drive or a fancy memory stick or a little hard drive. With its internal DAC and output stage bypassed - it ceases to be an "audio component".

Anyway I will still have to disagree. Why, because the Wadia still needs to interact with the IPOD firmware, it is still the one streaming out the digital data into the transport. To back my argument up, I'll just quote the WADIA president

From Stereophiles: "I thought it was impossible to bypass the iPod's DAC. "So did we," said Wadia president John W. Schaffer. "Then we discovered the little-known fact that Apple had a process called 'authentication' that allowed mobile electronics companies to bypass the iPod's internal DAC."

"Authentication" refers to Apple's authentication chip, which essentially tells the iPod that it's okay to output raw digital audio or video data to the chip-enhanced component. The authentication chips are only available in Apple products or from products made by Apple-licensed third-party developers"

-----------------

The iTransport is useless without it, that is a given but it is the iTransport that feeds the DAC a good SPDIF signal and it is the only device in the market that can do so at the moment (at least to my knowledge anyway) which is why it is called a "transport" - and does a very good job at it which is why it is a bonafide high end component.

Agree at this point in time, the wadia is top notch as it does what its supposed to do. Hopefully wadia will come up with an ipod transport using I2S.

Note though that if someone can figure to feed the iTransport with say, a NAS which is in turn controlled by a portable PC ... then there would be no need for the Ipod.

Well honestly the wadia itransport is not needed at all if you have a PC IMHO, just use a streamer or connect via USB to the DAC. DACs are improving now, some have i2s implemented, or some other technology with very low jitter

So Im guessing you are the distributor for the wadia transport? Like I said in my previous post, this was a very good setup, I gained more respect for the ipod after hearing this

Yup. I sell iTransports (and yes I can also sell Ipods for the matter ). But that has no bearing in this discussion - I have the same opinion even if somebody else was the distributor.

Well I know that it doesn't matter in the discussion but it matters to me personally. I have to know who I am talking to, distributor (required to know a lot about the product and can give discounts ) vs fellow consumer

You noticed that I did not try to AB the sound of the Ipod vs the Ipod + iTransport + DAC at that time - why? Because there was no need to - the latter is simply overwhelmingly superior to our idea and aural experience of Ipod sound quality after all.

Though Im a believer in ABX testing, I have to agree with you on this. Ipod lineout + amp alone does not beat a setup with a high end external dac, which the wadia needs to shine

[Jones710]

"Ipod using Apple lossless Audio Codec + wadia iTransport + a good coax SPDIF cable + a good external DAC " how does this setup compare to your entry level cd player?

[kenckn]

Doc Fer & Doc"B"........I think we should have "SECRET" groupbuy that wadia itransport.........so we can instantly become audiophiles I know plenty head-friers sa HK are selling Pre-own itransport at very "CHEAP" price

[Kogarashi]

...
Nope there is a BIG difference. The Ipod in this setup is just a storage and fancy user interface - no different from a pricey USB drive or a fancy memory stick or a little hard drive. With its internal DAC and output stage bypassed - it ceases to be an "audio component". The iTransport is useless without it, that is a given but it is the iTransport that feeds the DAC a good SPDIF signal and it is the only device in the market that can do so at the moment (at least to my knowledge anyway) which is why it is called a "transport" - and does a very good job at it which is why it is a bonafide high end component.

Note though that if someone can figure to feed the iTransport with say, a NAS which is in turn controlled by a portable PC ... then there would be no need for the Ipod.
...

Not really, the iTransport does not have direct access to the filesystem. The iPod still decodes the audio so it is part of the chain.

[insyte]

Doc Fer & Doc"B"........I think we should have "SECRET" groupbuy that wadia itransport.........so we can instantly become audiophiles I know plenty head-friers sa HK are selling Pre-own itransport at very "CHEAP" price

Hehe Im using Rockbox. At the hifi show, I tried it and it didn't work on the Wadia, as it can't interact with the rockbox firmware, it needs the original ipod firmware. And I am not willing to remove rockbox from my ipod for it to just work with the Wadia Hehe sayang, sama sana ako diyan sa secret group buy na yan, may extra pa naman na optical at coax input yung DAC ko

I think preowned, this will sell at around 250-300USD shipped, or baka cheaper pa diyan sa Hong Kong Sir Ken