iPods are for Audiophiles

Mr iPod Luvver writes "Wes Phillips in this month's Stereophile magazine shows the iPod to be an audiophile-quality device. AIFF seems to be the high-resolution ripping option. Says Phillips, 'Dynamics were impressive, imaging was nuanced and detailed, and the frequency extremes sounded extended and natural.'"

Comments

even our music . . .

[Hall and Oates]

sounds great on an iPod!

The iPod tastes like fluffy caramel.

[Prince_Ali]

Says Phillips, 'Dynamics were impressive, imaging was nuanced and detailed, and the frequency extremes sounded extended and natural.'"

What typical audiophile fluff. Why don't audiophiles ever give any opinion that is actually backed up with data. Oh yes, because if they might find out the oxygen-free 00 gauge speaker wire that they paid $10,000 for doesn't make the music taste anymore like caramel than the normal stuff.

Re:The iPod tastes like fluffy caramel.

[One Louder]

I think the article is a little vague on the details.

What they *meant* to say was that the iPod flows with gusto and verve, with nuanced palpability that is suprisingly smooth and spacious, with harmonic undertones that languidly coil around your nerve endings and deliver liquid bliss combined with in-your-face bravado and euphonic outlines, providing a sonic womb with a sugar-sweet coating of midbass impedance resonance.

next month...

[edrugtrader]

and in next months stereophile magazine....

Our Computer Hardware: Not a Web-Server-Quality Device

Re:iPods are very nice, but my concern is...

[noewun]

There needs to be a Slashdot Troll Hall of Fame, and this needs to be there. I mean, it just keeps going and going. . .

Perhaps it needs to be rewritten, tho:

I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I have recently upgraded from a Mac 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM to a new G6 quad 4GHz with AGP 16X and PCI-X to help me at my freelance gig where I needed to copy a 17 Meg file from my home network to a desktop folder. On the G6 it took almost 14 days. At home, on my Ti99/4A, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 4 nanoseconds. If that.

In addition, during this file transfer, my iPod will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Safari is straining to keep up as I type this. My cat has been run over, the dog is pregnant, my toilet is backed up and I am having shooting pains up and down my right arm. None of this happened before I got the G6!

I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My Ti99/4a with 16k of ram running an OS I programmed myself from the back pages of old Byte magazines is faster than this G6 quad 4GHz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.

Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

Re:AIFF

[Waffle Iron]

Indeed, I don't see any oversized black anodized allen screws anywhere on these iPods. They're obviously not audiophile quality.

No, no, no!

[ColaMan]

This is what happens when you let automated spell checkers do all the work.

iPods are not for "Audiophiles"

iPods are for Audio Files

Jeez, at least proofread your posts before submitting them!