# ALO V-DOCK HAS ARRIVED! PICS



## trose49

*Ken has done it again with this amazing piece of art and function!

 Introducing the V-DOCK for the RED WINE AUDIO iMOD!*































 Test results to follow!!!!

 First impression of the sound was very positive kind of a OMG!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 More to come.............


----------



## kamal007

nice...


----------



## granodemostasa

WOW, nice pictures. I admit to not knowing anything about what this is about, but being very impressed with the visual. Does this thing charge the ipod while It plays? or is it just an overbuilt line-out?Does it come in different colors? 

 Anyhow, congrats!


----------



## JLai

I gotta ask...How much cheese did that cost?


----------



## Nebby

any pictures of the bottom?


----------



## lmilhan

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JLai* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I gotta ask...How much cheese did that cost?_

 

My guess is at least $250. But then again I suck at guessing games...


----------



## Killercrush

I think it's $550, ouch !


----------



## lmilhan

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Killercrush* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think it's $550, ouch !_

 

Holy crap... I think my testes just shriveled up and crawled inside of my torso, and my wallet burst into flames and then imploded! Pass.


----------



## warrior05

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *granodemostasa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_WOW, nice pictures. I admit to not knowing anything about what this is about, but being very impressed with the visual. Does this thing charge the ipod while It plays? or is it just an overbuilt line-out?Does it come in different colors? 

 Anyhow, congrats!_

 

This is built for RWA's 5+ gen iMod. I don't know a lot of details but I believe there are some real high-end caps inside. Skylab has one as well and he's pretty floored by what he's hearing.


----------



## PFKMan23

It's a dock made out of wood so yeah it does came in different finishes/colors/appearances, etc... That said it does use V caps (hence the name) which are some of the highest regarded and highest priced caps out there.


----------



## trose49

*Yes* they come in different woods!
*Yes *it will charge the iMod!
*Yes* $550 is the going rate!

 You have to contact Ken at audiolineout@gmail.com to see what woods are/will be available and if he has more in stock. (I know they were going fast)

 This is an exclusive for the Red Wine Audio iMod (_[size=xx-small]not for regular iPODS[/size]_). It hold the V-CAPS hence the name. Link for caps is here: http://v-cap.com/oilcapacitors.html

 Skylab also has one and has given it rave reviews and in his opinion sounds better than his ROTEL.

 It has a cool push button switch on the back to turn the charge system on and off for optimum sound quality.

 So price although initially shocking is not when you hear the results. I am burning my unit in now and will post my own findings after at least 50 hours of burn-in.

 Great job Ken & Vinnie


----------



## granodemostasa

Oh, very nice. I didn't know one needed a modded ipod for that. (i have no interest in getting my ipod modded, sorry)...


----------



## Happy Camper

Looking at the ALO thread, they are looking at a different housing option to bring down the price. Appearently the wood machining is expensive. This only works with the 5/5.5 imod so add that to the price. Just another trinket for those who have the funds to be entertained. If the comparisons are favorable to $1k cdp and dacs, it might be worth it. I can't see how using the dac ipod uses but we'll see.


----------



## shigzeo

that must be what ken was describing in february to me. he said wait a month or so but i guess he meant longer. somehow, i would not want to have to take an imod and amp around given the size of both, but this for home use looks very sweet indeed and especially considering that hookin up to a home amplifier as well is easier. cheers ken


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *granodemostasa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Oh, very nice. I didn't know one needed a modded ipod for that. (i have no interest in getting my ipod modded, sorry)..._

 

Oh but you should!!! LOL!!!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Call Dr Vinnie for a little snip here and a clip there and voila a quality source!


----------



## chukwe

At $550? That's unneccesary expensive?

 It took me some time to make up my on getting an Imod b/c of cost. Then this.

 Thanks! No thanks


----------



## immtbiker

Your dock is beautiful, Todd. 

 It wouldn't work for me. because my modded ipod/amp combo, is purely for my listening pleasure on "Planes, Trains, and Automobiles"....and sitting in the park.

 Once again, great work Ken. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Something tells me that they are worth more in _blood, sweat and tears_, than the offering price.

 Labor of love, I guess.


----------



## immtbiker

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *chukwe* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_At $550? That's unneccesary expensive?
 Thanks! No thanks_

 

Yes, it's expensive, but not *unnecessarily *expensive.


----------



## guitarplayer

That sure is purty!

 Very nice work, Ken.

 Lee


----------



## larryminator

a little expensive. Isn't the Imod suppose to be for portable use? I find this dock a little useless because at that price i'd rather buy a DAC.


----------



## granodemostasa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Oh but you should!!! LOL!!!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Call Dr Vinnie for a little snip here and a clip there and voila a quality source!_

 

Sorry, I need something ultra portable for when I go to the gym, and an ipod+amp doesn't fit that description (But I would like a home ipod dock 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ).


----------



## boomana

Oooooooh. I wish I hadn't opened this thread. I've been happily using my imod with a Larocco PRII and SR-71, but Thrice has been modding my Canamp for me and what a nice bedroom rig that would make! I want one in ebony....I'm afraid to find out if that's a real option.


----------



## immtbiker

Get a white Ipod and you will *truly *have "Ebony and Ivory"


----------



## TheMarchingMule

I'm surprised so many people are just beginning to hear about this expansive project for the recent iMod. Oh well....

 Also, the point of thei dock is to have the iMod stationed as a true high-end home source. So you can use it to charge and play on your stereo speakers at home, then when you need to go on that plane ride, pull the iMod out and go!


----------



## boomana

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Get a white Ipod and you will *truly *have "Ebony and Ivory" 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I already have one of each: 4g white, 5.5g black....must stop now...eeek.


 Question: no offense to the OP, but why the heck is this in the headphone forum? I've noticed a lot of unheadphony threads here lately. Shouldn't this be in tweaks or at least portable?


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *TheMarchingMule* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm surprised so many people are just beginning to hear about this expansive project for the recent iMod. Oh well....

 Also, the point of thei dock is to have the iMod stationed as a true high-end home source. So you can use it to charge and play on your stereo speakers at home, then when you need to go on that plane ride, pull the iMod out and go!_

 

*Yes this is correct!* iMOD although great sounding as a portable unit can be a great home source which Ken & Vinnie are proving with this high end dock. Obviously it's not for everyone and not for portability (I mean look at it) you wouldnt want to scratch up that nice wood surface lugging it around!

 I have mine connected to RSA HR-2 but I am also getting one of Vinnie's Signature 3S source selectors. I am going to use the one source of the V-DOCK and have outputs for headphone amp and home system so that it is just a selector switch away and do not have to keep switching plugs and cables around.


----------



## Jon118

So chances are this is a better bet for speakers than headphones? For those prices I would get a real source, but that wouldn't be portable. But for someone like me who already has a portable source, this just doesn't make sense. That said it looks great, even if the iPod will probably diminish the looks. I wouldn't mind it if I already had an iMod.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Jon118* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So chances are this is a better bet for speakers than headphones? For those prices I would get a real source, but that wouldn't be portable. But for someone like me who already has a portable source, this just doesn't make sense. That said it looks great, even if the iPod will probably diminish the looks. I wouldn't mind it if I already had an iMod._

 

Why would you think better for speakers? This kind of detailed sound begs for headphones or speakers which ever you prefer! If it is getting reviews comparable to 1,500+ cdp's then I say....*It is a real source!*


----------



## immtbiker

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *boomana* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Question: no offense to the OP, but why the heck is this in the headphone forum? I've noticed a lot of unheadphony threads here lately. Shouldn't this be in tweaks or at least portable?_

 


 You are absolutely corect Boomy,


 I moved to the Accessories/Tweaks forum


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You are absolutely corect Boomy,


 I moved to the Accessories/Tweaks forum_

 

Sorry!!!


----------



## terance

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *larryminator* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_a little expensive. Isn't the Imod suppose to be for portable use? I find this dock a little useless because at that price i'd rather buy a DAC._

 

hey he could tell us exactly where everyone in an orchestra was sitting when the 5.5 iMod came out, imagine how it sounds now?

 maybe we can figure out what person wearing a blue suit playing a voilin ate for lunch
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 at any rate, this looks gorgeous, however I would never buy one, but if you can afford it, and if it sounds $400 better than a normal imod dock, then more power to ya


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *terance* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_hey he could tell us exactly where everyone in an orchestra was sitting when the iMod came out, imagine how it sounds now?

 maybe we can figure out what person wearing a blue suit playing a voilin ate for lunch
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 at any rate, this looks gorgeous, however I would never buy one, but if you can afford it, and it sounds $400 better than a normal imod dock, then more power to ya_

 

So catty!!!!! WRRRRRRRAAAAAAANOOOOOOOOOOOOW!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 The point is if it sounds as good as a $1500 cdp and it is portable as well why not!

 Many people respect Skylabs reviews and I am one. I find we like similar sound sigs and so now the V-DOCK has a home! And a happy one at that!


----------



## terance

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So catty!!!!! WRRRRRRRAAAAAAANOOOOOOOOOOOOW!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 The point is if it sounds as good as a $1500 cdp and it is portable as well why not!

 Many people respect Skylabs reviews and I am one. I find we like similar sound sigs and so now the V-DOCK has a home! And a happy one at that!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

it's pretty much in the same price range as a $1500 cd player, after you buy the iMod (550+shipping) and that vdock (5XX+shipping) the price is almost the same.

 I'm not trying to take anything away from you, or your excitment for a new toy (everyone has that feeling), but the point being that Skylab (or anyone on head-fi for that matter) isn't the be all end all source for saying what does and does not sound good in a price range.

 I have nothing against you or skylab, maybe i'm just bitter about getting rid of my ipod and switching to vinyl
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 keep up the good work ken/vinnie, looks live you've struck gold with this one


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *terance* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_it's pretty much in the same price range as a $1500 cd player, after you buy the iMod (550+shipping) and that vdock (5XX+shipping) the price is almost the same.

 I'm not trying to take anything away from you, or your excitment for a new toy (everyone has that feeling), but the point being that Skylab (or anyone on head-fi for that matter) isn't the be all end all source for saying what does and does not sound good in a price range.

 I have nothing against you or skylab, maybe i'm just bitter about getting rid of my ipod and switching to vinyl
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 keep up the good work ken/vinnie, looks live you've struck gold with this one_

 

I agree that one should not judge their purchases soley on a single recommendation from me or anyone else.

For me I have had discussions with Skylab and found that we tend to like similar things regarding a sonic signature of a Headphone, Amp etc.. So his reviews, again for me tend to work out well and have guided some of my purchases. He also has alot of experience with many, many many products so his knowledge of whats available at a given price point is worth it's weight in gold when deciding what else to consider.

 Isn't that the point of the forum to use the experience that others have had experience with a given product so you can further explore & discuss things so that ultimately you can decided for yourself if it might be a good fit for you.

 Thats why Im here anyway!


----------



## trose49

Quote:


 I have nothing against you or skylab, maybe i'm just bitter about getting rid of my ipod and switching to vinyl
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 



 AHHHHHHHHH! MOTIVE! LOL!


----------



## immtbiker

You could always rip your vinyl to lossless and put it on you iMod via ALAC. It's like killing 2 birds and getting stoned.


----------



## shineman

That is one beautiful hunk of wood!


----------



## Icarium

I think I can get balanced from a 1500 dollar cd player though is the thing. I know V-caps are damned good but even out of a 3500 dollar dac I have yet to hear even lossless through anything that sounds as good as a cd player ;p It does look beautiful though and that thing surely has a smaller footprint than a cdplayer ;p But after hearing a 4th gen imod even if the full on 5.5 gen treatment is 2x better in every way... I find that claim skeptical at best 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 But hey who knows... perhaps I'll hear one one day and be proven completely wrong.


----------



## aluren

man that is beautiful! but if this v-dock is on par with a good cd player, then i'd say it's worth the price considering you got 80gb of music at your finger tips rather than switching cds left and right... i think i'll get one too if ken makes one that's cheaper (using aluminum instead of wood).


----------



## Martin Lau

How nice ...


----------



## trose49

I may go to the Boston/NE meet if I do I will bring it with me!


----------



## Skylab

Nice, Todd! Welcome to the club. The 5.5 iMod with VCap dock sounds better than my Rotel CDP, I can attest to that. The Rotel is not the highest-end cdp out there, but it was almost $1K a few years back, has high-qual Burr-Brown DACs, HDCD decoding, etc. And the iMod+VCap is definitely better.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Nice, Todd! Welcome to the club. The 5.5 iMod with VCap dock sounds better than my Rotel CDP, I can attest to that. The Rotel is not the highest-end cdp out there, but it was almost $1K a few years back, has high-qual Burr-Brown DACs, HDCD decoding, etc. And the iMod+VCap is definitely better._

 

Hey Skylab maybe when you get a chance you could do a shootout with the V-Dock VS some of your sources. Would be nice to see where the dollar cutoff point is for any sound improvement.

 For all the Doubters gonna just have to broaden your idea's of what is needed for a quality source because the V-Dock/iMOD combo simply is one to be reckoned with!


----------



## Skylab

Todd:

 You gotta skin that iPod, man! It's WAY to white in that pretty dock. Go to decalgirl.com


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Todd:

 You gotta skin that iPod, man! It's WAY to white in that pretty dock. Go to decalgirl.com 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Im gonna send it to colorwarepc.com. They did my 3rd gen and it comes out sooo sweet. i was going to go with a midnight blue front and white back but I think I need more of a red theme now!

 Check out the site it's cool!!! You can color anything. My 3rd gen ipod screen was so beat and when I got it back it looks better then new because then buff the scratches out and then clear coat over the final product. Looks so good!

 So what do you think about a mini shootout?


----------



## trose49

Next Im going to swap out the OPAMPS from my HR-2 to the Burr Brown 627BP's I have to see which has better synergy with 990's!


----------



## Chu

I'm a bit confused, what exactly does this do that a iMod cable doesn't? Why are there capacitors in there at all?


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Chu* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm a bit confused, what exactly does this do that a iMod cable doesn't? Why are there capacitors in there at all?_

 

It's not that the V-Dock does anything the iMOD cable doesnt it just does *"IT"* BETTER! As for what *"IT"* is I would refer to Ken at ALO because I am no expert in how the magic happens but it does happen.

 So far noticeably deeper lows and the highs are much smoother and have even more details then my Cryo X silver iMOD cable. Still Burning IN!

 I will say it is nice to have power connected to the iMOD durinf the burn-in process especially. Just keeps going and going!! About 24 hours so far and Ken had put about 12 on it for me so approx 36 hours of burn-in so far.!


----------



## 88Chris

pics with an ipod inserted would be sweet.


----------



## slwiser

It is the difference between using blackgate (regular cable Doc) caps and the V-Caps in the outboard doc (wood and upcoming enclosed case). Where blackgates are legendary around here for capacitors the V-Caps almost unknown. There is a paper (link below) on capacitor comparisons and the V-Caps were only one of two A-Class caps. The ratings went from A, B, C, D, E and no rating and everything else below. All that were given a rating were considered audio quality. Only one other cap is A-Class and those are the 500-1000 US dollars each. They are Audio Note Silver caps. The V-caps are only about 20-100 each whereas the blackgates are about 1 dollar each for the same capacitance. The dollar values are only approximate. http://www.vhaudio.com/21capacitorshootout.pdf

 So the question now is what does this cap do for you? If the Blackgate is the sought after audio bliss then the V-Caps must be a several levels higher. What do Blackgate caps do for you? Now think what the V-Caps would do? 

 If blackgates don't do anything for you that is your opinion but most people of debate that quite a bit. V-Caps would do far more for you than blackgates. 

 Recently there was someone who had there Woo6 modified using the V-Caps for the first time and afterward the manufacturer started making this modification available now on his site. So that is another angle on what this cap will do for your audio. You can search on this site for this discussion.


----------



## i has a can

the blackgates are like 3 dollars each while the vcaps are like 30-50 each..


----------



## purk

Guys....you can get iPod with UE11 for that price.
 Also.....should the iHP120 or iHP140 w/ Benchmark DAC sound better as a home source? That is roughly the same price as iMod + ALO V-Dock? Really....plus you can use the benchmark for something else.....like computer source.


----------



## i has a can

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *purk* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Guys....you can get iPod with UE11 for that price._

 

That is exactly where I am going.. I have an original shuffle and will be getting es2's for it..


----------



## Icarium

That paper doesnt cover electrolytic caps which blackgates are so its not like blackgates rank below no rating or something like that. 

 I don't doubt that V-caps are of a significant higher quality than black gates but they are still capacitors. Some people don't even feel capacitors make a difference. I personally do feel that they do, but it is still a fairly subtle difference when compared to say completely switching/upgrading your headphone/amp or source entirely.


----------



## juzmister

Maybe ken put some magic pebbles in the box


----------



## trose49

*UREKA!!!!!!* All this time devoted to the quest for the perfect tone and all I had to was buy an iPOD and UE-11's............boo hoo boo hoooooooo!


----------



## juzmister

Take a


----------



## trose49

oopsie!


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Icarium* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That paper doesnt cover electrolytic caps which blackgates are so its not like blackgates rank below no rating or something like that. 

 I don't doubt that V-caps are of a significant higher quality than black gates but they are still capacitors. Some people don't even feel capacitors make a difference. I personally do feel that they do, but it is still a fairly subtle difference when compared to say completely switching/upgrading your headphone/amp or source entirely._

 

I assure you there is nothing subtle about the change thus far!


----------



## slwiser

Check out those V-caps in those pictures and their size.

 This is the link to the upgraded Woo6:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showth...ight=v-cap+woo

 Specific to the V-Caps on the Woo6:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...0&postcount=15

 My pricing sources were the V-Caps site.

 The PDF article on Audio Note caps.

 and for the blackgate for the small capacitance of the above caps compared with the blackgate the Michael Perry Catalog.


----------



## trose49

My Bad wrong quote! LOL!!!

 Oh there good damn it!!! LOL!!!!


----------



## slwiser

Since we are adding quotes:

 Here is the quote from the Woo 6 manufacturer when he first heard the V-Cap installed:

_"Your WA6 has just completed. We noticed that the frequency response range is wider than the previous builds, showing on a test equipment. At first, I immediately found the both ends add more definition. Overall performance is fast, clean, and very dynamic. Right now, the sound is a bit tight and punchy but I can hear it opens up gradually after the first hour burn-in. As an early observation, these parts bring very positive improvements and make this build top the list. I also took some pictures for this special build. Feel free to share these with your friends."

_All results above are before burn-in...


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Since we are adding quotes:

 Here is the quote from the Woo 6 manufacturer when he first heard the V-Cap installed:

"Your WA6 has just completed. We noticed that the frequency response range is wider than the previous builds, showing on a test equipment. At first, I immediately found the both ends add more definition. Overall performance is fast, clean, and very dynamic. Right now, the sound is a bit tight and punchy but I can hear it opens up gradually after the first hour burn-in. As an early observation, these parts bring very positive improvements and make this build top the list. I also took some pictures for this special build. Feel free to share these with your friends."

All results above are before burn-in..._

 


 SO.....for the doubters. Do you still think the Caps cant make that big of a difference for the iMOD V-DOCK???????


----------



## i has a can

The reviews are for the teflon film tin foil caps, though in the pictures it shows the dock uses the oil caps


----------



## slwiser

I don't think so....edit out for being incorrect...

 I stand corrected...ALO appears to be using those oil caps...

 Here is a review page for oil caps then:

http://www.v-cap.com/oilcapcomments.html


----------



## immtbiker

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_SO.....for the doubters. Do you still think the Caps cant make that big of a difference for the iMOD V-DOCK???????_

 

-When Ray modded his Hornet to the "M" version, he changed out the caps (capacitance size, not necessarily brand) and most of us know that it made a big difference.

 -Xin messed with capacitors ranging from 10,000uF to 22,000 for his new Reference and found large changes in sound quality (larger not necessarily being better for a particular application, just different).

 -BAT changed their capacitors to 6 pack paper-in-oil and have stuck with them since (a noticeably larger dollar cost).

 por ejemplo...


----------



## purk

I don't doubt that at all...but what I'm trying to say is you can use that money to buy a really good external DAC to go with your computer and source. Some can even use that money to buy a UE11 or UE10. It is more logical. What would you do if your drop your iPod or the HD fails? Seriously, your iPod will be obsolete when the next model is due.


----------



## immtbiker

In all fairness, why bring that up in this thread? 
 If you think about it, alternatives can be offered in every equipment thread when talking about prices.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_In all fairness, why bring that up in this thread? 
 If you think about it, alternatives can be offered in every equipment thread when talking about prices._

 

THANK YOU!


----------



## purk

Well... I just beg to differ and all I'm trying to say is this is an expensive alternative to transport and external DAC combo. I think it is nice to have alternative gears to play with but one should consider all other options. I believe what I said had more positive things to say than negative.


----------



## trose49

Well anyway back on topic
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ,

 Im telling you the iMOD>V-DOCK>HR-2>DT990(600ohms) is like a drug!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 The sound is sooooo addicting. My wife asks me to get something from upstairs and I here my rig Burning in so I stop in for a quick listen before "I get caught" LOL!

 20 mins later I turn around to a not so pleasant wife face!!! LOL! OOPS!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Man it's awesome. (Far superior to my REGA Planet 2000) that I can say for sure.

 Not that I am recommending this be any kind of portable set up but a small gun case could easily carry the whole rig to carry to and from an office or for vacation! Its really quite small considering!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..............

 Very Happy Ken & Vinnie!!!!!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_-When Ray modded his Hornet to the "M" version, he changed out the caps (capacitance size, not necessarily brand) and most of us know that it made a big difference.

 -Xin messed with capacitors ranging from 10,000uF to 22,000 for his new Reference and found large changes in sound quality (larger not necessarily being better for a particular application, just different).

 -BAT changed their capacitors to 6 pack paper-in-oil and have stuck with them since (a noticeably larger dollar cost).

 por ejemplo..._

 

In general, bigger caps have better low frequency responce then smaller caps. Smaller caps sound "lighter" and larger caps sound usually "darker". As coupler caps, usually smaller caps makes the sound a bit faster and clearer.

 You bet a good cap can make a BIG difference!

 Those oimp vcaps are one of the best around!

 I told ya you would be in for a long ride here! the vcaps and also black gate caps need at least 200-300 hours to burn in. In case of the vcaps, most people even hear differences still after 500 hours. At about 100 hours, it starts to sound pretty good, at 200 it's about there and at 500, you'll be in for musical bliss.

 The vcaps have lovely, full bodied, low, multilayerd bass! One of the best i've heard. The vcaps are able to show much more detail in the low end then most other caps. The downside is the long burnin, just like black gates.

 If i were you, i would run the setup constandly for 24/7 or at least 8 hours a day to reach at least the 100 hour point.


----------



## Chu

I think you misunderstood my question.

 Unless it's hidden in the connector, there are no caps in the standard imod cable _at all_. I'm wondering what's going on inside that box that requires them.


----------



## Skylab

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Chu* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think you misunderstood my question.

 Unless it's hidden in the connector, there are no caps in the standard imod cable at all. I'm wondering what's going on inside that box that requires them._

 

In the iMod cable for the 5.5g iPod there absolutely are caps in there - small but high quality Black Gate caps. Without these caps being in the ALO iMod cable, the 5.5g iMod won't work properly, and could even cause damage.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Check out those V-caps in those pictures and their size.

 This is the link to the upgraded Woo6:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showth...ight=v-cap+woo

 Specific to the V-Caps on the Woo6:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...0&postcount=15

 My pricing sources were the V-Caps site.

 The PDF article on Audio Note caps.

 and for the blackgate for the small capacitance of the above caps compared with the blackgate the Michael Perry Catalog._

 

I also use the oimp vcaps, since the teflons are a bit pricey, but i allready use custom made silver signal caps in my amp (these are square and don't have the regular type of distortion round caps have), wich are to be said much better then the audio note silver caps!

 Audio note silver caps are notoriously expensive!

 Black gates in the signal path and in certain power circuits are preferred over any other cap. Silmics/cerafines and silks are best in powersection of an amp. The black gate NX type of caps are the best of the black gate pack. these are the red caps. Black gates have a very low noise floor!

 Expensive, yes, worth it, you betcha. They are better then anything else!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Chu* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think you misunderstood my question.

 Unless it's hidden in the connector, there are no caps in the standard imod cable at all. I'm wondering what's going on inside that box that requires them._

 

Caps act like a battery, storing energy! So, it could be that those caps are used as some kind of buffer or to balance the load.


----------



## immtbiker

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *purk* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well... I just beg to differ and all I'm trying to say is this is an expensive alternative to transport and external DAC combo._

 

That's cool, but it's not what this thread is all about.

 Now, if the OP started a thread like, "Do You Think It's Worth the Money to Buy an ALO Dock?", then I can see your points.

 But what we have here, is a thread showing the arrival of a member's new toy w/ pictures and the question and answer posts that follow.

 Any thread can steer off and talk about money saving alternatives.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That's cool, but it's not what this thread is all about.

 Now, if the OP started a thread like, "Do You Think It's Worth the Money to Buy an ALO Dock?", then I can see your points.

 But what we have here, is a thread showing the arrival of a member's new toy w/ pictures and the question and answer posts that follow.

 Any thread can steer off and talk about money saving alternatives._

 

Well, it's a bit too late for the OP.

 And concerning the vcaps; money well spent.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well, it's a bit too late for the OP.

 And concerning the vcaps; money well spent._

 

YES IT IS (and in many different ways many might say) LOL!!!!
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 This is a quality product and quite stunning in person/ I hope to set the rig up at the Boston/NE meet next weekend for all to hear!

 speaking of which I have to PM someone about that


----------



## trose49

Next Im having the DT990;s recabled by [ak]zip!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Next Im having the DT990;s recabled by [ak]zip!_

 

Hehe, wanna go as deep as the vcaps can go huh?!


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hehe, wanna go as deep as the vcaps can go huh?!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





_

 

[size=large]yep![/size]


----------



## trose49

Anyone compare zips wire to say BlackMax? or BlackGold?


----------



## trose49

OK I found a negative to the V-DOCK!

 Great recordings sound spectacular I mean best I have owned to date for sure.

 Now the negative, not so great recordings even when lossless seem to show their worse side vs their better side!

 I know I know, _garbage in garbage_ _out_ but tracks I though were passable with my iMOD cable before are now not so enjoyable as the flaws really come to life. (cant have both right?)

 I guess this is known by many with good sources but I was surprised how bad a badly recorded track can sound!

 Time to clean up my lossless track ratings in Itunes


----------



## immtbiker

It's lonely at the top. 

 You will have a lot of recordings that you won't be able to stomach due to the imperfections being brought out full tilt.

 You hit the nail on the head when you said that high end sources probably do the same thing.


----------



## juzmister

It would be interesting to do a shoot out with an iriver and the DAC1 vs the Imod with the Dock..They are both the same money, and are relative in size...


----------



## i has a can

Shoulda used the teflon vcaps


----------



## sepv1

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *i has a can* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Shoulda used the teflon vcaps 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Actually I believe ken said in the sponsors forum that the teflon caps are available as an expensive option...


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sepv1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Actually I believe ken said in the sponsors forum that the teflon caps are available as an expensive option..._

 

Oh this one wasn't enough for you wallet????

 Ken should def make a metal box version the wood is georgeous but for more people to experience the awesom sound a less expensive option would sell like hoitcakes

 For me it was worth every penny ! It's just SICK


----------



## Memphis

That dock is a thing of beauty. If I had that on my desk at work it would get stolen the first time I went to use the restroom.


----------



## i has a can

Metal box and teflon vcap would be something worth looking at. It would cost less than oil + wood.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *i has a can* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Shoulda used the teflon vcaps 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

They are only 400 dollars each for even average capacitance....go figure what they cost as higher capacitance caps................ I am quite sure the vcap oimps are not far behind, as are some other good caps. So, for a pair1000 dollars is gone in a jiffy.

 The audio note silver caps are even more expensive at more then 1000 dollars each!!!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *i has a can* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Metal box and teflon vcap would be something worth looking at. It would cost less than oil + wood._

 

Depends on what capacitance is needed for that particular piece of equipment. They go up in price rather quickly as the capacitance also goes up.

 You don't want ultra stuff for mp3, as it only shows the better all the weaknesses of compressed format! I bet most protable players don't go higher then 16khz!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *i has a can* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Metal box and teflon vcap would be something worth looking at. It would cost less than oil + wood._

 

Teflon vcap is mostly used as coupler cap for tube amps! Here they really shine!


----------



## colonelkernel8

Please, we need to hype ALO more. More posting people. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 When will people understand that no matter how much they spend on crap like this for their iPod, its still not going to touch a quality CD player. Its about the DAC people. Some second-rate low power DAC like in the iPod cannot touch most of the DAC's in most CD players. Its garbage in, garbage out.

 and for $550 + the cost of an iMod (what, $400+?), you may as well get a CD player that blows them out of the water.

 "V-caps" arent going to magically make it sound better. Im sorry, its just the placebo effect at work.


----------



## i has a can

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Please, we need to hype ALO more. More posting people. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 When will people understand that no matter how much they spend on crap like this for their iPod, its still not going to touch a quality CD player. Its about the DAC people. Some second-rate low power DAC like in the iPod cannot touch most of the DAC's in most CD players. Its garbage in, garbage out.

 and for $550 + the cost of an iMod (what, $400+?), you may as well get a CD player that blows them out of the water.

 "V-caps" arent going to magically make it sound better. Im sorry, its just the placebo effect at work._

 

Actually those capacitors in the signal path do change the sound a lot. The caps are a necessary evil, and having one of the best caps the vcap teflon instead of whatever the ipod used before probably is a move for the good.


----------



## colonelkernel8

Yes, the caps may change the sound. But an iPod is an iPod is an iPod is an iPod.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Please, we need to hype ALO more. More posting people. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 When will people understand that no matter how much they spend on crap like this for their iPod, its still not going to touch a quality CD player. Its about the DAC people. Some second-rate low power DAC like in the iPod cannot touch most of the DAC's in most CD players. Its garbage in, garbage out.

 and for $550 + the cost of an iMod (what, $400+?), you may as well get a CD player that blows them out of the water.

 "V-caps" arent going to magically make it sound better. Im sorry, its just the placebo effect at work._

 

How you could post so negatively for something you know nothing about and obviously have not heard!!

 You are just ignorant!

 The dac in the ipod is a wolfsen that is the same dac used in many cdp's

 God I pray you come to the boston meet so you can hear the v-dock. I am tempted to go for just this reason. 

 If your opinion is the same AFTER you hear it I would respect your opinion much more than I do now!

 Sounds to me your jealous!!! Lol!

 To be so arrogant without a demo is iresponsible to other headphiers especiallly noob's

 Shame shame


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_How you could post so negatively for something you know nothing about and obviously have not heard!!

 You are just ignorant!

 The dac in the ipod is a wolfsen that is the same dac used in many cdp's

 God I pray you come to the boston meet so you can hear the v-dock. I am tempted to go for just this reason. 

 If your opinion is the same AFTER you hear it I would respect your opinion much more than I do now!

 Sounds to me your jealous!!! Lol!

 To be so arrogant without a demo is iresponsible to other headphiers especiallly noob's

 Shame shame_

 

Some people will hear only what they want to hear, so don't bother.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, the caps may change the sound. But an iPod is an iPod is an iPod is an iPod._

 

No! An iMod is an iMod is an iMod

 And hd595's are hd 595's why recable?


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No! An iMod is an iMod is an iMod

 And hd595's are hd 595's why recable?_

 

Dog chewed original cable.


----------



## colonelkernel8

You're right, its unfair to fill Head-Fi noob's heads full of the truth. That they dont have to spend $550 on a chunk of wood to get good sound. That V-caps aren't going to magically make the sound better.

 I dont need to hear something to know what "Garbage in, garbage out" means. Adding nice boutique caps in the signal path isnt going to magically lower distortion and clean up all the noise.

 What you are hearing is the $550 you spent on the dock and will then telling everyone that its the best thing you've ever heard. I think its unfair that noobs should have to believe that the only way they can get good sound is to spend $550 on a wooden ALO dock.

 Jealous? Of what? A piece of wood with boutique caps in it? I can guarantee that my modded Rotel/Entech combo will make any iPod or iMod cry. And it costs less too.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The dac in the ipod is a wolfsen that is the same dac used in many cdp's_

 

God tell me you are only kidding...


----------



## Icarium

Eh, i do try and keep an open mind and can be swayed to an opposing side. I used to think power cords wouldn't matter... interconnects and headphone cables wouldn't matter. Now I am a firm believer in all the above. I do believe caps make a difference but how much of a different? I have audio note silver caps right doing coupling duty in my SDS and though I didn't hear it before them I'm sure they add a good chunk to the sound... but enough to revolutionize it? I just don't know.

 If one of these v-docks finds it way to the regional California meet I will definitely give it a full chance to convince me that I'm wrong ;p


----------



## Skylab

I can't see how anyone can be in a position to GUARANTEE anything, until you do a listening comparison. The distortion and noise you discuss an being inherent in the iPod is only inherent in it's headphone amp. If you play lossless files through an iMod, where the DAC chip (a good Wolfson Microelectronics DAC chip, the same brand of DAC Rotel uses) is tapped directly and only a high quality cap is used in the output stage, there is simply no reason this can't sound excellent. You'll have to do more than just blindly iPod bash to get away with being so dismissive. 

 It's find to object to paying for the pretty wood, although I of course love wood


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_a good Wolfson Microelectronics DAC chip, the same brand of DAC Rotel uses_

 

That is false, Rotel uses Burr Brown.

 Rega uses Wolfson, though much, much higher quality ones.


----------



## trose49

The wood work is quite a bit of the price and is not for everyone I agree. I never said is was the best I ever heard. I said it was the best I ever owned.

 No doubt the search for perfect tone is endless but you would be suprized to hear the V-dock. People know me as having a tendency to be overly excited (hyped) but those who know Skylab know he calls em like he sees em.

 If you dont believe me I wont blame ya although Im not totally full of it (lets just call it spirited)!!! LOL.

 But Skylab on the other hand his reputation speaks for itself........

 Let your own ears be the judge!

 I am going to try to make the Boston/NE meet.

 I will have iMOD>V-Dock>Madrigal Gel Cables>RSA HR-2>DT990's (600ohms)

 I assure you it's darn good!


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I never said is was the best I ever heard. I said it was the best I ever owned._

 

What does that mean?


----------



## Nebby

Just for clarification, the Wolfson chip in the 5th gen ipod is the WM8758. It is oem only for Apple, so it's not listed on their site, but I would guess that it's closely related to the WM8751, which has a SNR/THD of 98/-86. The WM8740, which is the chip normally used in high end CDP's, has a SNR/THD of 120/-104. The DAC in the ipod is designed for low power use, so it's not really fair to compare the two, but to say that they are the same chip isn't quite correct 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Speaking of the DAC, I wonder if you can directly pull the signal before the DAC and pump it out thru the dock connector? I will have to read up on the DAC to see what inputs it takes.

 IMHO, I think sound from the imod is great, and for a portable player it's amazing. To me, the largest selling point of the imod is the niche that is has. It's a good quality portable audio source in a very small form factor. Sure, it may be inferior to your ears when compared to your rotel/entech combo, but you can take the imod out of the dock, throw into into your bag with a headphone amp and have the same quality sound running portably. Can you do that with your rotel/entech? On the other hand, I do see where you are coming from, at the price point for the dock you can easily get a different setup. But for those that enjoy and want the best sound possible from their imod, I think this dock will do the trick. Personally it's too rich for my blood (and wallet) to handle, but I wouldn't mind hearing how it sounds for myself.


----------



## colonelkernel8

Exactly, I dont have a problem with using iMod's for portable use. But preaching that an iMod is the best thing ever and outperforms CD players is just silly. But the thing is is that this dock is designed for home use, so basically you are trying to bring the iPod into the realm of dedicated CD players, where it certainly doesnt belong.


----------



## Icarium

Yeah I think steve nugent of Empirical Audio, and perhaps others, have commented on doing a dock out DAC + amp docking station type gadget which I think would be reallyyyy a killer app for me. It wouldn't need to be portable per se just transportable and do balanced output if i bypass the amp for 1-1.5k that'd be definitely worth it. 

 I think its really tough for me to consider the imod really portable when it has a battery life of ~5 hrs while most portable amps can do 20-several hundred. So this v-dock, IF its as good as it they say, might be pretty killer since I see the imod as a convenient transportable source.


----------



## colonelkernel8

trose, can you open up the dock and take pictures so we can see what you payed $550 for and whats making your iMod sound so amazing? That would make my day.


----------



## Nebby

The idea may not be completely silly as the imod does sound strikingly good; have you heard one for yourself? 

 Personally I've moved away from using CD players so I can't really comment on how it sounds vs them, the convenience and accessibility of digital transports has sold me completely


----------



## colonelkernel8

ok, digital transports you could try a squeezebox. Much better sound quality.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What does that mean?_

 

You know all those very expensive systems you see at meets etc!!!

 I don't own all of them!


----------



## trose49

[size=medium]* Quote:


  Originally Posted by colonelkernel8 /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
ok, digital transports you could try a squeezebox. Much better sound quality.

 

HOW DO YOU KNOW IF YOUR NEVER HEARD AN iMOD?*[/size]


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_[size=medium]*

 HOW DO YOU KNOW IF YOUR NEVER HEARD AN iMOD?*[/size]_

 

Simple. The Squeezebox has a Burr-Brown PCM1748 DAC and doesn't run on 3.7 volts.


----------



## colonelkernel8

That is unless, of course, the iMod more than makes up for its shortcomings with Black Magic.

 I'd be happy to give an iMod a whirl if someone wants to send me one. I need a portable setup and they are perfectly suited to that and only that.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That is unless, of course, the iMod more than makes up for its shortcomings with Black Magic.

 I'd be happy to give an iMod a whirl if someone wants to send me one. I need a portable setup and they are perfectly suited to that and only that._

 

Specs rarely can be judged on their own. Your one of those people that buy a 2400dpi printer because it's better then the 1200dpi printer arnt you?

 I mean more dots means GOOD! right?

 Im done with your theories!

 Go play with your printer!


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Simple. The Squeezebox has a Burr-Brown PCM1748 DAC and doesn't run on 3.7 volts._

 

Do I interpret this to mean implementation has nothing to do with the sound out of a device?


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Specs rarely can be judged on their own. Your one of those people that buy a 2400dpi printer because it's better then the 1200dpi printer arnt you?_

 

Yeah. Because its better.

 Not that that has anything to do with what we are talking about. Its not even a good metaphor.


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *slwiser* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Do I interpret this to mean implementation has nothing to do with the sound out of a device?_

 

No, of course not. But in an iPod (or iMod) the implementation is all about saving space and using less power. Not really advantageous for sound quality.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yeah. Because its better.

 Not that that has anything to do with what we are talking about. Its not even a good metaphor._

 

Now I know you dont know anything! Go listen to your kmart 500w speakers and have a ball!


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Now I know you dont know anything! Go listen to your kmart 500w speakers and have a ball!_

 

I have B&W 602 speakers. What's your problem?


----------



## itsborken

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Please, we need to hype ALO more. More posting people. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

Yes, thanks for adding your opinion. I'm sure it has swung may customers. I'm taking my iMod to Goodwill now...

 Not.

 In the final analysis a 80GB portable library is more functional than CDs. Anything that makes it sound better is just icing on the cake.


----------



## Nebby

If you plan on printing large posters, the higher dpi printer will be better, but as many sites have concluded, when printing small to medium prints the extra dpi ends up mostly being a waste of ink.

 [sarcasm]
 By the way, I just wanted to say that with this line of thinking tube amps are clearly inferior to solid state. The numbers say so! [/sarcasm]


----------



## Skylab

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That is false, Rotel uses Burr Brown.

 Rega uses Wolfson, though much, much higher quality ones._

 

Sorry, you're right, I was thinking of Arcam (who uses Wolfson DACs to extremely good effect). I never said they were the same, just that it's not so impossible it could be very good.

 In any case, unless you have heard it, you cannot comment on it's sound accurately, period. It isn't possible to say you know what something sounds like solely based on what the DAC chip is. This is like the world-famous op-amp police, who claim to know exactly what any given headphone amp will sound like if they know what the op-amp is, regardless of what sort of circuit it's being used in, how it's being used, what other parts are used, etc. If you haven't heard it, YOU DON'T KNOW.


----------



## colonelkernel8

If you got my joke, he said "Your one of those people that buy a 2400dpi printer because it's better then the 1200dpi printer arnt you?"

 So I said, "Yeah, because its better"


----------



## terance

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Sorry, you're right, I was thinking of Arcam (who uses Wolfson DACs to extremely good effect). I never said they were the same, just that it's not so impossible it could be very good.

 In any case, unless you have heard it, you cannot comment on it's sound accurately, period. It isn't possible to say you know what something sounds like solely based on what the DAC chip is. This is like the world-famous op-amp police, who claim to know exactly what any given headphone amp will sound like if they know what the op-amp is, regardless of what sort of circuit it's being used in, how it's being used, what other parts are used, etc. If you haven't heard it, YOU DON'T KNOW._

 

I know these don't sound good, and I have never put them on my head


----------



## colonelkernel8

Well, I did make a comment on implementation earlier. Here it is again:

 "But in an iPod (or iMod) the implementation is all about saving space and using less power. Not really advantageous for sound quality."


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you got my joke, he said "Your one of those people that buy a 2400dpi printer because it's better then the 1200dpi printer arnt you?"

 So I said, "Yeah, because its better"_

 

I have been in the printing industry for 13 years and have been the top sales person in the country for major Manufacturer. I am also CDIA+ certified which stands for Certified Document Imaging Architect I am one of approx 250 in the country.

 A 2400dpi printer is not necessarily better it has much more to do with implementation, design, process, supply material, drivers, paper so on and so on!

 The printer manufacturers figured out early on that people but off of a spec sheets and will buy X because it has more than Y.

 I could show you a 600dpi printer that would destroy 2400dpi printer [size=xx-small](many of which are interpolated with software and are not even what they say but get away with it through a loop whole)[/size] 

 MY POINT and it is a good analogy is you have to look at the output (or hear the content) not view a catalog or brochure to tell how something will be!

 Anyway I have a feeling you are just pulling my chain because you find it fun so I will end it by saying this:

*I have B&W 603's which must be better!*


----------



## trose49

Now that you completely ruined my thread can you go away!


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have been in the printing industry for 13 years and have been the top sales person in the country for major Manufacturer. I am also CDIA+ certified which stands for Certified Document Imaging Architect I am one of approx 250 in the country.

 A 2400dpi printer is not necessarily better it has much more to do with implementation, design, process, supply material, drivers, paper so on and so on!

 The printer manufacturers figured out early on that people but off of a spec sheets and will buy X because it has more than Y.

 I could show you a 600dpi printer that would destroy 2400dpi printer [size=xx-small](many of which are interpolated with software and are not even what they say but get away with it through a loop whole)[/size] 

 MY POINT and it is a good analogy is you have to look at the output (or hear the content) not view a catalog or brochure to tell how something will be!

 Anyway I have a feeling you are just pulling my chain because you find it fun so I will end it by saying this:

*I have B&W 603's which must be better!*



_

 

Well, I dont have much to say about that...other than its completely besides my point. I am trying really hard to not make personal attacks here. But you have made a lot of stupid comments on the last 2 pages which really don't defend your case and make you look very unintelligent. Im sorry.

 Oh, and im sure the 603's are better, because they have a dedicated woofer than takes some stress off the kevlar driver for less distortion. Plus the larger floor standing case will improve bass.


----------



## i has a can

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_trose, can you open up the dock and take pictures so we can see what you payed $550 for and whats making your iMod sound so amazing? That would make my day._

 

There's already pics in the alo info thread. Imagine two caps, a few jacks, hookup wire, and a male ipod jack. The caps arnt a majority of the price. The majority is the wood and labor and overhead.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *i has a can* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_There's already pics in the alo info thread. Imagine two caps, a few jacks, hookup wire, and a male ipod jack. The caps arnt a majority of the price. The majority is the wood and labor and overhead._

 

Yes Ken will be making an aluminum box that will have a ipod jack hardwired with the caps inside and a jack for the amplifier! 

 At a lower cost for sure.

 The wood work was alot as Ken used a very skilled craftsman that made these from a solid block and charged by the hour not the piece!

 This was not a money making venture as it turned out and Ken was lucky if he broke even.

 SPEAKING OF WOOD, and since we are completely off topic. Has anyone got a price from Brad on the Lisa III Woodies?


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *i has a can* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_There's already pics in the alo info thread. Imagine two caps, a few jacks, hookup wire, and a male ipod jack. The caps arnt a majority of the price. The majority is the wood and labor and *overhead*._

 

Yup.


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This was not a money making venture as it turned out and Ken was lucky if he broke even._

 

I doubt it. That would be poor business if he did.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I doubt it. That would be poor business if he did._

 

FACT! not disputable!


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_FACT! not disputable!_

 

Do you have his bank statements? How is it fact?

 (I know, I know, over the top)


----------



## immtbiker

This tread is turning personal and a lot of info is pure speculation and not real factual listening facts.
 It's obvious that 2 people have completely different views on whether it's worth it or not. 
 With that said, and everyone knowing what trose49 and colonelkernel8's point of views are about the worth and sound quality of the dock, I advise that we move on with other comments knowing how strongly each feel about their opinions. 
 Going on with insinuations is taking down an otherwise good thread.
 It is true that a Ipod dac cannot compare with those of a mid to high end CDP, so let's let Todd bask in his glory and enjoyment of his his new toy, because after all, that's what it's all about.

 Enjoy your new toy Todd, and everyone can make a decision based upon there own needs, whether or not, the dock is the right component for them.

 One thing (and the main reasn that the dock came about) is to allow a listener to hear their Imod and have it charged at the same time, and this dock does that. When the trickle down technology gets to the point when people who can't afford the wooden dock arrives, it will open the door for more people to add it to their component inventory.
 For those who can afford it, enjoy it and revel in your glory.


----------



## colonelkernel8

Bam, thank you immtbiker.


----------



## D_4_Dog

regardless... the thought of a brushed-aluminum v-dock still makes me drool....


----------



## Vinnie R.

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well, I did make a comment on implementation earlier. Here it is again:

 "But in an iPod (or iMod) the implementation is all about saving space and using less power. Not really advantageous for sound quality."_

 

Hi colonelkernel8,

 What does saving space and using less power have to do with sound quality?

 Saving space means that the iPod using a very small board that has very short signal paths (lower inductance, less noise pick-up, etc.). How is that bad for sound quality? I see this as an advantage over a home audio CD player. Short and clean signal paths are a GOOD thing. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Using less power has nothing to do with the sound quality of the source. The source is driving the high input impedance of a headphone amp or home audio amp. You are using milliamps of current, so why the concern about power? There is more than enough voltage and current to cleanly drive the input stage of an amplifier. Please explain to me why you would need more power?

  Quote:


 Simple. The Squeezebox has a Burr-Brown PCM1748 DAC and doesn't run on 3.7 volts. 
 

So, the PCM1748 runs on 5V... big deal. Running on higher voltage does not equal better sound quality. The output of the burr-brown PCM1748 is also approx. 1Vrms, just like the Wolfson dac in the iPod. Measure it yourself! Why do you think you need higher voltage? 

 The iPod can be played directly off its internal battery (doesn't need to be connected to an AC power supply). No need for a power conditioner or power cords, and there is no AC to DC conversion process. This is definitely an advantage over a conventional cd player.

  Quote:


 I am trying really hard to not make personal attacks here. But you have made a lot of stupid comments on the last 2 pages which really don't defend your case and make you look very unintelligent. Im sorry. 
 

You are the one who is talking about something that you have not even heard, and your comments about portable size and less power consumption don't seem to many any sense.

 Please don't take this post as a personal attack (even though you are clearly attacking something you have not even heard 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ), I'm just trying to understand your logic.

 Thanks,

 Vinnie


----------



## terance

looks like someone taddled!


----------



## trose49

I swear I said nothing to Vinnie! Not that it matters. But thanks Vinnie! As I stated earlier I do not know how the magic happens but it does!


----------



## i has a can

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I doubt it. That would be poor business if he did._

 

actually most statement and flagship products that go way overboard like this are not really for profit, but rather just to show off either technical prowess or to do something to the extreme for style points(in this case
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ).


----------



## juzmister

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *i has a can* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_actually most statement and flagship products that go way overboard like this are not really for profit, but rather just to show off either technical prowess or to do something to the extreme for style points(in this case
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 )._

 

Would you call a $500 dock a statement product though? Vinnie sells some pretty crazy stuff...


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vinnie R.* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 Saving space means that the iPod using a very small board that has very short signal paths (lower inductance, less noise pick-up, etc.). How is that bad for sound quality? I see this as an advantage over a home audio CD player. Short and clean signal paths are a GOOD thing. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Then why dont all the high end CD players use tiny iPod-sized boards with tiny components cramped on them? Duh...

 I think we all agree that the DAC in the iPod or iMod is inferior to that in the Squeezebox and all mid to high end CD players, and the reason its inferior is because it is designed to run on a small voltage and small current so it doesnt suck the battery dry in ten minutes. How do they get it to do this? *Sacrifice.* This goes for the rest of the circuitry in the iPod (including the microprocessor chips that also vie for the battery's power, remember, the iPod is essentially a computer), trying to balance efficiency with sound quality, whereas a CD player, is all about quality, there are no power supply limits. Thats why the old audiophile saying goes, "We strive for inefficiency".

 So regardless of what you do to the analog stage, you are still limited to the quality of the DAC's output, which in the case of the iPod, is rather poor, albeit good for a portable DAP.

 I think we have an understanding. For a portable player, the iMod is as good as it gets im sure. For a home source, its mediocre.

 If I am completely wrong here (im not), then prove it to me, send me an iMod and some sort of dock with RCA's, I'll gladly test her out. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vinnie R.* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* 
Simple. The Squeezebox has a Burr-Brown PCM1748 DAC and doesn't run on 3.7 volts.

 

So, the PCM1748 runs on 5V... big deal. Running on higher voltage does not equal better sound quality. The output of the burr-brown PCM1748 is also approx. 1Vrms, just like the Wolfson dac in the iPod. Measure it yourself! Why do you think you need higher voltage?_

 

The PCM1748 DAC is superior to the iPod's Wolfson in every way, and I meant the unit as a whole didnt run on only 3.7 volts, not just the DAC. It was more of a comment on how the Squeezebox doesn't have to sacrifice quality for less power consumption.


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vinnie R.* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Saving space means that the iPod using a very small board that has very short signal paths (lower inductance, less noise pick-up, etc.). How is that bad for sound quality? I see this as an advantage over a home audio CD player. Short and clean signal paths are a GOOD thing. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

There is more to good layout than just trace length. Parasitic capacitance comes into play and can actually be a serious problem in circuits that are packed tightly, especially when there are parallel traces. Inductance can come into play as well due to layout and trace geometry. Additionally, a major source of inductance is capacitor leads, and it at least appears as though the iMod's design involves leads of substantial length, including relative to the stock path. Those paths are also close to what are probably significant sources of noise such as the hard drive and the microprocessors, as well as any regulation circuitry involved, which does not appear to be an optimal condition. I've also found that dc blocking with electrolytics isn't exactly optimal (incl. relatively poor inductance and dielectric absorption properties). Film caps would be better, but running dual supply and being able to avoid caps in the first place would be even better.

  Quote:


 Using less power has nothing to do with the sound quality of the source. The source is driving the high input impedance of a headphone amp or home audio amp. You are using milliamps of current, so why the concern about power? There is more than enough voltage and current to cleanly drive the input stage of an amplifier. Please explain to me why you would need more power? 
 

I don't see how power _doesn't_ have anything to do with performance. Micropower op-amps (seems likely to be at the output of the WM8758) are not the best when it comes to fidelity. You can get acceptable performance for a portable device and the convenience that goes with it, but it's unlikely to perform on par with a device where design limitations on power consumption aren't so tight. There are special topologies that can obtain high slew rate (and fast settling) with relatively low Iq (though not into the micropower range - e.g. wouldn't be in a portable codec), but those haven't really made it into any of the v-out dacs I've seen thus far.

  Quote:


 So, the PCM1748 runs on 5V... big deal. Running on higher voltage does not equal better sound quality. The output of the burr-brown PCM1748 is also approx. 1Vrms, just like the Wolfson dac in the iPod. Measure it yourself! Why do you think you need higher voltage? 
 

Running on 5V also means that its output stage has more headroom, and it can probably make use of an op-amp with better slew characteristics, overall, when considering the additional power available. I don't know what the squeezebox does, but a desktop solution offers the opportunity for either use of film caps, or use of no caps (e.g. dual supply obviating the need to have an offset).

  Quote:


 The iPod can be played directly off its internal battery (doesn't need to be connected to an AC power supply). No need for a power conditioner or power cords, and there is no AC to DC conversion process. This is definitely an advantage over a conventional cd player. 
 

Hmm, are you suggesting that the iPod doesn't use some sort of regulation or DC-DC conversion? If so, I'd find this perplexing, considering that it seems to regulate the charge and use of its battery power. Without any regulation, it would also mean everything in the device must run on 3.7V, which I have some doubts about being the case. Additionally, I'd imagine the iPod still relies on the ps rejection of its components since some of its components are probably throwing noise around (incl. the HD). Decent filtering coupled with enough capacitance at the rails and some bypassing will probably provide better power than is really available in a portable solution in terms of impedance and noise. Battery power can be helpful for solving some problems effectively, but working on a single 3.7V pack doesn't come without limitations, in my experience anyhow.

 Note 1 - Not trying to start a flamewar here, but I noticed this discussion and thought to comment on some of what's being said here. I'm perfectly happy to keep it civil, since I'm more interested in being helpful and having a productive discussion than anything else ^_^

 Note 2 - Looking at Wolfson's list of CODECs and what are likely the WM8758's relatives, in addition to looking at specs in general of their products, it does look as though it is rather probable that the PCM1748 outperforms the WM8758 (it would have to perform over 10dB better THD than its peers, which doesn't appear probable to me, at least). The Wolfson low-power converters are still pretty good, all things considered, though. There are certainly worse chips to spend the effort on >.>

 Note 3 - Edit: Made error on codec model number >.<, sorry about that


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The PCM1748 DAC is superior to the iPod's Wolfson in every way, and I meant the unit as a whole didnt run on only 3.7 volts, not just the DAC. It was more of a comment on how the Squeezebox doesn't have to sacrifice quality for less power consumption._

 

Note that some people go to great lengths to get off AC power and onto the battery, why, because of cleaner power. If you want clear power for the Squeezebox you have to have it modified as well. There goes any price advantage with these mods. So you love wall-wart power?


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Filburt* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Note - Looking at Wolfson's list of CODECs and what are likely the WM8975's relatives, in addition to looking at specs in general of their products, it does look as though it is rather probable that the PCM1748 outperforms the WM8975. That is, unless it manages to perform near an order of magnitude better than its peers, which I find a bit implausible. If I were to guess, I'd say the WM8975 is probably a stereo WM8974, and served as the predecessor to the WM8976. Interestingly enough, they are largely related to the codec in my somewhat obscure Nextway MP3 player. It's a solid portable codec, but I don't consider it high fidelity. I imagine Wolfson doesn't, either; reserving that title for something like the WM8740._

 

Just a quick note, but the DAC used in the imod 5th gen, which is what this dock is designed for, is the WM8758. The WM8975 is the chip used in the imod 4th gen, which has the caps internally and would not work with a dock since the line out has been re-routed to the headphone jack.


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just a quick note, but the DAC used in the imod 5th gen, which is what this dock is designed for, is the WM8758. The WM8975 is the chip used in the imod 4th gen, which has the caps internally and would not work with a dock since the line out has been re-routed to the headphone jack._

 

Oops >.<. Thank you very much for letting me know! It looks as though the same performance figures more or less apply, but it's good to have that correction, nonetheless, to avoid confusion. I'll fix the previous post, and note the error. Thanks again!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Then why dont all the high end CD players use tiny iPod-sized boards with tiny components cramped on them? Duh...

 I think we all agree that the DAC in the iPod or iMod is inferior to that in the Squeezebox and all mid to high end CD players, and the reason its inferior is because it is designed to run on a small voltage and small current so it doesnt suck the battery dry in ten minutes. How do they get it to do this? *Sacrifice.* This goes for the rest of the circuitry in the iPod (including the microprocessor chips that also vie for the battery's power, remember, the iPod is essentially a computer), trying to balance efficiency with sound quality, whereas a CD player, is all about quality, there are no power supply limits. Thats why the old audiophile saying goes, "We strive for inefficiency".

 So regardless of what you do to the analog stage, you are still limited to the quality of the DAC's output, which in the case of the iPod, is rather poor, albeit good for a portable DAP.

 I think we have an understanding. For a portable player, the iMod is as good as it gets im sure. For a home source, its mediocre.

 If I am completely wrong here (im not), then prove it to me, send me an iMod and some sort of dock with RCA's, I'll gladly test her out. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			







 The PCM1748 DAC is superior to the iPod's Wolfson in every way, and I meant the unit as a whole didnt run on only 3.7 volts, not just the DAC. It was more of a comment on how the Squeezebox doesn't have to sacrifice quality for less power consumption._

 

Because large caps, with better low frequency responce eat up alot of space.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Also, a larger powersupply with filtering takes alot of space.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Some cdplayers even have 2 powersupplies.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This tread is turning personal and a lot of info is pure speculation and not real factual listening facts.
 It's obvious that 2 people have completely different views on whether it's worth it or not. 
 With that said, and everyone knowing what trose49 and colonelkernel8's point of views are about the worth and sound quality of the dock, I advise that we move on with other comments knowing how strongly each feel about their opinions. 
 Going on with insinuations is taking down an otherwise good thread.
 It is true that a Ipod dac cannot compare with those of a mid to high end CDP, so let's let Todd bask in his glory and enjoyment of his his new toy, because after all, that's what it's all about.

 Enjoy your new toy Todd, and everyone can make a decision based upon there own needs, whether or not, the dock is the right component for them.

 One thing (and the main reasn that the dock came about) is to allow a listener to hear their Imod and have it charged at the same time, and this dock does that. When the trickle down technology gets to the point when people who can't afford the wooden dock arrives, it will open the door for more people to add it to their component inventory.
 For those who can afford it, enjoy it and revel in your glory._

 

If i was ever to use an ipod ( i hate mp3), the wooden dock is a beauty!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, the caps may change the sound. But an iPod is an iPod is an iPod is an iPod._

 

Just thing i said earlier, mp3 is limited to 16khz. I bet no ipod or any pro or better ipod variation is ever going over 16khz. if you did, you would hear the shortcommings all the better! So, if i was to design an ipod, i wouldn't go as further as 16khz. if any even lower so none could hear the edgies at 16khz.


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If i was ever to use an ipod ( i hate mp3), the wooden dock is a beauty!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

you can use lossless with AAC, or even flac if you choose to install the 3rd party firmware, rockbox (which is what I use with my imod).

 btw, what do you mean by "mp3 is limited to 16khz"?

 edit: Ah, I see you meant in terms of frequency response. I haven't heard of such a limit, though I believe the rule of thumb is that you must have a sampling rate twice of the frequency you want to encode. I don't think 16khz would be out of the question, since that would correspond to a sample rate of 32khz which is well within the 48khz sampling maximum of mp3.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_you can use lossless with AAC, or even flac if you choose to install the 3rd party firmware, rockbox (which is what I use with my imod).

 btw, what do you mean by "mp3 is limited to 16khz"?_

 

MP3 compression software is cutting off anything beyond 16khz! Simple as that. You gotta save somewhere to get the compressionratio's possible with mp3.

 I tried and compared mp3 with several compression ratio's and i still could hear differences compared to a wave file. No mp3 for me.


----------



## Nebby

what encoder did you use for your comparisons? At low bitrates I can tell the differences, but with proper encoding I have difficulty telling a difference between it and lossless. I haven't really done any comparisons but on general principles I use flac, much better space usage than with normal wave 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Edit: I just realized I took the thread way OT again.....my apologies


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_what encoder did you use for your comparisons? At low bitrates I can tell the differences, but with proper encoding I have difficulty telling a difference between it and lossless. I haven't really done any comparisons but on general principles I use flac, much better space usage than with normal wave 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Edit: I just realized I took the thread way OT again.....my apologies 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

It is still in the realms of the OP; ipods use mp3.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 No, i stick with wave, no compression for me as the first thing that will be sacrificed is dynamics. Even an mp3 at high bitrate over 300kbits has less dynamics then a wave, it the first thing you'll hear. Not to mention the cut off in the highs.

 i used lame, wich is generally seen as one of the best. i used others, but i found lame to sound the best of the pack.


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No, i stick with wave, no compression for me as the first thing that will be sacrificed is dynamics._

 

But FLAC is lossless 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Are you saying you lose dynamics with flac vs wav? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I've played around with checking out with a few settings on lame, it does appear that at 19khz it drops off like a cliff. I will have to read up more on this. I don't think it's too surprising though, mp3 depends heavily on pychoacoustics to do it's compression. I'll have to invite a friend over and do some good old fashioned ABX'ing


----------



## trose49

I know Vinnie uses .wav but I think it would be nearly impossible to tell lossless from .wav!


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I know Vinnie uses .wav but I think it would be nearly impossible to tell lossless from .wav!_

 

This I have tested myself just to see if I could tell....nope, I can't tell the difference between the two. I guess I must not have the Platinum Ears needed for it 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I would never go with wav not because of the file size, but because file tagging is important to me, and album art is nice too!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_But FLAC is lossless 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Are you saying you lose dynamics with flac vs wav? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I've played around with checking out with a few settings on lame, it does appear that at 19khz it drops off like a cliff. I will have to read up more on this. I don't think it's too surprising though, mp3 depends heavily on pychoacoustics to do it's compression. I'll have to invite a friend over and do some good old fashioned ABX'ing 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

What is lossless? you'll always loose something with a conversion!


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What is lossless? you'll always loose something with a conversion!_

 

*Apple Lossless* (also known as *Apple Lossless Encoder*, *ALE*, or *Apple Lossless Audio Codec*, *ALAC*) is an audio codec developed by Apple Inc. for lossless data compression of digital music.
 Apple Lossless data is stored within an MP4 container with the filename extension _.m4a_. While Apple Lossless has the same file extension as AAC, it is not a variant of AAC, but uses linear prediction similar to other lossless codecs such as FLAC and Shorten.[1] iPods with a dock connector (not the Shuffle) and recent firmware can play Apple Lossless-encoded files. It does not utilize any digital rights management (DRM) scheme, but by the nature of the container, it is thought that DRM can be applied to ALAC much the same way it can with other files in QuickTime containers.
 Apple claims that audio files compressed with its lossless codec will use up "about half the storage space" that the uncompressed data would require. Testers using a selection of music have found that compressed files are about 40% to 60% the size of the originals depending on the kind of music, similar to other lossless formats. Furthermore, the speed at which it can be decoded makes it useful for a limited-power device such as the iPod.[2]


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_But FLAC is lossless 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Are you saying you lose dynamics with flac vs wav? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I've played around with checking out with a few settings on lame, it does appear that at 19khz it drops off like a cliff. I will have to read up more on this. I don't think it's too surprising though, mp3 depends heavily on pychoacoustics to do it's compression. I'll have to invite a friend over and do some good old fashioned ABX'ing 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

If i am not mistaken, lame cuts off anything above 16khz.

 "Due to the protocol constraint, the audio bandwidth of MP3 is restricted to 16 kHz at 128 kbps and 12 kHz at 64 kbps. Although band-restricted MP3 audio provides savings of storage space and network bandwidth, it suffers a major problem of a loss in high frequency fidelity such as localization, ambient information, and bright nature of audio"

 Even at 320kb, i still hear differences, especially in the dynamics of the sounds, it is lifless comapred to the original wave, wich hass more oomph in the notes. i even hear this on a relatively cheap PC setup.


----------



## Skylab

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What is lossless? you'll always loose something with a conversion!_

 

Tourmaline, an iPod is NOT limited to mp3! Apple Lossless is bit-perfect to the original CD. I have tested this myself. The actual source material coming off the hard drive of an iPod is NOT degraded in any way versus CD (if Apple Lossless is used) - this cannot even be argued - it's mathematical fact.


----------



## trose49

If you take a foobar a/b/x test apple lossless vs .wav and get a perfect 20/20 I will give you my V-Dock!

 Test must be taken on video and submiited for review!

 I will provide 2 files to be tested!

 Step up to the plate!

 If you loose I get your best source!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*Apple Lossless* (also known as *Apple Lossless Encoder*, *ALE*, or *Apple Lossless Audio Codec*, *ALAC*) is an audio codec developed by Apple Inc. for lossless data compression of digital music.
 Apple Lossless data is stored within an MP4 container with the filename extension .m4a. While Apple Lossless has the same file extension as AAC, it is not a variant of AAC, but uses linear prediction similar to other lossless codecs such as FLAC and Shorten.[1] iPods with a dock connector (not the Shuffle) and recent firmware can play Apple Lossless-encoded files. It does not utilize any digital rights management (DRM) scheme, but by the nature of the container, it is thought that DRM can be applied to ALAC much the same way it can with other files in QuickTime containers.
 Apple claims that audio files compressed with its lossless codec will use up "about half the storage space" that the uncompressed data would require. Testers using a selection of music have found that compressed files are about 40% to 60% the size of the originals depending on the kind of music, similar to other lossless formats. Furthermore, the speed at which it can be decoded makes it useful for a limited-power device such as the iPod.[2]_

 

fables.

 Conversion always means loss of something. Simple as that. No matter how small.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_fables.

 Conversion always means loss of something. Simple as that. No matter how small._

 

Put your Money where you mouth continues to go?????


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you take a foobar a/b/x test apple lossless vs .wav and get a perfect 20/20 I will give you my V-Dock!

 Test must be taken on video and submiited for review!

 I will provide to files to be tested!

 Step up to the plate!

 If you loose I get your best source!_

 

I bet you would like that.

 Then i would have it done on MY soundsystem.
 But i am way to far away for you to do such a test in the first place.
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Besides, i don't like the restriction of apple software!

 Please bear in mind that there is difference in wave playback software as well!

 if you concentrate on dynamics, i bet you could hear a difference on a good soundsystem.

 Also a bit contradictive with your earlier posts; you stated this setup didn't sound as good as your other setup.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Put your Money where you mouth continues to go?????_

 

I only read: apple claims.....that is enough for me.

 i don't believe all commercials. period.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Tourmaline, an iPod is NOT limited to mp3! Apple Lossless is bit-perfect to the original CD. I have tested this myself. The actual source material coming off the hard drive of an iPod is NOT degraded in any way versus CD (if Apple Lossless is used) - this cannot even be argued - it's mathematical fact._

 

if i was ever to use an ipod or any other portable device, it would be wave, since everything i tested thusfar didn't sound as good. I doubt it! There is variation in wave playback software. So, who tells me that apple losless is the best sounding? Only apple would like to make you believe. software is based on algorythms, one is beter then the other, hence variation in wave playback software, same *MUST* be true for flack and lossless software as well.


----------



## Skylab

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_fables.

 Conversion always means loss of something. Simple as that. No matter how small._

 

Tourmaline, this just isn't right! Lossless is LOSSLESS. Means there IS NO LOSS.

 I tested this myself, and Apple Lossless preserves the HDCD subcode embedded in the Least Significant Bit of a 16/44.1 kHz digital signal of CD. There is no way to do this if the Lossless file isn't 100% lossless. This has been proven over and over, it really isn't debatable...


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I bet you would like that.

 Then i would have it done on MY soundsystem.
 But i am way to far away for you to do such a test in the first place.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Besides, i don't like the restriction of apple software!

 Please bear in mind that there is difference in wave playback software as well!

 if you concentrate on dynamics, i bet you could hear a difference on a good soundsystem._

 


 I have been down this road before and between 192aac and lossless I could hear a difference but still not 100% of the time.

 You can use any sound system you want too. I will send you the 2 files and you video tape the session the moment you get one wrong (which will be within the first 5 times) shut the camera off and send me your source.

 Anything less is jibberish and a cop-out!


----------



## Nebby

For rockbox imod users, flac is an option...and it's open source too.

http://flac.sourceforge.net/features.html

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If i am not mistaken, lame cuts off anything above 16khz.

 "Due to the protocol constraint, the audio bandwidth of MP3 is restricted to 16 kHz at 128 kbps and 12 kHz at 64 kbps. Although band-restricted MP3 audio provides savings of storage space and network bandwidth, it suffers a major problem of a loss in high frequency fidelity such as localization, ambient information, and bright nature of audio"_

 

From the quote "16khz at 128kbps" that is at 128kbps, which is rather low, I encoded at 230ABR and 320CBR and the cutoff was higher than that. I can show screenshots later if you would like.


----------



## immtbiker

WOW! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 Some members love to argue for the sake of arguing. 
 What did people do before the internet (the mail system is to slow for an impatient person to have a good debate)?


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_WOW! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 Some members love to argue for the sake of arguing. 
 What did people do before the internet (the mail system is to slow for an impatient person to have a good debate)?_

 

Head-fi the new WWF!


----------



## i has a can

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I only read: apple claims.....that is enough for me.

 i don't believe all commercials. period.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Just because its APPLE doesn't mean you can automatically nod it off as marketing bs. Lossless formats aren't created by ad agencies. They are made by engineers and programmers who know what they are talking about, and what they are doing, unlike some people


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *i has a can* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just because its APPLE doesn't mean you can automatically nod it off as marketing bs. Lossless formats aren't created by ad agencies. They are made by engineers and programmers who know what they are talking about, and what they are doing, unlike some people 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

He is sooo positive that he will not take the challenge
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 What is with people lately?

 Everyone just wants to argue.


----------



## terance

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_He is sooo positive that he will not take the challenge
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 What is with people lately?

 Everyone just wants to argue._


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_WOW! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 Some members love to argue for the sake of arguing. 
 What did people do before the internet (the mail system is to slow for an impatient person to have a good debate)?_

 

they had....bbs 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_He is sooo positive that he will not take the challenge
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 What is with people lately?

 Everyone just wants to argue._

 

isn't it what the internet was made for?


----------



## trose49

Just in Case people forgot how pretty she is! LOL!


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just thing i said earlier, mp3 is limited to 16khz._

 

You should really make an effort to educate yourself before you further demonstrate your embarrassing lack of understanding. This is equally true of your statements regarding lossless codecs.


----------



## frozenice

I've laughed at a lot of things in the audio industry as being ridiculous and over-priced. But at $550 this is both a piece of art and a functional component at the same time. Job well done! Thanks.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *frozenice* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I've laughed at a lot of things in the audio industry as being ridiculous and over-priced. But at $550 this is both a piece of art and a functional component at the same time. Job well done! Thanks._

 


 Are you the person who got the Mrytle wood? That thing was soooo nice!!


 PICS PLEASE!!!


----------



## frozenice

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Are you the person who got the Mrytle wood? That thing was soooo nice!!


 PICS PLEASE!!!_

 

Not I didn't buy it but I agree the myrtle one was beautiful. I am going to wait for the aluminum version to come out and then decide which way I am going to go. I think the aluminum version will be more practical but with me I change my mind at least three times before I do anything.


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I know Vinnie uses .wav but I think it would be nearly impossible to tell lossless from .wav!_

 

You're right, considering .wav is a lossless format...


----------



## Musicdiddy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Are you the person who got the Mrytle wood? That thing was soooo nice!!


 PICS PLEASE!!!_

 

Hi Trose I am the one who got it! Well our Post Office should deliver it tomorrow, I can't wait to get my hands on it. When I contacted Ken he had 2 left & told me the Mrytle wood was the more attractive by far.
 Will try & post some pics later in the week.


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_WOW! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 Some members love to argue for the sake of arguing. 
 What did people do before the internet (the mail system is to slow for an impatient person to have a good debate)?_

 

They gathered together in conference rooms at Super 8 motels and argued.

 I (as well as Filburt probably) are interested in Vinnie's response.

 Filburt beat me to the post I was going to make this morning about interference from the iPods hard drive and (I am adding this one) LCD screen, which the DAC chip as well as the rest of the circuitry are in extremely close, unshielded proximity to.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You should really make an effort to educate yourself before you further demonstrate your embarrassing lack of understanding. This is equally true of your statements regarding lossless codecs._

 

wav is lossless. any more. 128kbits mp3 IS limited to 16khz.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have been down this road before and between 192aac and lossless I could hear a difference but still not 100% of the time.

 You can use any sound system you want too. I will send you the 2 files and you video tape the session the moment you get one wrong (which will be within the first 5 times) shut the camera off and send me your source.

 Anything less is jibberish and a cop-out!_

 

I heard a difference, can i get your doc!
 so, you only heard a difference when you were drunk.

 I have been extensively experimenting with mp3 up to 320 and i still could hear a difference and i settled for wav. simple as that. i don't have a capacity problem. loads of harddrives.

 The first thing you'll notice, if you pay attention is less oomph in the notes, they don't have the power as with wav. The speed and attack of the notes are not the same with mp3 even up to 320kb. They seem slower and less powerfull.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *terance* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_



_

 

the cat smells a rat.

 because it's apple i have to think everything they say is true.

 When they were using the motorola chips they always said they were faster then intel chips, now they use intel chips, it's once and for all proven they were telling b$ll**** all the time.

 Show me some graphs before and after conversion, did you ever see any?!
 What do i get if the graphs don't match!


----------



## GreatDane

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *terance* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_



_

 

lol 

 Great stuff Todd. That dock is truly a work of art. 

 Some people in this thread are acting funny but not HA-HA funny


----------



## epaludo

Is this 16KHz MP3 limitation true ... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ?


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_wav is lossless. any more. 128kbits mp3 IS limited to 16khz._

 

16KHz is the specified low-pass point by the ISO standard. However, encoders can deviate from that standard and still be compatible with any decoder, as it is only a spec on the psy model rather than the format. Therefore, 128Kbps MP3 is _not_ limited to 16KHz in any necessary sense.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You're right, considering .wav is a lossless format..._

 

And considdering that there is variation in playback software for wave,( a wav sounds considderably different then with other wav playback software, like creative media source) it is not unthinkable that with better playback software wav could sound better as apple's or any other restricting lossless format. Apple lossless only works on apple or apple software. Ever did a comparission with other lossless formats? Could be that they simply sound better because the algorythms are better.

 There's also huge difference between mp3 playback software! Lame is one of the best of the pack.

 Gee thank god i don't know anything about it but i think the encoder(algorythms) are more important then being a lossless format. You still need software to play it back and there is still a difference in that software.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Filburt* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_16KHz is the specified low-pass point by the ISO standard. However, encoders can deviate from that standard and still be compatible with any decoder, as it is only a spec on the psy model rather than the format. Therefore, 128Kbps MP3 is _not_ limited to 16KHz in any necessary sense._

 


 It depends on the quality of the algorythm used! Fact is that most are limited to 16khz for 128kbits. It is an iso standard and most algorythms are designed to that model.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *GreatDane* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_lol 

 Great stuff Todd. That dock is truly a work of art. 

 Some people in this thread are acting funny but not HA-HA funny 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

Truth can hurt.

 Apple fooled you guys for years with their apple computers and do the same thing with their restricting software.

 If any, i would never use software that will bound you to hardware, in this case ipods and apple software.
 Ever done a comparisson with the so calles apple lossless codec and any other, say open source lossless codec like flac. It might be better. BUT you can't use it on an ipod!


----------



## terance

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Truth can hurt.

 Apple fooled you guys for years with their apple computers and do the same thing with their restricting software.

 If any, i would never use software that will bound you to hardware, in this case ipods and apple software.
 Ever done a comparisson with the so calles apple losless codec and any other, say open source lossless codec like flac. It might be better._

 






 sounds like someone waited all night to get an iPhone and didn't


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *terance* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_





 sounds like someone waited all night to get an iPhone and didn't 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

No, i don't use apple, i use real stuff.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Oh, and since apple isn't using motorola chips anymore, it just became an intel clone, like any other ordinairy PC.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 But that wooden doc still looks nice.

 I don't believe in fairytales not backed up with frequency charts. I looked on the web for any charts but i couldn't find any, somehow i am not surprised!

 I still think E.A.C.(exact audio copy) is the best audio ripper around, together with the plextor tools pared with plextor drives.

 By the way, the overly expensive and simple iphone has allready been demistyfied. There are much better phones around for the same price or less.

 You're entitled to buy want you want.

 The cat on the picture is really cute though, i like cats.


----------



## Nebby

Apple lossless isn't the only lossless compression available, there's flac, ape, shorten.....the list goes on.


----------



## Febs

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ever done a comparisson with the so calles apple lossless codec and any other, say open source lossless codec like flac._

 

That comparison has been done many times. For example: 

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index....ess_comparison
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Lossless
http://www.bobulous.org.uk/misc/loss...udio_2006.html (doesn't include ALAC but does include quite a few other lossless codecs)

  Quote:


 It might be better. BUT you can't use it on an ipod! 
 

http://www.rockbox.org


----------



## Vinnie R.

Quote:


 Then why dont all the high end CD players use tiny iPod-sized boards with tiny components cramped on them? Duh... 
 

No need to be rude with your "Duh..." comment, Colonel. A response like this is childish and not going to get you anywhere. You already don't have a valid opinion because you never even heard the iMod. 

 Anyway, getting back to your statement above -- Using tiny iPod-sized boards makes manufacturing more expensive, as more sophisticated (and very expensive!) machines are needed to handle and solder them. The manufacturing process need to be much more accurate. High end CD player manufacturers do not sell high volumes of units. Apple has hundreds of thousands of iPods made, so the cost per board is significantly reduced. If they were only making them in small quantity, I would guess that the price would be at least 10x more... possibly higher.

  Quote:


 I think we all agree that the DAC in the iPod or iMod is inferior to that in the Squeezebox and all mid to high end CD players, and the reason its inferior is because it is designed to run on a small voltage and small current so it doesnt suck the battery dry in ten minutes. 
 

I don't agree with you. I for one have listened to (and used to modify) the SB2 and the SB3 (I've modded well over a hundred of them and know their sound very well), and I prefer the sound of the modded iPod. However, what I think sounds better does not make it better and the same goes for everyone else. I'll touch on this more later in this post, but to state that the Wolfson dac in the iPod is inferior because it is in a portable, more energy-efficient unit makes NO sense at all. Do you even know how much power the internal dac in the iPod is consuming, vs. the Burr Brown in the Squeezebox. I'd bet that they draw very similar amounts of power. The dac in the iPod is not the part that draws much current. It is the hard drive, LCD, and processing chips that eat up power. As I mentioned before, the Wolfson dac in the iPod can output the same voltage and current as the Burr Brown in the Squeezebox. In other words, both dac chips output approx 1Vrms and they both can handle a load down to 5Kohm without any problem. This is why I have to disagree with you on this point.

  Quote:


 So regardless of what you do to the analog stage, you are still limited to the quality of the DAC's output, which in the case of the iPod, is rather poor, albeit good for a portable DAP. 
 

Can you please explain how it is poor, compared to a dac in a home audio CD player? I'm just curious how you came to this conclusion. 

  Quote:


 I think we have an understanding. For a portable player, the iMod is as good as it gets im sure. For a home source, its mediocre. 
 

Sorry, but don't don't have an understanding. Why? Because you can't come to a conclusion without ever hearing an iMod! You need to first listen to one and do a comparison before making such comments. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


 The PCM1748 DAC is superior to the iPod's Wolfson in every way, and I meant the unit as a whole didnt run on only 3.7 volts, not just the DAC. It was more of a comment on how the Squeezebox doesn't have to sacrifice quality for less power consumption. 
 

Re-read my comments above. This point makes NO sense. 

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Filburt* 
_Additionally, a major source of inductance is capacitor leads, and it at least appears as though the iMod's design involves leads of substantial length, including relative to the stock path_

 

Hi Filburt,

 I agree with you that longer lead length does add inductance, but in the analog domain (after the dac) you are talking about inductance that is so small that it not of any significance in the the audio spectrum. If we were dealing with microwaves, I would be more willing to take it a little more seriously 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


 Those paths are also close to what are probably significant sources of noise such as the hard drive and the microprocessors, as well as any regulation circuitry involved, which does not appear to be an optimal condition. 
 

The hard drive and some other ICs are not too far away (they can't be in a unit this small), but there does not appear to be any audible noise on the analog output (again, I'm referring to the audio spectum). In other words, when the hard drive spins up, this cannot be heard from the modded line-out. The high-speed switching of the integrated circuits (processors) are way above the audio band. I agree with you in theory, but in practice, it doesn't appear to matter.

  Quote:


 I've also found that dc blocking with electrolytics isn't exactly optimal (incl. relatively poor inductance and dielectric absorption properties). 
 

I have found that the Black Gate NX-Hi-Q (non-polarized) caps that I use to sound very good for dc blocking applications. I agree that there are still better caps (those V-caps come to mind! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ), but for their size these caps are really hard to beat. I have used these in mods to other units besides the iMod, and many others have as well (if you search around on other audio forums). Have you listened to that make/model of cap before? In my opinion, they do not sound like a 'lytic cap at all. I'm talking about the NX-HI-Q series.. not the other series of Black Gate caps.

  Quote:


 I don't see how power doesn't have anything to do with performance. Micropower op-amps (seems likely to be at the output of the WM8758) are not the best when it comes to fidelity. You can get acceptable performance for a portable device and the convenience that goes with it, but it's unlikely to perform on par with a device where design limitations on power consumption aren't so tight. 
 

If you are talking about driving headphones, I agree 100%. A dedicated headphone amp will most likely offer more power output and do a better job at driving a pair of headphones (lowish impedance). However, when it comes to driving the input stage of a headphone amp (or home audio preamp, or integrated amp), where is the Wolfson dac in the iPod lacking in terms of power? See my comments to Colonel above. You are driving high impedance input stage of an amp and only need small milli-amps of current (power). You rarely see the input impedance to be under 5Kohm, and the dac would have no problem with this. 

  Quote:


 Running on 5V also means that its output stage has more headroom, and it can probably make use of an op-amp with better slew characteristics, overall, when considering the additional power available. 
 

Headroom is important when you need it, but the max output voltage of the Squeezebox's PCM1748 dac is approx 1Vrms.. the same as the Wolfson dac in the iPod. You don't need the extra headroom because you are not ever going to be running that close to the rail. 

  Quote:


 Note 1 - Not trying to start a flamewar here, but I noticed this discussion and thought to comment on some of what's being said here. I'm perfectly happy to keep it civil, since I'm more interested in being helpful and having a productive discussion than anything else ^_^ 
 

I know you are not trying to start a flamewar and I appreciate your respectful posts and I hope that this thread continues to follow in this fashion. It is nice to see some maturity around here 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


 Note 2 - Looking at Wolfson's list of CODECs and what are likely the WM8758's relatives, in addition to looking at specs in general of their products, it does look as though it is rather probable that the PCM1748 outperforms the WM8758 (it would have to perform over 10dB better THD than its peers, which doesn't appear probable to me, at least). 
 

Ok... this brings me to another point I want to make. I have listened to many dacs with inferior specs (e.g. lower SNR, not as good THD ratings, etc.) and have still found some them to sound better than others with better specs. For example, I prefer many Non-Oversampling, 16-bit dacs to many upsampling/oversampling dacs that I have heard. Yes, I am making a generalization here... but I have found a more musical, less-sterile tone to the NOS dacs. They don't win when it comes to pulling out every last bit of micro-detail and nuance out of the recording, but they are less analytical and more pleasant to listen to. This is my opinion. I don't want to sound like a shill for my own mod, but I DO find the sound of the iMod to sound more like a good NOS dac (even though the Wolson dac is not this kind of design)... it just has a warmer, more balanced sound that keeps me wanting to listen and is not fatiguing. 

 I agree that if you are looking at datasheets, you will find other dacs that have better specs, but better specs on paper doesn't necessarily yield better sound. The sound of a dac (or any other audio component) is more of a matter of personal taste. Look at vinyl and tube amps. They don't measure nearly as well as digital and many solid-state amps, however, there are many who prefer the sound of vinyl and tubes. Others will disagree. 

 Because of this, I can't argue with someone who has heard the iMod and compared it to another source/dac and preferred the other unit. If you *actually listened to the iMod carefully* (using Lossless or WAV files on the iMod and trying your best to level-match, as most CD players output 2Vrms), and preferred something else, that is fine and one can't really argue because it is a matter of taste. You like yellow, I like green. Green isn't better than yellow. However, if you state things like "the iPod is inferior sounding because it consumes less power," I can easily debate this and I sort of have fun doing so 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Best regards,

 Vinnie


----------



## Jon118

A dissertation of a response, but a well thought out one. I guess I can't really speak for this since I haven't heard it, I think most people are just put off by the price. That said I would love to hear one, but then I would have to re-rip my library to lossless, but I certainly would not mind seeing one of these on my desk beside my speakers. I'm still sort of skeptical that it is as good as high-end CDPs, but I'll have to take those who have heard this docks word for it right now.


----------



## colonelkernel8

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vinnie R.* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No need to be rude with your "Duh..." comment, Colonel. A response like this is childish and not going to get you anywhere. You already don't have a valid opinion because you never even heard the iMod. 

 Anyway, getting back to your statement above -- Using tiny iPod-sized boards makes manufacturing more expensive, as more sophisticated (and very expensive!) machines are needed to handle and solder them. The manufacturing process need to be much more accurate. High end CD player manufacturers do not sell high volumes of units. Apple has hundreds of thousands of iPods made, so the cost per board is significantly reduced. If they were only making them in small quantity, I would guess that the price would be at least 10x more... possibly higher.
_

 

I apologize about the "duh" comment but in a $30,000+ CD player, I cannot believe that the cost of the board is going to keep them from any benefits it may offer. The iPod's board is so small because they want their product to be small.

  Quote:


 I don't agree with you. I for one have listened to (and used to modify) the SB2 and the SB3 (I've modded well over a hundred of them and know their sound very well), and I prefer the sound of the modded iPod. However, what I think sounds better does not make it better and the same goes for everyone else. I'll touch on this more later in this post, but to state that the Wolfson dac in the iPod is inferior because it is in a portable, more energy-efficient unit makes NO sense at all. Do you even know how much power the internal dac in the iPod is consuming, vs. the Burr Brown in the Squeezebox. I'd bet that they draw very similar amounts of power. The dac in the iPod is not the part that draws much current. It is the hard drive, LCD, and processing chips that eat up power. As I mentioned before, the Wolfson dac in the iPod can output the same voltage and current as the Burr Brown in the Squeezebox. In other words, both dac chips output approx 1Vrms and they both can handle a load down to 5Kohm without any problem. This is why I have to disagree with you on this point. 
 

The PCM1748 outperforms the WM8758 in SNR, Dynamic Range, and THD. These three statistics are what I use to determine the "quality" of a DAC. I cannot agree that a low power DAC designed for long battery life implementations is not inferior to a standard unit, the statistics speak for themselves. Why would Wolfson even have a category of DAC called "Low Power" if there weren't any changes and could perform equally? In order to lower the power requirements for a portable DAC, they have to sacrifice, as I said before. Why else would the SNR of the WM8758 be 96db and the SNR of the PCM1748 be 106db?


----------



## colonelkernel8

Well, im withdrawing from this argument as I see its never going to get anywhere...


----------



## itsborken

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *colonelkernel8* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well, im withdrawing from this argument as I see its never going to get anywhere..._

 

I think the key is to treat it as a discussion, not an argument.


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *itsborken* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think the key is to treat it as a discussion, not an argument._

 

I agree, it's best to have a civil discussion rather than a heated argument.


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Vinnie R.* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hi Filburt,_

 

Hello!

  Quote:


 I agree with you that longer lead length does add inductance, but in the analog domain (after the dac) you are talking about inductance that is so small that it not of any significance in the the audio spectrum. If we were dealing with microwaves, I would be more willing to take it a little more seriously 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 

Hmm, I guess I'd have to take your word for that. In my experience, this would be considered non-negligible, especially if considering the impact on the audio band in many amplifiers based on what's going on outside of it. It's something I would be concerned with, at least. However, comprimise is often the game when it comes to modification, and the rather substantial distortion introduced by the tantalum caps versus that of the BGs may overwhelm whatever is saved in avoiding the additional lead inductance. Nonetheless, I made the comment primarily because you were describing the iPod configuration as somehow optimal, and I did not find it to be.

  Quote:


 The hard drive and some other ICs are not too far away (they can't be in a unit this small), but there does not appear to be any audible noise on the analog output (again, I'm referring to the audio spectum). In other words, when the hard drive spins up, this cannot be heard from the modded line-out. The high-speed switching of the integrated circuits (processors) are way above the audio band. I agree with you in theory, but in practice, it doesn't appear to matter. 
 

If you look later in my post, I did mention PS rejection on the part of the components within, which will probably take care of a good portion of the noise. However, you do end up relying on that all the way through, so some of it will be equipment-dependent. I didn't have a problem with my equipment when using either the 4th or 5th gen in terms of audible noise. This, again, though had more to do with whether the design was an optimal platform, and I don't find it to be. It's certainly workable, though.

  Quote:


 I have found that the Black Gate NX-Hi-Q (non-polarized) caps that I use to sound very good for dc blocking applications. I agree that there are still better caps (those V-caps come to mind! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ), but for their size these caps are really hard to beat. I have used these in mods to other units besides the iMod, and many others have as well (if you search around on other audio forums). Have you listened to that make/model of cap before? In my opinion, they do not sound like a 'lytic cap at all. I'm talking about the NX-HI-Q series.. not the other series of Black Gate caps. 
 

Oddly enough, I actually have used BGs for signal coupling before. It's been a while, though, since I've had them handy. My space constraints were pretty similar to yours, so this did show up as a possible candidate for replacing the original caps in my own portable device. I don't think they're bad, but they still sound like electrolytics to me, at least. It's very difficult to avoid distortion broadly with this dielectric, though I think caps like the BGs or Cerafines have shown you don't have to outright suffer for it 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




. Nonetheless, it's still a constraint that I consider non-optimal, and I think it's a substantial advantage of having a larger space to work with. I got involved in the conversation since the discussion appeared to be concerning relative performance, so that's why some of my comments are in that vein.

  Quote:


 If you are talking about driving headphones, I agree 100%. A dedicated headphone amp will most likely offer more power output and do a better job at driving a pair of headphones (lowish impedance). However, when it comes to driving the input stage of a headphone amp (or home audio preamp, or integrated amp), where is the Wolfson dac in the iPod lacking in terms of power? See my comments to Colonel above. You are driving high impedance input stage of an amp and only need small milli-amps of current (power). You rarely see the input impedance to be under 5Kohm, and the dac would have no problem with this. 
 

Hmm...I wasn't referring to drive power, though. Micropower op-amps don't slew very quickly nor settle particularly quickly, which is ultimately going to lead to more distortion. It won't necessarily show so clearly in a run of the mill THD plot, but things like SID is likely to crop up in the form of high order hd products or TIMD. Unfortunately, we haven't reached a point where very small, low power op-amps perform at this level. 


  Quote:


 Headroom is important when you need it, but the max output voltage of the Squeezebox's PCM1748 dac is approx 1Vrms.. the same as the Wolfson dac in the iPod. You don't need the extra headroom because you are not ever going to be running that close to the rail. 
 

Having an amplifier swing near its rails is generally not an optimal circumstance. Even feeding a relatively high impedance, it can still be an issue, depending on the circuit topology. I have, at least, noticed that CMOS op-amps (which is frequently what you'll see in these chips, and very likely to be in the Wolfson given operating voltage and power) do exhibit this trait. 

  Quote:


 I know you are not trying to start a flamewar and I appreciate your respectful posts and I hope that this thread continues to follow in this fashion. It is nice to see some maturity around here 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 

Okay, I'm glad we're on the same page then ^_^ 

  Quote:


 Ok... this brings me to another point I want to make. I have listened to many dacs with inferior specs (e.g. lower SNR, not as good THD ratings, etc.) and have still found some them to sound better than others with better specs. For example, I prefer many Non-Oversampling, 16-bit dacs to many upsampling/oversampling dacs that I have heard. Yes, I am making a generalization here... but I have found a more musical, less-sterile tone to the NOS dacs. They don't win when it comes to pulling out every last bit of micro-detail and nuance out of the recording, but they are less analytical and more pleasant to listen to. This is my opinion. I don't want to sound like a shill for my own mod, but I DO find the sound of the iMod to sound more like a good NOS dac (even though the Wolson dac is not this kind of design)... it just has a warmer, more balanced sound that keeps me wanting to listen and is not fatiguing. 
 

I find R-2R dacs sound better than delta-sigma type. I'm not saying THD+N in the datasheet is the be-all, end-all indicium of quality; it isn't even close (for a variety of reasons). However, Wolfson's spec on this part is probably in the 86-88dB THD+N range and, coupled with what knowledge we probably have of the overall design and components therein, that's going to likely include odd order products and transient IM products in the audible range (e.g. delta-sigma type into a CMOS, low power op-amp). I do like the Wolfson codecs as far as modern portable devices go, but I don't find the performance to be beyond that of a basic desktop solution, either audibly or in measured performance. As meager as that probably sounds, it is an improvement over what was previously the average state of portable audio. I'm not trying to say it sounds bad, but I don't necessarily agree with some of the posts I've seen on head-fi describing relative performance.

 As for subjective impression, I personally found that the Wolfson chip sounds like a basic oversampling sigma-delta codec, overall. I wouldn't characterise the sound like a so-called 'NOS' dac. The distortion really isn't that high, nor is the overall distribution similar. It's not a bad sound, but I wouldn't characterise it as anything superlative. I find many converters perform substantially better, including Wolfson's own WM8740. I don't find oversampling to have such a deliterious effect as has been suggested in the audiophilia world, though. In my experience, the bigger problem has been lousy output stages available in mass-market items and, since those devices are nearly always oversampling, OS I think has gotten a bad rap as a result. The 'NOS' dacs, as they are frequently well into the realm of audiophilia, probably have more attention paid to the output stage in terms of subjective performance, so it's little wonder people are happier with it than something with a more conventional design.

  Quote:


 I agree that if you are looking at datasheets, you will find other dacs that have better specs, but better specs on paper doesn't necessarily yield better sound. The sound of a dac (or any other audio component) is more of a matter of personal taste. Look at vinyl and tube amps. They don't measure nearly as well as digital and many solid-state amps, however, there are many who prefer the sound of vinyl and tubes. Others will disagree. 
 

I'll throw you a bone and note that I misread the TI spec and the figure is actually around -91dB, so it's not tremendously better, though enough to change what is probably to be expected in terms of masking. However, it does look like the overall performance is moderately better. I probably didn't notice this because of the outright surprise that TI would make something this low-end in desktop-oriented parts. While this does impact comparison of these two parts, most of what I'm talking about is in a more general sense, so it's not too big a deal. I thought I'd mention this, though.

 Anyhow, performance judgments really depend on what you're measuring, of course. It's difficult to even get a THD/Frequency plot on a converter datasheet; they like to spec a-weighted 1KHz measurements as that is frequently the optimum point from a numbers perspective. So, considerably more is involved in making a useful analysis. However, we have some decent idea of what the A-Weighted THD+N probably is (-88-86dB), we know it's sigma-delta type, and it is most probably (by a wide margin) that the output device is a CMOS type op-amp. The a-weighting isn't going to tell us about high order products, which is unfortunate as that is one of my concerns with this arrangement. -88dB would include probably at least some of the SID. Based on experience, I'd estimate some of this is probably in the audible range, though a substantial portion of distortion does usually end up masked. Nonetheless, it is IMO substantial and the audible characteristic is, while not bad, not what I would describe as high performance in the broad sense. In the narrow sense of modern portable devices like DAPs, the Wolfsons are probably some of the best available for this task.

  Quote:


 Because of this, I can't argue with someone who has heard the iMod and compared it to another source/dac and preferred the other unit. If you *actually listened to the iMod carefully* (using Lossless or WAV files on the iMod and trying your best to level-match, as most CD players output 2Vrms), and preferred something else, that is fine and one can't really argue because it is a matter of taste. You like yellow, I like green. Green isn't better than yellow. However, if you state things like "the iPod is inferior sounding because it consumes less power," I can easily debate this and I sort of have fun doing so 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 

Hmm...well, I don't think I said it's inferior _because_ it consumes less power. However, its power draw requirements impose structural constraints on design and component choice, and those constraints do substantially impact performance, and generally do so in the manner I've witnessed in specification, testing, and in subjective listening. I did indeed listen very carefully, both to 4th and 5th gen units, and of course took great care in attempting to level match. It's difficult to criticise something on a forum without giving off the impression that one believes something is bad. I think the WM8758 does a good job for what it's designed to do, but I don't think it substitutes for a desktop solution (including the WM8740). Likewise, I found the iMod to sound good for a DAP, but I wouldn't swap it in place for a decent deck or DAC of similar cost if sound quality is the primary concern. It's difficult to argue with the convenience offered by DAPs when serious portable use is the objective, though, so the balance struck in that application is considerably better than in a desktop or 'home' application.

 Thanks for taking the time to respond ^_^

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* 
_It depends on the quality of the algorythm used! Fact is that most are limited to 16khz for 128kbits. It is an iso standard and most algorythms are designed to that model._

 

Well, you stated in rather absolute terms that 128Kbps MP3 low passes at 16KHz. I'm merely noting to you that this is simply the ISO spec on the psy model, and models can and do deviate from it. ISO spec'd this, though, because many people _can't_ hear much information above 16KHz (if any) in the context of actual music, and the average equipment being used to reproduce the music often doesn't benefit, either. The subjective qualms with 128Kbps performance generally lie in problems that arise from problems other than the lowpass in mp3, and encoders like LAME incorporate a substantially different, and more advanced, psy model than what was available at the time of ISO specification.


----------



## tourmaline

I'd be hard pressed to think that any 128kb based portable device(especially cheap) is going any higher then the 16khz the iso standard is calibrated to.
 Furthermore, the weakest part is the software, algorythm, especially the quality of it.

 There is soo much variation in mp3 playback, wav playback etc, because of their own patented algorythms for playback.

 Some open source stuff is better then commercially available playback software.

 Is wav lossless playback capable of being better then apple lossless playback, yes it could, depending on the quality of the ripper and the playback software. And the other way around is also possible, due to software.

 You need software to rip and to encode, here lies the true weakness.

 Don't believe me?! try to play a wav file in media player and try to play a wav file in your dedicated soundcard software, i am 100% positive you'll hear a difference!

 Rip a cd with EAC and rip a cd with for instance nero; i bet you'll hear a difference when playing back the ripped file.

 So, as i stated before, ripping and encoding isn't as simple as some stated earlier. Everything IS depending on the quality of the software!(ripper and encoding algorythms.)


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That comparison has been done many times. For example: 

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index....ess_comparison
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Lossless
http://www.bobulous.org.uk/misc/loss...udio_2006.html (doesn't include ALAC but does include quite a few other lossless codecs)



http://www.rockbox.org_

 

Thanks for the links.
 I cannot however find any graph of frequency responce of the apple encoder.


  Quote:


 *Apple claims that audio files compressed with its lossless codec* 
 

Do i read a BIG contradiction here?! Lossless and compression?! So, it isn't lossless after all.

 Furthermore, use what you think sounds best. But i can tell ya one thing, you need to try a few since there's quite a difference between rippers and playback software.


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Do i read a BIG contradiction here?! Lossless and compression?! So, it isn't lossless after all.

 Furthermore, use what you think sounds best. But i can tell ya one thing, you need to try a few since there's quite a difference between rippers and playback software._

 







 Compression simply means the output is smaller than the input. Lossless and lossy describe the _type_ of compression, not the presence of it.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Filburt* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_





 Compression simply means the output is smaller than the input. Lossless and lossy describe the type of compression, not the presence of it._

 

True, but the weakness is in the ripper/encoder
 It works with prediction.

 "(hopefully small) difference between the expected value and the actual data. If the difference between the predicted and the actual data (called the "error") tends to be small, then certain difference values (like 0, +1, -1 etc. on sample values) become very frequent, which can be exploited by encoding them in few output bits."
 So, there is an error margin and thus not a 100% copy of the original.

 you can fool the ear so it would sound like the original but IT isn't a 100% real copy of the real song on a cd.


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_True, but the weakness is in the ripper/decoder.
 it works with prediction._

 

I'm sorry, I've honestly lost you at this point 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




. Lossless algos don't employ anything that would threaten a loss of bit-identicality. I think you're thinking of something like MPEG4 rather than lossless compression. There is no such thing as one lossless codec being lossier than another. If you're worried about errors on the decoder side, that's not a problem with the format itself. If you're worried about errors induced at the DAE stage, that's still not a problem with the format.


----------



## Nebby

You asked for frequency charts, so here's one of Blue Man Group - Rods and Cones. Bottom graph is wav, top graph is flac.





 MP3 encode from the wav:




 You can also do a CRC check to verify that the wav is the same after compressing to flac and decompressing back to wav. Websites are out there that have done this and you can find them via google.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Filburt* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm sorry, I've honestly lost you at this point 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




. Lossless algos don't employ anything that would threaten a loss of bit-identicality. I think you're thinking of something like MPEG4 rather than lossless compression. There is no such thing as one lossless codec being lossier than another. If you're worried about errors on the decoder side, that's not a problem with the format itself. If you're worried about errors induced at the DAE stage, that's still not a problem with the format._

 

Since there is an error margin, you could think the term lossless is a bit deceiving. that's all.

 You could discuss that on a mathematical level it would be pretty much the same but not on an absolute term. There is an error margin and some faulty bits could be introduced in the file.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You asked for frequency charts, so here's one of Blue Man Group - Rods and Cones. Bottom graph is wav, top graph is flac.





 MP3 encode from the wav:




 You can also do a CRC check to verify that the wav is the same after compressing to flac and decompressing back to wav. Websites are out there that have done this and you can find them via google._

 

Looks pretty decent. Maybe i would have to take another look at flac. Done that before but not that extensively, after i still could hear a difference between wav and mp3 320. Flac might save me some space.

 Thanks for the graphs.

 If you look closely, especially at the beginning of the graph, there's some slight changes between the mp3 and the wav. The flac looks pretty much the same. Is that mp3 320kb?! must be since the frequencyresponce is over 16khz, so it cannot be 128kb. frequency responce doesn't say anything about attack and pressure level of a note, there is still slight difference between wav and 32o kb mp3 in that respect. It sounds a bit tamer then wav.

 Problem would probably be that my favourite playback software cannot playback flack files. There would still be differences playing back flac files, since different encoders would be used. Same as wav playback software.

 Wich playback software/encoders are best in sound?


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Since there is an error margin, you could think the term lossless is a bit deceiving._

 

Where do you get this "error margin"? Please link your source of these quotes so that we can gain an understanding of the context used. Lossless compression is bit perfect, during an encode if something is not bit perfect the encoder will scream bloody murder


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Since there is an error margin, you could think the term lossless is a bit deceiving._

 

What error margin? I certainly didn't indicate the existence of a margin of error in my post, so I'm confused as to what you're referring to. As I'd noted, if there are errors at the decode stage or the DAE stage, that isn't the fault of the encoder or the format nor does it make it lossy.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Where do you get this "error margin"? Please link your source of these quotes so that we can gain an understanding of the context used. Lossless compression is bit perfect, during an encode if something is not bit perfect the encoder will scream bloody murder 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

"As mentioned previously, lossless sound compression is a somewhat specialised area. Lossless sound compression algorithms can take advantage of the repeating patterns shown by the *wave-like *nature of the data - essentially using models to *predict* the "next" value and encoding the *(hopefully small) difference *between the *expected* value and the *actual* data. If the difference between the *predicted and the actual data [/B](called the "error") tends to be small, then certain difference values (like 0, +1, -1 etc. on sample values) become very frequent, which can be exploited by encoding them in few output bits."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossless*


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_"As mentioned previously, lossless sound compression is a somewhat specialised area. Lossless sound compression algorithms can take advantage of the repeating patterns shown by the *wave-like *nature of the data - essentially using models to *predict* the "next" value and encoding the *(hopefully small) difference *between the *expected* value and the *actual* data. If the difference between the *predicted and the actual data [/B](called the "error") tends to be small, then certain difference values (like 0, +1, -1 etc. on sample values) become very frequent, which can be exploited by encoding them in few output bits."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossless*_*
*
*


From your source:

  Quote:


 Lossless data compression is a class of data compression algorithms that allows the exact original data to be reconstructed from the compressed data. 
 

 Quote:


 Lossless compression is used when it is important that the original and the decompressed data be identical, or when no assumption can be made on whether certain deviation is uncritical. 
 

When you said 'predictive', I thought you meant something considerably more extensive. I didn't realise you just meant in this degree, mainly because you seemed to be insinuating that lossless codecs are actually lossy in some manner.*


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Filburt* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_From your source:





 When you said 'predictive', I thought you meant something considerably more extensive. I didn't realise you just meant in this degree, mainly because you seemed to be insinuating that lossless codecs are actually lossy in some manner._

 

Nope, in that context on a mathematical bases it is pretty much the same as the original, but probably not on an absolute term. if you would really be a nitpicker.

 I never used the term lossy.


----------



## Nebby

No, a lossless file after decompression is absolutely bit-perfectly the same as the originating file.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No, a lossless file after decompression is absolutely bit-perfectly the same as the originating file._

 

what about the error margin?!

 mathemetically the errormargin might be 0.00000000001%, but on an absolute level it still isn't the same as the physical cd.


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Nope, in that context on a mathematical bases it is pretty much the same as the original, but probably not on an absolute term. if you would really be a nitpicker.

 I never used the term lossy._

 

If it's not the same as the original, it's lossy. Even if you didn't use the term, it was implicit in your posts. If you could provide some sort of evidence of your claims that lossless codecs are, in fact, lossy in some capacity, it would be much appreciated. I mean something like bit-by-bit analysis or something of that sort (e.g. don't refer me to the spectrographs above). If there is _any_ error, it is _not_ lossless. Therefore, if you are claiming that a codec has some error (e.g. 'error margin'), then you are claiming it isn't lossless. I have seen no evidence, thus far, to support this claim from you 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




. If you tell me there is error from the decoder, or in the DAE (as the source .wav would have the same 'loss'), that doesn't qualify as evidence that the codec itself is lossy.

 Secondly, I do not understand why you insist upon claiming that 128Kbps mp3 must lowpass at 16KHz. I think I've more than sufficiently explained why this is not the case. You can try it for yourself. Configure LAME with the appropriate switches to set the lowpass at a higher frequency and tell the psy model not to throw it under the masking threshold. I'm at a loss as to how to make this any clearer to you.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Filburt* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If it's not the same as the original, it's lossy. Even if you didn't use the term, it was implicit in your posts. If you could provide some sort of evidence of your claims that lossless codecs are, in fact, lossy in some capacity, it would be much appreciated. I mean something like bit-by-bit analysis or something of that sort (e.g. don't refer me to the spectrographs above). If there is _any_ error, it is _not_ lossless. Therefore, if you are claiming that a codec has some error (e.g. 'error margin'), then you are claiming it isn't lossless. I have seen no evidence, thus far, to support this claim from you 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




. If you tell me there is error from the decoder, or in the DAE (as the source .wav would have the same 'loss'), that doesn't qualify as evidence that the codec itself is lossy.

 Secondly, I do not understand why you insist upon claiming that 128Kbps mp3 must lowpass at 16KHz. I think I've more than sufficiently explained why this is not the case. You can try it for yourself. Configure LAME with the appropriate switches to set the lowpass at a higher frequency and tell the psy model not to throw it under the masking threshold. I'm at a loss as to how to make this any clearer to you._

 

you don't get it do you.

 On a mathemetical basis an error of 0.000000001 is the same as the original, but on an absolute level it ISN'T. The algorythms use a prediction method with an error margin. So, the decoder could have a file with 0.00000001 error and the encoder could encode the file totalling to an error of 0.000000015%.
 mathemetically this still would be called as the same as the original, again, on an absolute basis it isn't. But they call it lossless as the mathematical error is sooooo small, they see it as the original.

 Lossy takes a great portion of the orignal data away to save space in the file.
 You can choose how much of the data have to be taken away to get better compression ratio's.

 lossless doesn't but still has an error margin, so theoretically and being a nitpicker, it still isn't the same as the original cd. Thus far i haven't seen evidence from you either that the prediction algorythms don't have an error margin. As i read in wikipedia, they do have an error margin. So, theoretically, they could never be exactly the same as the original, but very, very, very close, hence the term lossless; mathemetically neglectable margin.


 If you rip a cd via eac, you can set lame to use pre-installed settigs. So, if you use the 128kb setting with eac and lame, you would get an 128kb mp3 cutoff at 16khz. Sure, there is software that can alter the pre-set values, so you can determin your own compression. 

 I know myself what you mean. But in general, most people rip with lame 128kb presets and don't realize it's cut off at 16khz according to the iso standards.


----------



## trose49

Did I mention I got a new V-Dock and it sounds great!


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


 As mentioned previously, lossless sound compression is a somewhat specialised area. Lossless sound compression algorithms can take advantage of the repeating patterns shown by the wave-like nature of the data - essentially using models to predict the "next" value and encoding the (hopefully small) difference between the expected value and the actual data. If the difference between the predicted and the actual data (called the "error") tends to be small, then certain difference values (like 0, +1, -1 etc. on sample values) become very frequent, which can be exploited by encoding them in few output bits. 
 

In this quote, "error" is simply referring to the the difference between the predicted and actual data. It is only a designation of that difference, not an actual error in the data. There is no error margin in the compression. In fact the wikipedia entry that you used as a source for that quote starts out with the sentence "Lossless data compression is a class of data compression algorithms that allows the *exact original data* to be reconstructed from the compressed data."

 You can mathematically prove that the files are completely and absolutely identical by doing a CRC comparison, or if you wanted to really go to the extreme do a MD5 hash comparison. I would do it myself, but this has been done plenty of times already online and it would be easier and more convincing for you to do it yourself. It is documented well enough that you could easily grab a flac encoder, a file checker software, and do the comparison yourself.

 I mean no offense, so please don't take this the wrong way but is English your first language?


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Did I mention I got a new V-Dock and it sounds great! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

How's the burning in going? Any noticeable changes in the sound so far?


----------



## stevenkelby

Not sure if Vinnie has mentioned this here but I will put it out there for those interested. Vinnie explained this to me in an email. It's easier if I just quote Vinnie here. If thats not cool Vinnie, PM me and I'll edit it but I think you said it's cool, can't remember.



 "One of the advantages of the iMod vs.using an external dac is that there is no SPDIF involved. SPDIF is not all that great... the multiplexing of the clock and data signals is the worst thing about it. The I2S interface is what most actual dac chips use. So if an external dac has an SPDIF input, inside there is going to be an SPDIF receiver chip that is going to do conversion to I2S to pass to the internal dac chip. There is more jitter in this conversion process. 

 Keep in mind that the transport (e.g. CD player or any other source that generates the SPDIF output) has to also create the SPDIF signal. Then it must be transferred via a cable (coax or optical) to the external dac.

 The beauty of the iMod is the simplicity of the circuit path, and the very small circuit design (very clean, short signal paths). The whole thing is battery powered as well, so the power source is nice and clean "


 So there you go.

 As for the other argument, without being pedantic about irrelevant "errors", does 111111111 sound the same as 3x3 ? The answer is yes, no info is lost and it takes up less space. Thats my understanding of how lossless compression works but I could be wrong of course. 

 In other news, my imod has just over 200 hours now. Going through my RPX-33 and ED.9s it sounds just as I hoped, thanks Vinnie and Ken! Now I'm thinking about v-caps...

 I have a female mini jack and charging dongle on my imod dock and used cryo jena mini - RCA and cryo jena RCA - RCA cables to compare the imod and Sony DVP-S725D DVD player (not mine, looking after for a mate for a couple years, $1000 6 years ago, great SQ but doesn't play some DVDs, Google if your interested). The difference is too close to call and is much smaller than any differences caused by minor level matching issues. I fooled myself a few times but had the wife swap RCA's without me seeing over 3 10 sec. sections of music I know well by Radiohead, Michael Jackson and Pink Floyd. I couldn't guess correctly better than half the time.

 The only difference is an irrelevantly, unimportantly, never to be heard lower noise floor in the DVD player. By saying that, I mean that with both players paused, and the amp at full power through the high gain output, the DVD is nearly silent, with only slight noise through what I think is the volume knob of the RPX-33. Very hard to hear in my silent room.

 In the same conditions with the imod paused, there is a faint, barely audible "tick" every second or so. 

 Bare in mind that in order to hear this tick, the volume is so high that even in a silent passage of a well recorded CD the mastering hum is very loud and any normal music would blow the drivers out of the ED9, and my eardrums out of my head.

 The sound through the imod is identical whether charging or not, there is zero difference.

 I am confident in all this because, you will be glad to know, I had my hearing tested last Friday, and it is impeccable. It was part of a research project for Flinders uni, they said I got the best results they ever got! There were 2 parts, a regular hearing test and a part where you listen to a voice speaking with other voices in the background, then repeat what the voice said. The background noise gets progressively louder. Most people can get 50% of the words right with the background noise at 3db lower than the voice. I got 100% of the words with the background noise 3db higher than the voice, the last stage in the test. In left, right, then both ears. Nice to have unprofessional confirmation of my ear-skills!

 Slightly off topic that, sorry! If any over 30 YO males in Adelaide can do it on Fridays on Sth Terrace, they need your ears! PM me for details.


----------



## stevenkelby

Oh and I was using the tracks on cd burned to flac with the longest-time-taking settings to flac with EAC. AS said, no difference. I also tried 1 of the tracks burned to 320kbps with lame 3.97 or whatever it is. Very obvious difference, mainly in precision of soundstage, also speed of attack and decay, amongst other things. These differences aren't easily clear on my iaudio U3 of course.


----------



## stevenkelby

Sorry to be OT Todd, nice dock!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_In this quote, "error" is simply referring to the the difference between the predicted and actual data. It is only a designation of that difference, not an actual error in the data. There is no error margin in the compression. In fact the wikipedia entry that you used as a source for that quote starts out with the sentence "Lossless data compression is a class of data compression algorithms that allows the *exact original data* to be reconstructed from the compressed data."

 You can mathematically prove that the files are completely and absolutely identical by doing a CRC comparison, or if you wanted to really go to the extreme do a MD5 hash comparison. I would do it myself, but this has been done plenty of times already online and it would be easier and more convincing for you to do it yourself. It is documented well enough that you could easily grab a flac encoder, a file checker software, and do the comparison yourself.

 I mean no offense, so please don't take this the wrong way but is English your first language?_

 

Nope.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 (on both questions).

 Sorry, a cd only contains a 0 or 1. Wikipedia states the algorythm uses a 0 a 1 or -1. So, apperntly it can distract something from the original. If he uses a -1, it's a correction of the original.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_How's the burning in going? Any noticeable changes in the sound so far? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

If he also uses the vcaps, he's also in a for a long ride, about 200 hours. After that, i bet the differences between wav/flac and 320 mp3 will only become more apperent!

 Congrats on your purchase.

 Edit: ah, i read you're thinking of vcaps; i wouldn't even think about it, grap your CC and order them today!
 These caps are a no-brainer and amongst the very best you can get! But, as i said before, it would take another 200 hours+ for burn-in.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Oh and I was using the tracks on cd burned to flac with the longest-time-taking settings to flac with EAC. AS said, no difference. I also tried 1 of the tracks burned to 320kbps with lame 3.97 or whatever it is. Very obvious difference, mainly in precision of soundstage, also speed of attack and decay, amongst other things. These differences aren't easily clear on my iaudio U3 of course._

 

Amen, you're not the only one thinking(hearing) 320 mp3 isn't perfect.

 I defenately must have a look (listen) into flac. As i said before, i am still allergic to mp3!


----------



## stevenkelby

Yep. I can certainly understand why people say they can't hear a difference though, if their ears or gear can't resolve it. On certain tracks I can hear no difference either, but if I know where and when to listen it's obvious to me.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Not sure if Vinnie has mentioned this here but I will put it out there for those interested. Vinnie explained this to me in an email. It's easier if I just quote Vinnie here. If thats not cool Vinnie, PM me and I'll edit it but I think you said it's cool, can't remember.



 "One of the advantages of the iMod vs.using an external dac is that there is no SPDIF involved. SPDIF is not all that great... the multiplexing of the clock and data signals is the worst thing about it. The I2S interface is what most actual dac chips use. So if an external dac has an SPDIF input, inside there is going to be an SPDIF receiver chip that is going to do conversion to I2S to pass to the internal dac chip. There is more jitter in this conversion process. 

 Keep in mind that the transport (e.g. CD player or any other source that generates the SPDIF output) has to also create the SPDIF signal. Then it must be transferred via a cable (coax or optical) to the external dac.

 The beauty of the iMod is the simplicity of the circuit path, and the very small circuit design (very clean, short signal paths). The whole thing is battery powered as well, so the power source is nice and clean "


 So there you go.

 As for the other argument, without being pedantic about irrelevant "errors", does 111111111 sound the same as 3x3 ? The answer is yes, no info is lost and it takes up less space. Thats my understanding of how lossless compression works but I could be wrong of course. 

 In other news, my imod has just over 200 hours now. Going through my RPX-33 and ED.9s it sounds just as I hoped, thanks Vinnie and Ken! Now I'm thinking about v-caps...

 I have a female mini jack and charging dongle on my imod dock and used cryo jena mini - RCA and cryo jena RCA - RCA cables to compare the imod and Sony DVP-S725D DVD player (not mine, looking after for a mate for a couple years, $1000 6 years ago, great SQ but doesn't play some DVDs, Google if your interested). The difference is too close to call and is much smaller than any differences caused by minor level matching issues. I fooled myself a few times but had the wife swap RCA's without me seeing over 3 10 sec. sections of music I know well by Radiohead, Michael Jackson and Pink Floyd. I couldn't guess correctly better than half the time.

 The only difference is an irrelevantly, unimportantly, never to be heard lower noise floor in the DVD player. By saying that, I mean that with both players paused, and the amp at full power through the high gain output, the DVD is nearly silent, with only slight noise through what I think is the volume knob of the RPX-33. Very hard to hear in my silent room.

 In the same conditions with the imod paused, there is a faint, barely audible "tick" every second or so. 

 Bare in mind that in order to hear this tick, the volume is so high that even in a silent passage of a well recorded CD the mastering hum is very loud and any normal music would blow the drivers out of the ED9, and my eardrums out of my head.

 The sound through the imod is identical whether charging or not, there is zero difference.

 I am confident in all this because, you will be glad to know, I had my hearing tested last Friday, and it is impeccable. It was part of a research project for Flinders uni, they said I got the best results they ever got! There were 2 parts, a regular hearing test and a part where you listen to a voice speaking with other voices in the background, then repeat what the voice said. The background noise gets progressively louder. Most people can get 50% of the words right with the background noise at 3db lower than the voice. I got 100% of the words with the background noise 3db higher than the voice, the last stage in the test. In left, right, then both ears. Nice to have unprofessional confirmation of my ear-skills!

 Slightly off topic that, sorry! If any over 30 YO males in Adelaide can do it on Fridays on Sth Terrace, they need your ears! PM me for details._

 

What if it's a 11111-1111= not equal to 3 x 3.

 Congrats on your impecable hearing. Mine has to be in that realm also, since i hear the same things in mp3 files, up to 320kb.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_How's the burning in going? Any noticeable changes in the sound so far? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Burn-in of the V-Dock is going nicely I have had it runnng for 4.5 days straight.

 I have noticed a few changes mostly in the bass response. When I first listened I thought the bass was very high quality, tight and accurate.

 I have sinced noticed that at around 72 hours plus the 12 Ken put on for me so *84* hours mark that I was initially wrong.

 The bass NOW sounds incredibly high quality very tight and accurate! LOL!

 In other word the bass response in general has improved. The timbre on drums, bass guitar etc have very quick accurate tone and in comparison made the inital sound a bit boomy by comparison.

 I also notice that the voices seems closer/more up front and quite a bit clearer then the initial sessions I spent with the V-dock.

 I will also note that with a linear power supply the V-dock can be enjoyed with the power on and I hear NO difference in the sq or any noise. Dont know if this has other variable for different people/power etc. but for me it is silent.

 I am very pleased to say the least. The V-Dock is easily as good as a Rega 2K but for different reasons. They are quite a bit different in sound signature so hard to directly compare.

 The Rega was very linear and didnt have the punch the V-dock has but I would say overall clarity is very similar and the music layering seems to be about equal. The V-dock definatly hits the low notes that the Rega never found.

 I guess it would be all up to personal preference in the end like always.

 I can not imagine someone purchasing a V-dock and not being completely impressed with the unit and happy with their descion.

 Wether the 1's and 0's are all there I am no expert I go by what I hear and my ears are happy!


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Nope.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 (on both questions).

 Sorry, a cd only contains a 0 or 1. Wikipedia states the algorythm uses a 0 a 1 or -1. So, apperntly it can distract something from the original. If he uses a -1, it's a correction of the original._

 

The article in question is only describing in general what a lossless algorithm may use to achieve it's compression. The 0, +1, and -1 that it speaks of are the sample values that it calculates from the difference between the calculated value and the actual value. Then, if the same sample value occurs multiple times, compression can be done by encoding fewer bits to represent the multiples of the same value. 

 You are comparing apples and oranges, the 0,+1, and -1 that are referenced in the article has absolutely nothing to do with the 0's and 1's on a cd-rom. 

 I have no first hand technical knowledge of the compression algorithms myself, but this is what I understand to be the content of the wikipedia article.

 Btw, I also agree that mp3 isn't perfect. It's a compression codec that's mostly based on psychoacoustics, so it really can't be perfect. But to the majority of the human population (which doesn't really include audiophiles and their golden ears), the files produced sound almost the same as the original. With the compression ratio that mp3 gets, I believe that it serves it's purpose quite well.

 How does this relate with the thread? I think we can conclude that people should load rockbox and use lossless files for their iMods, which can be docked into the purty looking v-cap dock


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The article in question is only describing in general what a lossless algorithm may use to achieve it's compression. The 0, +1, and -1 that it speaks of are the sample values that it calculates from the difference between the calculated value and the actual value. Then, if the same sample value occurs multiple times, compression can be done by encoding fewer bits to represent the multiples of the same value. 

 You are comparing apples and oranges, the 0,+1, and -1 that are referenced in the article has absolutely nothing to do with the 0's and 1's on a cd-rom. 

 I have no first hand technical knowledge of the compression algorithms myself, but this is what I understand to be the content of the wikipedia article.

 Btw, I also agree that mp3 isn't perfect. It's a compression codec that's mostly based on psychoacoustics, so it really can't be perfect. But to the majority of the human population (which doesn't really include audiophiles and their golden ears), the files produced sound almost the same as the original. With the compression ratio that mp3 gets, I believe that it serves it's purpose quite well.

 How does this relate with the thread? I think we can conclude that people should load rockbox and use lossless files for their iMods, which can be docked into the purty looking v-cap dock 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I'll have a look into it. Also into flac, might be a good alternative to wav.....saving some space. But i will have an extensive listen first.....

 If you wanna make sure the conversion was bit perfect, it HAS to compare to the original cd.

 I think i know how it works, if there's a difference, it markes it as a -1, saving space.

 Another conclusion could be that the vcap dock isn't to be underestimated!

 I know first hand vcaps are special.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 not cheap, worth every penny!

 Oh, what you forgot to mention about the vcaps is the well bodied and layered bass. It's tight, yet has a good body and has more info/layering at the deep end. especially bassguitars sound full, with alot of layered detail.

 The combination of rockbox, lossless and a good dock like the vcap dock, it could be a good alternative for people looking for quality and ease of use. No more switching cd,s.

 The reasons why more and more pople on headfi use a PC as transport.

 Do you need a seperate player for flac files or can flac also be uses as playback software (like mediaplayer)?
 Also, what is the best sounding flac software? ( i know mediaplayer isn't the best sounding player around).


----------



## stevenkelby

Todd, are those changes you speak of relative to the regular imod dock cable or the Rega? I will probably get a v-cap dock too if the cheap one fits my budget.


----------



## Nebby

Don't forget that flac can store tags! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 I've been thinking of using some v-caps for some of my projects, but I ended up concluding that I should hold off until they're in nearly final form before playing with those expensive caps


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Todd, are those changes you speak of relative to the regular imod dock cable or the Rega? I will probably get a v-cap dock too if the cheap one fits my budget._

 

The oimps are considderably cheaper then the teflon versions. price is dependant on the capacity of the cap. A midrange cap would cost you about 60-70 dollars a piece.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Don't forget that flac can store tags! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I've been thinking of using some v-caps for some of my projects, but I ended up concluding that I should hold off until they're in nearly final form before playing with those expensive caps 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 






 The ones you can buy now at the venhaus website are the final versions!

 I use the oimps, together with custom made rectangular silver signal caps in my amp( said to be better then the audio note silver caps- wich are on par with the teflon caps)). A lovely combination. It's about the same combo as using teflon vcaps and oimp vcaps. The layering of the vcaps is really nice, especially at the bottom end!

 Probably the silver signal caps could be a tad more organic, compared to the teflon's.
 teflon vcaps for midrange capacity is around 400 dollars each and going up fast for larger caps!


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Todd, are those changes you speak of relative to the regular imod dock cable or the Rega? I will probably get a v-cap dock too if the cheap one fits my budget._

 

Sorry was I confusing.

 Those changes do occur with the regular imod cable however I was speaking about the Changes in the V-dock itself.

 I found the changes much more dramatic with the V-dock then with either of my imod cables.


----------



## tourmaline

I just converted some wave files to flac and i played both the wave and flac files forth and back;

 i can hear a very slight difference in the files, probably conversion of the flac files is slightly different then the wav codec. For the rest they are pretty much the same. At least much better then mp3!

 I used creative mediasource go 5.

 The plucking of the base in the music is with flac slightly "clearer" then the wav file. I think this is just a slight difference in algorythm, no biggy.

 Hmm, after longer comparative listening i am not so sure anymore.

 Flac is a keeper, especially flac is natively supported by my preferred player!

 45 mb wav vs 25,4 mb flac.


----------



## Febs

Do a proper ABX test. Whatever you're hearing is either your imagination or a difference in volume, and a proper ABX test will address both of those issues.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Do a proper ABX test. Whatever you're hearing is either your imagination or a difference in volume, and a proper ABX test will address both of those issues._

 

AMEN TO THAT!!!! LOL!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Febs* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Do a proper ABX test. Whatever you're hearing is either your imagination or a difference in volume, and a proper ABX test will address both of those issues._

 

The first time i played the flac file and immediatly switched to the wav file i heard this phenomenon, now it sounds the same. The volume is exactly the same!

 After longer switching forth and back, it was gone.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_AMEN TO THAT!!!! LOL!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

how is your break-in with the vcaps? hearing any progress?!


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The first time i played the flac file and immediatly switched to the wav file i heard this phenomenon, now it sounds the same. The volume is exactly the same!

 After longer switching forth and back, it was gone._

 

Trust me do an ABX and you will be suprized I guarantee it!

 The only reason people dont take them is that they are afraid of the results.

 Its worth the 10 mins to try it. Dont be shy!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Trust me do an ABX and you will be suprized I guarantee it!

 The only reason people dont take them is that they are afraid of the results.

 Its worth the 10 mins to try it. Dont be shy!_

 

 I learned from this fast switching that the brain needs some time to refocus!


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_how is your break-in with the vcaps? hearing any progress?!_

 

Yes:

  Quote:


 Burn-in of the V-Dock is going nicely I have had it runnng for 4.5 days straight.

 I have noticed a few changes mostly in the bass response. When I first listened I thought the bass was very high quality, tight and accurate.

 I have sinced noticed that at around 72 hours plus the 12 Ken put on for me so *84* hours mark that I was initially wrong.

 The bass NOW sounds incredibly high quality very tight and accurate! LOL!

 In other word the bass response in general has improved. The timbre on drums, bass guitar etc have very quick accurate tone and in comparison made the inital sound a bit boomy by comparison.

 I also notice that the voices seems closer/more up front and quite a bit clearer then the initial sessions I spent with the V-dock.

 I will also note that with a linear power supply the V-dock can be enjoyed with the power on and I hear NO difference in the sq or any noise. Dont know if this has other variable for different people/power etc. but for me it is silent.

 I am very pleased to say the least. The V-Dock is easily as good as a Rega 2K but for different reasons. They are quite a bit different in sound signature so hard to directly compare.

 The Rega was very linear and didnt have the punch the V-dock has but I would say overall clarity is very similar and the music layering seems to be about equal. The V-dock definatly hits the low notes that the Rega never found.

 I guess it would be all up to personal preference in the end like always.

 I can not imagine someone purchasing a V-dock and not being completely impressed with the unit and happy with their descion.

 Wether the 1's and 0's are all there I am no expert I go by what I hear and my ears are happy!


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes:_

 

Still about 100 hours off............................................... .................
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 it suppose to get even more detailed at about 200 hours, even up to 500 hours differences can be noticed.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Still about 100 hours off............................................... .................
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 it suppose to get even more detailed at about 200 hours, even up to 500 hours differences can be noticed._

 

I cant imagine it sounding better but I will try to get as many hours on it as I can before the Boston/NE meet!


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_you don't get it do you.

 On a mathemetical basis an error of 0.000000001 is the same as the original, but on an absolute level it ISN'T. The algorythms use a prediction method with an error margin. So, the decoder could have a file with 0.00000001 error and the encoder could encode the file totalling to an error of 0.000000015%.
 mathemetically this still would be called as the same as the original, again, on an absolute basis it isn't. But they call it lossless as the mathematical error is sooooo small, they see it as the original.

 Lossy takes a great portion of the orignal data away to save space in the file.
 You can choose how much of the data have to be taken away to get better compression ratio's.

 lossless doesn't but still has an error margin, so theoretically and being a nitpicker, it still isn't the same as the original cd. Thus far i haven't seen evidence from you either that the prediction algorythms don't have an error margin. As i read in wikipedia, they do have an error margin. So, theoretically, they could never be exactly the same as the original, but very, very, very close, hence the term lossless; mathemetically neglectable margin.


 If you rip a cd via eac, you can set lame to use pre-installed settigs. So, if you use the 128kb setting with eac and lame, you would get an 128kb mp3 cutoff at 16khz. Sure, there is software that can alter the pre-set values, so you can determin your own compression. 

 I know myself what you mean. But in general, most people rip with lame 128kb presets and don't realize it's cut off at 16khz according to the iso standards._

 

Of course I understand what you're trying to argue. However, what you're arguing doesn't make any sense. You have provided absolutely no evidence of your claims, and instead are working off of pure conjecture based on some interpretation of the predictive element of a lossless algo. I don't need to prove to you that it _doesn't_ have an error margin. You're the one making the claim that it does, and it isn't my responsibility to disprove your claim when you haven't done anything to back it up. Wiki's entry simply notes that the codec can integrate the error into a small substream to zero the error. It _does not_ mean that the output contains errors. The article you quoted, more than once, explicitly states that lossless codecs have zero error in their output. Your argument that some tiny error is equivalent to losslessness makes very little sense (as it would be ruinous for compression of many other data types), and is not backed up by anything in the wiki article and anything I've ever read about in literature discussing lossless encoding. You can also test that claim by encoding something losslessly, decoding it, and checking to see if the output is bit identical to the input. Your computer can do the work for you; use CRC or an MD5 hash, or some other method of file comparison. 

 As for the 128Kbps claim, arguing that many codecs do it by default is arguing something categorically different from your previous claim that the lowpass _must_ be applied. I never argued that it isn't frequently used by encoders, but the fact of the matter is that it isn't required. The ISO spec has the low-pass set even at higher bitrates, not just 128Kbps. Deviation from that is relatively common in modern encoders as the psy models have gotten more sophisticated.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Filburt* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Of course I understand what you're trying to argue. However, what you're arguing doesn't make any sense. You have provided absolutely no evidence of your claims, and instead are working off of pure conjecture based on some interpretation of the predictive element of a lossless algo. I don't need to prove to you that it doesn't have an error margin. You're the one making the claim that it does, and it isn't my responsibility to disprove your claim when you haven't done anything to back it up. Wiki's entry simply notes that the codec can integrate the error into a small substream to zero the error. It _does not_ mean that the output contains errors. The article you quoted, more than once, explicitly states that lossless codecs have zero error in their output. Your argument that some tiny error is equivalent to losslessness makes very little sense (as it would be ruinous for compression of many other data types), and is not backed up by anything in the wiki article and anything I've ever read about in literature discussing lossless encoding. You can also test that claim by encoding something losslessly, decoding it, and checking to see if the output is bit identical to the input. Your computer can do the work for you; use CRC or an MD5 hash, or some other method of file comparison. 

 As for the 128Kbps claim, arguing that many codecs do it by default is arguing something categorically different from your previous claim that the lowpass must be applied. I never argued that it isn't frequently used by encoders, but the fact of the matter is that it isn't required. The ISO spec has the low-pass set even at higher bitrates, not just 128Kbps. Deviation from that is relatively common in modern encoders as the psy models have gotten more sophisticated._

 

Problem solved. I think i know what the -1 setting does in that algorythm stated in that wikipedia article. I was thinking it was used for error correction but i think that bit is used for saving space.

 I didn't say that, i said that most people use default settings, wich are set to 128kb, 16khz. without people knowing it is cut off at 16khz. People are lazy and use default settings and are happy with it.

 Nice you know how to make higher quality mp3. So do i, but most people are satisfied with mp3 at default settings of 128kb, 16khz.

 Audio enthausiasts obviously are not satisfied with these settings.
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Oh and if a standard is that flexible, it isn't really a standard, mainly because alot of free mp3 players don't actually follow the iso standard.
 "Interestingly enough, the MP3 specification (ISO 11172-3) does not specify exactly how the encoding is to be accomplished. Rather, it outlines techniques and specifies a level of conformance; in other words, it tells developers that their resulting MP3 files must meet certain structural criteria".

 "A good example of the kind of freedom left to developers is the fact that the MP3 standard does not specify exactly how to treat the upper end of the spectrum, above 16kHz. Since human auditory perception begins to diminish greatly (with age and exposure to loud volumes) between 16kHz and 20kHz, *some developers have historically chosen to simply chop off frequencies above 16kHz*, which can be beneficial at low bitrates, since it leaves more bits available for encoding more audible frequencies. Xing, for example, did this with the first versions of their very fast codec. *Later, they rewrote their codec to handle frequencies up to 20kHz (probably at the behest of the audiophile MP3 community)."*

 "In fact, by the time we're adults, most of us can't hear much of anything above 16kHz (although women tend to preserve the ability to hear higher frequencies later into life than do men). The most sensitive range of hearing for most people hovers between 2kHz to 4kHz, a level probably evolutionarily related to the normal range of the human voice, which runs roughly from 500Hz to 2kHz."

 Now, the interesting question is, do all portable mp3 players cut off the frequency off at 16khz, or are they as flexible as the codec itself. I doubt some older mp3 players can go above 16khz, maybe even newer, cheaper mp3 as well.

 If i am thinking of standards, 16/44.1 is a solid industry standard.


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I didn't say that, i said that most people use default settings, wich are set to 128kb, 16khz. without people knowing it is cut off at 16khz. People are lazy and use default settings and are happy with it._

 

That isn't what you said. You said this:

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just thing i said earlier, mp3 is limited to 16khz._

 

 - http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...&postcount=164

 Followed by:

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_wav is lossless. any more. 128kbits mp3 IS limited to 16khz._

 

 - http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...7&postcount=18

 You have gradually amended your claim since I responded to you, but your original claim (which was erroneous) was not what you are claiming it to be now.

 I don't know what you're quoting, so it's difficult for me to comment on its veracity. You've been quoting some sources without providing a link to them. However, it's true that ISO standardised various format elements (e.g. frame size and construction, general formatting syntax, etc.). 16KHz is not part of the format's standard, though it did become part of the more or less de facto psy model specs early in MP3's lifetime (helped in part by FhG).


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Filburt* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That isn't what you said. You said this:

 - http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...&postcount=164

 Followed by:

 - http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...7&postcount=18

 You have gradually amended your claim since I responded to you, but your original claim (which was erroneous) was not what you are claiming it to be now.

 I don't know what you're quoting, so it's difficult for me to comment on its veracity. You've been quoting some sources without providing a link to them. However, it's true that ISO standardised various format elements (e.g. frame size and construction, general formatting syntax, etc.). 16KHz is not part of the format's standard, though it did become part of the more or less de facto psy model specs early in MP3's lifetime (helped in part by FhG)._

 

In general, default setting is 128kb, 16khz. Especially in the early software.

 Modern software is more flexible, but i still think they use 128kb, 16khz as default setting.

 As in my quote stated, most developers just cut off at 16khz, as they thought nobody would hear above 16khz in general.

 I think, because audiofiles reported artifacts and could hear the drastic cut off at 16khz, they made the codecs more flexible.

 I bet some older software is still cutting off at 16khz!

*I stand corrected, it IS not limited to 16khz, it is mostly cut off at 16khz.*

 In that respect you are right. It is an essential difference. Cutt off was the word i was looking for.

 maybe you missed this one:
  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_
 I mean no offense, so please don't take this the wrong way but is English your first language?_

 

 Quote:


 Nope.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 (on both questions). 
 

When it's getting late at my end(night time for you, early morning for me) and i am getting tired, it might get a bit harder to find the right words.

 But essentially we all agree now, on all subjects.


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_





 The ones you can buy now at the venhaus website are the final versions!

 I use the oimps, together with custom made rectangular silver signal caps in my amp( said to be better then the audio note silver caps- wich are on par with the teflon caps)). A lovely combination. It's about the same combo as using teflon vcaps and oimp vcaps. The layering of the vcaps is really nice, especially at the bottom end!

 Probably the silver signal caps could be a tad more organic, compared to the teflon's.
 teflon vcaps for midrange capacity is around 400 dollars each and going up fast for larger caps!_

 

I meant my own projects, I keep thinking they're done and then thinking of something new I could add to them. It's an endless cycle 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I think we have finally reached an agreement on the mp3 cutoff topic 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Now, back to the regularly scheduled V-Dock thread! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Trust me do an ABX and you will be suprized I guarantee it!

 The only reason people dont take them is that they are afraid of the results.

 Its worth the 10 mins to try it. Dont be shy!_

 

I've done a few ABX's in my time, I've found that my ears aren't quite platinum ears, but more of the Copper or silver ears. My wallet thanks me


----------



## GreatDane

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Truth can hurt.

 Apple fooled you guys for years with their apple computers and do the same thing with their restricting software.

 If any, i would never use software that will bound you to hardware, in this case ipods and apple software.
 Ever done a comparisson with the so calles apple lossless codec and any other, say open source lossless codec like flac. It might be better. BUT you can't use it on an ipod!_

 

I've never owned nor used an Apple computer and know very little about them. 

 I use mp3 on my iPod and use LAME at its highest VBR. My iPod is not for critical listening and I like having the huge music library as I do in mp3. I also have grown to like iTunes very much.


----------



## trose49

Isn't there always a price to pay and nothing is perfect. Can you really blame Apple for a near perfect business plan the last few years.

 Apart from the recent dip in the market if you bought Apple six months ago at 62.00 a share you would have still doubled you money *IN SIX MONTHS* (100% return on investment not bad)

 The Ipod is without question the most innovative and intuaive product of our time and Apple is trying to ride this coaster as long as possible. They are already offering some non DRM songs on ITUNES and that will grow over time but they held on to the reins as long as possible to make the IPOD as exclusive and protected from competitors as possible. (Can you blame them?)

 Only Apple haters will argue this point and Im not going there. They are a leader for a reason. Who would have predicted this when the first IPODS came out. *Very few or we would all be rich!*

 With other leading manufacturers such a Sony, Panasonic etc... and all the other big boys being the favorite for years for this type of product. Apple did it despite the odds and certainly no where near the funds as some of the other companies.

 Apple saw the future and others did not and are still playing catch-up and thats the bottom line.


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Isn't there always a price to pay and nothing is perfect. Can you really blame Apple for a near perfect business plan the last few years.

 Apart from the recent dip in the market if you bought Apple six months ago at 62.00 a share you would have still doubled you money *IN SIX MONTHS* (100% return on investment not bad)

 The Ipod is without question the most innovative and intuaive product of our time and Apple is trying to ride this coaster as long as possible. They are already offering some non DRM songs on ITUNES and that will grow over time but they held on to the reins as long as possible to make the IPOD as exclusive and protected from competitors as possible. (Can you blame them?)

 Only Apple haters will argue this point and Im not going there. They are a leader for a reason. Who would have predicted this when the first IPODS came out. *Very few or we would all be rich!*

 With other leading manufacturers such a Sony, Panasonic etc... and all the other big boys being the favorite for years for this type of product. Apple did it despite the odds and certainly no where near the funds as some of the other companies.

 Apple saw the future and others did not and are still playing catch-up and thats the bottom line._

 

I doubt there are people really hating Apple, maybe microsoft.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Sure, the ipod was very inovative, nobody is arguing that, nobody is arguing the design, wich is nice. What the problem is, not only for Apple is that lossless format only works with their hardware and software, this is a restriction in free use, as would drm be.( not to mention it is actually globally forbidden to tie people to hardware with software restrictions).

 If i was to buy a song, i want to be able to play that on any device of my choice in the quality i like most, either lossless or wav, sinds mp3 doesn't cut it for me. Problem is that most brands use their own type of lossless format, Sony has it, Apple has it.

 Now, with open source comming with alternatives that are even better in quality and don't restrict you in use of the highest quality possible, it is a good time for those brands to see what the people really want; drm free music, for a good price and no time or usage restrictions, like a cd does.

 GreatDane;

 I used Apple g4's for a couple of years professionally and it was quite a disaster. Compatability problems with professional software, reboots, slow computers etc. Even the largest apple/mac importer told me he had more problems with mac's than with computers at that time.

 What makes apple's great is the design, ease of use and the nice interface.
 Although apple's osX is simply a unix clone with a nice shell. So, that isn't so inovative.

 Apple's are in general more expensive because of the added bonus of nice looking stylisch designs, if you look at the hardware, the price is nowhere justified. Apple computers are as bad or good as any other PC. Giving apple the notch for being slightly more foolproof and easier to use for people that don't know much about computers, or people that simply want a stylish case on their desk. It comes at a price though.
 if you wanna know where apple stand at this moment; apple has about 4-5 % of the world market, microsoft/intel/amd machines have about 90+ % of the worldmarket. 
 In America, Apple is much more popular then in europe, (besides the ipods).
 Apple is mostly used in the design section over here, a very small niche market.

 In the end, it's just a preference, just buy want you want or like, or your wallet allows you to buy.

 What you have to give Apple credit for is making portable music more accessable and global.


----------



## terance

for some reason trose can't make any threads that stay on topic


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *terance* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_for some reason trose can't make any threads that stay on topic 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

At least he's the one going off topic.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 It's not just this thread, it happens in any thread!


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_At least he's the one going off topic.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 It's not just this thread, it happens in any thread!_

 

I know I should not respond to the tangents but I cant help it sometimes. Sorry to the OP. OH thats me!!!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Anyone here going to the Boston meet to hear this thing or what?

 I am thinking of doing an a/b comparison with a good cdp with a ballot box. People can choose which they feel is the best source V-Dock vs cdp. Before the crow thins i will anounce which was which and the number of votes for each.

 I know its not a place for criticle listening but if it is easy as most say anthe V-dock cant hold a candle to the cdp it should be easy right?

 I figure a 50/50 split would still be a V-dock victory meaning that half of the people picked wrong.

 Any suggestions?


----------



## beer

nice dock.
 but for $550 it's too much for me


----------



## jbloudg20

So what happens when the majority picks the CD player? Do you call off all accounts because it was a 'meet setting' and not ideal to hear the fine sound of your $1100 ipod? Same can be said inversely.


----------



## jbloudg20

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *terance* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I guess you are the only one who doesn't care about what the [size=large]TOP SECRET[/size] piece of gear is?

 I really don't care either._

 

I'm willing to bet only .1% of the head-fi population does.


----------



## trose49

GRUMPY OLD TROLLS WHO LIVE UNDER A BRIDGE!


----------



## trose49

Im sure I have received more PM inquires on the TOP SECRET PROJECT then:

 Quote:


 Team residual icewater running through veins
 Team ...The Cat with the .45 calibur Claws 
 



LOL!!! ROTFL!!!!


----------



## Skylab

By the way, just to set the record straight on Apple Lossless for anyone who may be interested, since you can easily (and losslessly) transcode between Apple Lossless and WAV in iTunes, and directly from Apple Lossless to FLAC using dbpoweramp, there is really nothing about it that "locks you in" or is any way "drm-like".

 I'm going to go back to happily listening to my i-Mod/V-Dock now


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_By the way, just to set the record straight on Apple Lossless for anyone who may be interested, since you can easily (and losslessly) transcode between Apple Lossless and WAV in iTunes, and directly from Apple Lossless to FLAC using dbpoweramp, there is really nothing about it that "locks you in" or is any way "drm-like".

 I'm going to go back to happily listening to my i-Mod/V-Dock now 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I have a set of file in each of these formats, FLAC, MP3 and Appleloss and if you consider the CD the original WAV.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *jbloudg20* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So what happens when the majority picks the CD player? Do you call off all accounts because it was a 'meet setting' and not ideal to hear the fine sound of your $1100 ipod? Same can be said inversely._

 

That is a possibility! I dont operate like that but since you pointed it out I wont bother bringing all the extra gear.

 It wont be appreciated and seems to be only viewed as personal justification for my purchase which IS NOT my intennt.

 I was trying to show people to have an open mind until your hear something. I dont appreciate the angry personal comments and digs as they are not needed at head-fi at all.

 I really dont understand where all the aggretion is coming from? What did I ever do to any of you?


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm going to go back to happily listening to my i-Mod/V-Dock now 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

heee hee!


----------



## V-Duh

I stopped reading this thread after the 7th page of peacocking. I come here to get away from stress... 

 Could someone point me to actual listening impressions, ideally with comparisons to decent quality standard LODs, either in this thread or another?

 I do not care about anyone's opinion about the iPod/iMod and I'm not sure I care about the value in $$ spent for any SQ differences. I would just like to hear impressions as compared to previous iPod options. 

 To whomever responds without telling me I'm wrong for even making the request, I give you my thanks in advance.


----------



## terance

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *V-Duh* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I stopped reading this thread after the 7th page of peacocking. I come here to get away from stress... 

 Could someone point me to actual listening impressions, ideally with comparisons to decent quality standard LODs, either in this thread or another?

 I do not care about anyone's opinion about the iPod/iMod and I'm not sure I care about the value in $$ spent for any SQ differences. I would just like to hear impressions as compared to previous iPod options. 

 To whomever responds without telling me I'm wrong for even making the request, I give you my thanks in advance._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It's not that the V-Dock does anything the iMOD cable doesnt it just does *"IT"* BETTER! As for what *"IT"* is I would refer to Ken at ALO because I am no expert in how the magic happens but it does happen.

 So far noticeably deeper lows and the highs are much smoother and have even more details then my Cryo X silver iMOD cable. Still Burning IN!

 I will say it is nice to have power connected to the iMOD durinf the burn-in process especially. Just keeps going and going!! About 24 hours so far and Ken had put about 12 on it for me so approx 36 hours of burn-in so far.!_

 

k


----------



## Skylab

No doubt this thread has taken some odd, occasionally unfortunate turns.

 I posted a very few comments here: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...8&postcount=27

 I continue to be impressed by the sound of the iMod+V-Dock. It's audibly better sounding than the standard iMod dock cable from ALO, and sounds FAR better than a standard iPod using even a terrific ALO Cotton LOD cable.


----------



## tyrion

Back on topic, please keep it that way. Leave the personal attacks at the door.


----------



## stevenkelby

Some people are easily offended by other peoples choices and get aggresive, they don't even know why they react that way. Feel sorry for them!

 Todd, would you be as happy with the dock if it sounded the same way it does, but looked cheap? Or is the look an important part for you? How about the functionality, is the charging etc important to you?

 I ask as I am considering v-caps but am not sure if I should go for the nice dock or just the v-caps as cheap as possible.


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No doubt this thread has taken some odd, occasionally unfortunate turns._

 

Indeed. I'm hoping I can continue my discussion with Vinnie. My reply post to him has faded into the dark abyss of a few pages back >.<


----------



## Skylab

Ken from ALO has agreed/decided to offer the v-caps in a cheap case - a hammond or some such thing - at a (obviously) much lower price. The sound is so good I am going to buy one of these as well for use in another location, but I can only justify one in the beautiful wood housing.

 But what I might do is get the super-swank teflon v-caps in the cheap case


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *stevenkelby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Some people are easily offended by other peoples choices and get aggresive, they don't even know why they react that way. Feel sorry for them!

 Todd, would you be as happy with the dock if it sounded the same way it does, but looked cheap? Or is the look an important part for you? How about the functionality, is the charging etc important to you?

 I ask as I am considering v-caps but am not sure if I should go for the nice dock or just the v-caps as cheap as possible._

 

I would be just as happy with the end result of the sound sig being the same regardless of the wood. I actually am not a big fan of Paduck however it does look better in person certainly. I actually wanted a Wenge dock to match the Darths but those are up for sale now so it's irrelevant.

 The only reason I jumped in so quickly was I had a feeling the initial supply would be limited and I was right. I believe (correct me if Im wrong Ken or Vin) the first batch of wood docks is sold out. I actually bought Ken's personal dock and left him with the "Brick" Prototype LOL! Sorry Ken!

 I know that Ken and Vinnie are working on a small enclosure that would have a hardwired iMOD dock connector and and output jack for your amp although no design has been finalized I know they want to be able to get more of these to the dedicated imodder's out there.

 I dont believe the less expensive V-dock (or whatever it might be called will look cheap at all) Nothing that comes from ALO looks inexpensive or of poor quality so you can bet that Ken will make it nice and clean regardless of if it's wood or metal.

 I think a portable version is just the ticket because I would not want to damage the beautiful wood dock it's just too darn nice!

 I'm gonna double wrap it in bubble wrap to transport it to the meet! LOL!


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ken from ALO has agreed/decided to offer the v-caps in a cheap case - a hammond or some such thing - at a (obviously) much lower price. The sound is so good I am going to buy one of these as well for use in another location, but I can only justify one in the beautiful wood housing.

 But what I might do is get the super-swank teflon v-caps in the cheap case 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

OHHHHH NO YOU DONT!!! LOL! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 jealous!


----------



## stevenkelby

Yeah I'm thinknig the same thinhg with the tef caps!


----------



## bhd812

TRose...


 ok i dont understand this entire Shipping Dock or this i-Mop stuff so let me ask you a real question..

 what is with these people saying $1100.00 for any ipod? how does this come to such a price? i ask you...
 again i dont know any of this stuff, last i checked into this school the Turbo dock 2 was cool so..


----------



## terance

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bhd812* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_TRose...


 ok i dont understand this entire Shipping Dock or this i-Mop stuff so let me ask you a real question..

 what is with these people saying $1100.00 for any ipod? how does this come to such a price? i ask you...
 again i dont know any of this stuff, last i checked into this school the Turbo dock 2 was cool so.._

 

550 for iMod (80 gig ipod 5.5g w/ mods)
 550 for v-dock (posted in this thread)

 with shipping the cost is probably 15-25 dollars more.

 thus bringing us to 1100 USD or above, depending on shipping (I don't know if this is included or not).

 when people say 1100 total for the imod package, they are implying that the person buys both the vdock and the imod.

 hope that helps some

 -matt


----------



## bhd812

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *terance* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_550 for iMod (80 gig ipod 5.5g w/ mods)
 550 for v-dock (posted in this thread)

 with shipping the cost is probably 15-25 dollars more.

 thus bringing us to 1100 USD or above, depending on shipping (I don't know if this is included or not).

 when people say 1100 total for the imod package, they are implying that the person buys both the vdock and the imod.

 hope that helps some

 -matt_

 

Thank you it does...

 So this V-dock is meant to be a charger(slash)home thingy? so no portable use can be had with this $1100.00 ipod package?

 serious..i really dont know snap about this stuff.


----------



## terance

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bhd812* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Thank you it does...

 So this V-**** is meant to be a charger(slash)home thingy? so no portable use can be had with this $1100.00 ipod package?

 serious..i really dont know snap about this stuff._

 

I believe the vdock requires an external power supply, so that would mean no portable use, but i don't know much past what i've posted.

 to my knowledge, the vdock works as a charger, as well as providing the needed electronics to power the imod 5.5g (a normal LOD won't work with them due to caps of some sort).


----------



## Icarium

It's basically a docking station for a home setup using the Imod. If you want to use the Imod on the go you get one of those special line out dock cables for considerably less than the V-Dock.


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *terance* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I believe the vdock requires an external power supply, so that would mean no portable use, but i don't know much past what i've posted.

 to my knowledge, the vdock works as a charger, as well as providing the needed electronics to power the imod 5.5g (a normal LOD won't work with them due to caps of some sort)._

 

From what I understand the vdoc only requires the external power supply for the charging feature, otherwise it is a standalone large line out dock with line out jacks in the back. Just from what I understand 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Normal line out dock will not work with the 5.5gen imod because the caps that are present inside a 4th gen are put into the line out dock due to size constraints inside the 5.5gen ipod.


----------



## bhd812

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *terance* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I believe the vdock requires an external power supply, so that would mean no portable use, but i don't know much past what i've posted.

 to my knowledge, the vdock works as a charger, as well as providing the needed electronics to power the imod 5.5g (a normal LOD won't work with them due to caps of some sort)._

 

ok thanks i am starting to understand this..

 but one more question then i am so done messing this thread,,actually learning a lot here.

 ok..i look at the ipod as a portable source that can store loads of music for portable use. why would you use a portable source at home as a source there when you have all the first generation copies (i-tunes,cds,vinyl) that is on the ipod right there..? the way i see this (again i dont understand this market entirely thats why i am asking) is like your doing a circle..
 you take your cd's or your vinyl or your downloads that you have at home and put them into itunes.
 then you put the itunes files into the ipod.
 you take your ipod outside of your house where your cd's or your vinyl or your downloads can not go..
 but then you take the ipod with all your music from your cd's or your vinyl or your downloads and use it back home..

 get me? i dont think i understand this v-dock stuff.

 and the $550 package with the ipod and imods..does that include the speacil needed cable you need to use it portable? 


 how the hell have i been missing this stuff..
 (no spell check..)


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_From what I understand the vdoc only requires the external power supply for the charging feature, otherwise it is a standalone large line out dock with line out jacks in the back. Just from what I understand 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Normal line out dock will not work with the 5.5gen imod because the caps that are present inside a 4th gen are put into the line out dock due to size constraints inside the 5.5gen ipod._

 

The charging feature is just a bonus with a small push button switch on the back for toggle on and off of the charger. The iMOD is fully functional without any power cable. It offers both a set of RCA's out and a mini jack out for your choice in type of output.

 The less expensive versions to come will be designed with portability in mind from what I have heard.

 It is recommended (due to possible line noise) to shut power off for critical listening but I have found that with a linear 5V power supply that is is completely silent even while playing while charging.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bhd812* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ok thanks i am starting to understand this..

 but one more question then i am so done messing this thread,,actually learning a lot here.

 ok..i look at the ipod as a portable source that can store loads of music for portable use. why would you use a portable source at home as a source there when you have all the first generation copies (i-tunes,cds,vinyl) that is on the ipod right there..? the way i see this (again i dont understand this market entirely thats why i am asking) is like your doing a circle..
 you take your cd's or your vinyl or your downloads that you have at home and put them into itunes.
 then you put the itunes files into the ipod.
 you take your ipod outside of your house where your cd's or your vinyl or your downloads can not go..
 but then you take the ipod with all your music from your cd's or your vinyl or your downloads and use it back home..

 get me? i dont think i understand this v-dock stuff.

 and the $550 package with the ipod and imods..does that include the speacil needed cable you need to use it portable? 


 how the hell have i been missing this stuff..
 (no spell check..)_

 

The idea is that the iMOD *can* be a quality home source while also benefiting from the large amount of music selection you can have without swapping cd's especially if you like to listen to one song from one artist vs a whole cd and are a "channel changer" you know what I mean right?

 The iMOD cable's are different prices (depending on the wires used etc) and are not included with the wood V-docks but that may be a good suggestion for Ken that maybe he could offer a package price for both a dock and a portable iMOD cable.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bhd812* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_get me? i dont think i understand this v-dock stuff.

 and the $550 package with the ipod and imods..does that include the speacil needed cable you need to use it portable? 


 how the hell have i been missing this stuff..
 (no spell check..)_

 

The V-dock is essentially as SUPER high quality iMOD cable in pretty box!

 The caps are so big that if you made them in a cable it would look like a snake that swallowed a couple of mouses! *(The Anaconda!)
* NO THIS DOES NOT EXIST YET??? LOL!

 Ken if you use that Idea I want a piece of the action! LOL! _kidding!_


----------



## frozenice

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bhd812* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ok thanks i am starting to understand this..

 but one more question then i am so done messing this thread,,actually learning a lot here.

 get me? i dont think i understand this v-dock stuff.

 and the $550 package with the ipod and imods..does that include the speacil needed cable you need to use it portable? 


 how the hell have i been missing this stuff..
 (no spell check..)_

 

If you have a gen 4 or gen 5 or 5.5 iPod you can send it in to get the iMod done for $199 (gen4) or $249 (gen 5 or 5.5). Then you need an iMod cable - they range from $110 to $400. Or you can get the V-doc for $550. Does that help?


----------



## terance

I would have bought an imod buy now, but something about vinyl just makes me hesitant to buy another ipod.

 i never listened to my ipod and thought, "i'll just listen to one more song", but when I listen to vinyl i always find myself thinking (at the early hours of the morning), "i'm just going to flip this record one more time".

 i can't really explain it, but it's probably the only reason that I do not currently own an iPod, or an iMod.


----------



## V-Duh

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The charging feature is just a bonus with a small push button switch on the back for toggle on and off of the charger....The less expensive versions to come will be designed with portability in mind....with a linear 5V power supply that is is completely silent even while playing while charging._

 

Having the ability to power the iPod while having high quality sound would be very nice. I use my iPod (not yet iMod) at work and can get a full work day out of the battery, even with lossless. However, most every night I have to remember to plug it in when I get home. I've had very quiet/boring days at work due to my ever-failing memory.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Ken's "powered" iMod black cap LOD w/ the dangly-jack would work but it's a bit funky. Should the transportable V-cap dock offer the same or similar features as the home version it could be a great combination - high quality components in a transportable form factor. I'm still very interested in hearing about SQ comparisons/differences with the black cap/V-cap options.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *V-Duh* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Having the ability to power the iPod while having high quality sound would be very nice. I use my iPod (not yet iMod) at work and can get a full work day out of the battery, even with lossless. However, most every night I have to remember to plug it in when I get home. I've had very quiet/boring days at work due to my ever-failing memory.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Ken's "powered" iMod black cap LOD w/ the dangly-jack would work but it's a bit funky. Should the transportable V-cap dock offer the same or similar features as the home version it could be a great combination - high quality components in a transportable form factor. I'm still very interested in hearing about SQ comparisons/differences with the black cap/V-cap options._

 

I have noted some things but waiting for a 200hr burnin to completely review

 It's coming I promise!


----------



## terance

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *frozenice* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you have a gen 4 or gen 5 or 5.5 iPod you can send it in to get the iMod done for $199 (gen4) or $249 (gen 5 or 5.5). Then you need an iMod cable - they range from $110 to $400. Or you can get the V-doc for $550. Does that help?_

 



 i find it funny that the 5.5 gen imod costs more, AND it also requires a special cable.

 i guess you really are paying the price for the 5.5 gen


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *terance* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_i find it funny that the 5.5 gen imod costs more, AND it also requires a special cable.

 i guess you really are paying the price for the 5.5 gen 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Smaller space to work in = More time and labor invloved to complete an iMOD, also there is a Cardas cable used in the 5 Gen.

 Since the Caps simply wont fit they have to go somewhere. This is where Ken came in partnered with Red Wine to make the iMOD cables and you cant expect him to make the cables for free so there is the added cost.

 The is a logical answer for ever question.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *V-Duh* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I stopped reading this thread after the 7th page of peacocking. I come here to get away from stress... 

 Could someone point me to actual listening impressions, ideally with comparisons to decent quality standard LODs, either in this thread or another?

 I do not care about anyone's opinion about the iPod/iMod and I'm not sure I care about the value in $$ spent for any SQ differences. I would just like to hear impressions as compared to previous iPod options. 

 To whomever responds without telling me I'm wrong for even making the request, I give you my thanks in advance._

 

Here is a quote from Skylab from the ALO forum page!
  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_At 40 hours now. Sound definitely improved after about 30 hours (overnight), and it's JUST STUNNING now. It is really VERY hard to believe that the source of the sound I am getting is still an iPod. I have had a 4G iMod iPod for well over a year, and as impressive as it is, the 5.5g iMod with the VCap dock is really shockingly good sounding. No question it sounds easily, noticeably better than either of my $1500 digital disc based players (when playing CDs). Granted, it's not that far below them in cost, but it's of course far more convenient 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Compared to the normal iMod dock, the VCap is more transparent, has deeper AND tighter bass, has slightly more treble extension, slightly more lush mids, and a slightly wider soundstage. I went back and forth repeatedly, and these things are easy to detect.

 Again, great work Ken._


----------



## Icarium

So before some burn in it was already bettering almost 1k Rotel CDPs. Now post a bit of burn in it is defeating $1500 dollar cd players? Which models pray tell.

 So here's how my thinking follows...

 I had an imod 4th gen (3 months old/200 hrs when I received it) for a period of a week or so couple weeks ago and it was solidly bettered by a 15-20 year old then ~500 dollar player (Sony 508ESD) in pretty much every area. I also compared it to the EMU 0404 usb (200 dollars) which it was about on par with. I actually liked it slightly more but blessingx who did a shootout with me preferred the EMU 0404 usb slightly more... so I consider them about on par. Basically the difference in sound I would say is that the mids are more forward with the EMU 0404 usb so they deemphasize (But don't completely obfuscate) some detail. I think Blessingx preferred the way the EMU 0404 usb presents mids and details just matter a bit more to me. Everything else was almost too close to call. 

 Now I like the Sony 508 ESD more than the EMU 0404 usb on a stand alone basis but if I use them in conjunction the sound improves further (Like: EMU 0404 usb < Sony 508 ESD < Sony 508 ESD as transport + EMU 0404 usb as a dac). Which really leads me to believe that cd based transports have something that cd free systems (Comp + Dac/Mp3 players) doesn't... but that's a different tangent. I've heard a good # of different cd transports... but the Sony 508 ESD is probably the weakest of those I have heard out of all fullsized units and the one I am most familiar with. Every single one I've heard besides it (Most fall under the 1k price range) are significantly better in at least 2 ways or more.

 Anyway, what I've read is that the 5/5.5 gen iMod is not significantly better than the 4th gen and some might actually prefer the 4th gen sound over the 5/5.5 gen depending on personal preference. Maybe this is true, maybe it isn't. I'd have to hear myself to be sure of course. Maybe in actuality the 5/5.5 gen isn't just about size/newer ipod/different but roughly equal sound signature... it is actually an improvement on all levels in every possible way. Perhaps I'll check it out in the coming meet.

 But, this V-dock is supposed to take this Imod 5/5.5 which is about on par with an Imod 4 and basically make it several orders of magnitude better through the use of two very good capacitors? Definitely possible I suppose, but color me skeptical ;p Maybe I'll see the light when I get a chance to hear this miraculous device.


----------



## trose49

Thers is actually just a really good cover band inside the box


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Icarium* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So before some burn in it was already bettering almost 1k Rotel CDPs. Now post a bit of burn in it is defeating $1500 dollar cd players? Which models pray tell.

 So here's how my thinking follows...

 I had an imod 4th gen (3 months old/200 hrs when I received it) for a period of a week or so couple weeks ago and it was solidly bettered by a 15-20 year old then ~500 dollar player (Sony 508ESD) in pretty much every area. I also compared it to the EMU 0404 usb (200 dollars) which it was about on par with. I actually liked it slightly more but blessingx who did a shootout with me preferred the EMU 0404 usb slightly more... so I consider them about on par. Basically the difference in sound I would say is that the mids are more forward with the EMU 0404 usb so they deemphasize (But don't completely obfuscate) some detail. I think Blessingx preferred the way the EMU 0404 usb presents mids and details just matter a bit more to me. Everything else was almost too close to call. 

 Now I like the Sony 508 ESD more than the EMU 0404 usb on a stand alone basis but if I use them in conjunction the sound improves further (Like: EMU 0404 usb < Sony 508 ESD < Sony 508 ESD as transport + EMU 0404 usb as a dac). Which really leads me to believe that cd based transports have something that cd free systems (Comp + Dac/Mp3 players) doesn't... but that's a different tangent. I've heard a good # of different cd transports... but the Sony 508 ESD is probably the weakest of those I have heard out of all fullsized units and the one I am most familiar with. Every single one I've heard besides it (Most fall under the 1k price range) are significantly better in at least 2 ways or more.

 Anyway, what I've read is that the 5/5.5 gen iMod is not significantly better than the 4th gen and some might actually prefer the 4th gen sound over the 5/5.5 gen depending on personal preference. Maybe this is true, maybe it isn't. I'd have to hear myself to be sure of course. Maybe in actuality the 5/5.5 gen isn't just about size/newer ipod/different but roughly equal sound signature... it is actually an improvement on all levels in every possible way. Perhaps I'll check it out in the coming meet.

 But, this V-dock is supposed to take this Imod 5/5.5 which is about on par with an Imod 4 and basically make it several orders of magnitude better through the use of two very good capacitors? Definitely possible I suppose, but color me skeptical ;p Maybe I'll see the light when I get a chance to hear this miraculous device._

 

So, you basically believe that even modest $400-500 cd players will out do the Imod and that the $200 EMU 0404 is on par with the Imod? Correct?


----------



## Icarium

Well they did perform accordingly with the Imod 4th gen, so I would assume approximately the same with the 5th gen if its on par with the 4th gen and unless the v-dock multiplies the performance by 10x I don't see how it can be equaling the cdps that people say it is.


----------



## immtbiker

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Thers is actually just a really good cover band inside the box 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 


 When I was 5 years old, back when dinosaurs ruled the planet and am (not fm) was where all the cool music was (WABC), I couldn't understand how all of the bands fit into my mother's radio. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I think I have it figured out now.


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_When I was 5 years old, back when dinosaurs ruled the planet and am (not fm) was where all the cool music was (WABC), I couldn't understand how all of the bands fit into my mother's radio. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I think I have it figured out now. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

When I was five years old that was when everyone knew that oil came from dinosaurs and crystal radios grabbed energy to make music right out of the air. Those were the days....and now we have to deal with iPods, iMods, V-
 Docs, MP3, Flacs and many other burdens of life such as which headphone do I keep or which amp? Oh well, time goes on.


----------



## immtbiker

My daughter took Powerpoint and Word classes in 6th grade. 

 All we cared about in 6th grade was 43 lb. Schwinn Continental 10 speeds, dissecting frogs and dodgeball (and Cindy Schneider...man, was she hot!).


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Icarium* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well they did perform accordingly with the Imod 4th gen, so I would assume approximately the same with the 5th gen if its on par with the 4th gen and unless the v-dock multiplies the performance by 10x I don't see how it can be equaling the cdps that people say it is._

 

Anyone coming to the meet in in for a suprise if they can keep an open mind. If you listen with a hater additude or have preconcived notions with NO intent on liking the sound you wont regardless of what your ears here.

 It's human nature Knowone likes to look foolish. I dont expect to hear great things from people that have posted negagtively but for people who have kept an open mind your in for a treat IMO!


----------



## Skylab

I prefer the sound of the iMod+V-dock over my Sony SCD-555ES (was $1495 new) and Denon DVD-5900 (was $2000 new). So sue me


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I prefer the sound of the iMod+V-dock over my Sony SCD-555ES (was $1495 new) and Denon DVD-5900 (was $2000 new). So sue me 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 


 Well so much for the PLACBO theory 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I don't think I have been in love with someones post more in my whole life!!!

 I knew I couldn't be hearing things thanks for the confirmatioin I wasn't going crazy!!


----------



## Skylab

No, Todd, I at least don't think you are hearing things.

 I should qualify my last statement though, that we're talking here about the Sony and Denon playing regular CDs, not SACD or DVD-Audio, where they of course blow away the iMod+V-Dock, due to the *source material*. Playing regular CDs, I think the iMod+V-Dock, playing lossless files, sounds slightly better.

 And my turntable sounds better than the iMod/V-Dock too, but that's not a fair fight


----------



## sacd lover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Anyone coming to the meet in in for a suprise if they can keep an open mind. If you listen with a hater additude or have preconcived notions with NO intent on liking the sound you wont regardless of what your ears here.

 It's human nature Knowone likes to look foolish. I dont expect to hear great things from people that have posted negagtively but for people who have kept an open mind your in for a treat IMO!_

 

Why would someone questioning the actual sound quality of the Imod setup in relation to a cd player make them have a "hater attitude"? When I see claims that the Imod is good as a $1500 cd player .... like Icarium .... I also think what $1500 player. Moreover, posts like Icarium's are very clear about what he compared and how they compared. I dont see any bias in that post .... just a well thought out opinion. Furthermore, why would people purposely be intent on disliking the Imod sound or anything else for that matter? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Moving on .... preconceived notions can work both ways. After all this basically unsubstantiated hype people could be predisposed to like the sound of this combo regardless if the sound is anything special or not. Looking at this objectively, I truly dont see how the inclusion of two high quality caps in a docking station will magically transform and elevate the performance of an Imod to equal a good quality cd player. The newer Imods I have heard dont begin to touch my $1500 cd player .... or my $1200 cd player .... or even the $750 retail Eastsound E5 you know see selling used for as little as $400. For a home source I dont see why you would not just get a ~$500 cd player. The cd player will be more durable and less expensive .... and sound as good or better.

 Just my $.02


----------



## Skylab

I agree, EVERYONE will come into any situation with some sort of bias. But I believe the overwhelming majority of head-fiers will listen and decide for themselvces based on what they hear, given the chance to do so. I think people may be surprised at their conclusion, but regardless of whether they are or not, it's great Todd if you'll provide people with the chance to check it out. 

 I came into a listening session at a meet with the idea that I would adore the L-3000, for example, and that I would leave weeping that I didn't have $2500 to spend on a pair. Instead, though, I came away realizing they were not the headphone for me after all. And I expected to be totally underwhelmed by the Eddie Current Lunchbox II, and came away from that listen with a strong desire to buy one right away


----------



## purk

Skylab,

 The thing is...you can buy those CD players for less than $500 used. To be honest, I highly doubt that the iMod + Vdock will touch the C555ES in SACD playback. Plus you can add on the external DAC to those CD player and make them sound a lot better for relatively the same price of iMod+V-dock. In fact, I recently bought a Musical Hall Maverick from A-gon for $550 shipped for the price of your V-dock. The seller also stated that the Maverick is a 9/10 condition. If you going to drop that kind of money on an iMod+V-dock, I highly recommend you get a used Modwright Sony DVP-900ES for $1200 on Audiogon right now! I've own the SACDmods Sony SCD-C555ES (a huge jump in performance vs. the stock C555ES) and it lacks a sense of refinement in comparison to the modwright 900ES. Again, I'm not questioning your iMod + Vdock but for $500 USD ...you can buy many fine CD players for that price. You should really look around. BTW, the stock C555ES is pretty average in redbook playback. It was rated as a class B for redbook but A for SACD playback. I'm sure you know this, but a used Sony SCD-777ES can be had for around $1000 on audiogon. The SCD-777ES also feature the same transport as the 20K Accuphase CD/SACD & DAC system.

 I also want to add that you can get a lot of money for the price of iMod + V-dock. You can do a lot of money for $1200 USD on Audiogon. Even the Meridian 520.24 with a balanced output can be had for that price.


----------



## Skylab

Yeah, as I said, the Sony playing SACDs sounds much better than the iMod+V-Dock, since SACDs sound much better than redbook CD, which is all the iMod will play, of course.

 And I agree, I have not upgraded my CD front end in many years. I am eyeing an Ayre player in my future...


----------



## purk

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yeah, as I said, the Sony playing SACDs sounds much better than the iMod+V-Dock, since SACDs sound much better than redbook CD, which is all the iMod will play, of course.

 And I agree, I have not upgraded my CD front end in many years. I am eyeing an Ayre player in my future..._

 

I really appreciate your insight on the iMod+V-dock. But I really want to add that there are many fine CD players for the price of the two also. In fact, you will be surprised that my Sony CDP-XA20ES (1997 $700 dollars) also sound slightly better than my C555ES in redbook. If you guys have around $300 to spend on a source, I highly recommend the Toshiba SD9200.


----------



## bebanovich

I am an outside observer to this thread in the sense that I'm not really in the market for an iMod or a mid- or high-end CDP. I've got to say that I've never seen this much concern trolling about how people choose to spend their money in a thread before.

 I don't know what causes it but it comes across as a bunch of thread-crapping with specs and statistics to try to justify it. To me, it doesn't matter if you read National Enquirer or Scientific American in the can - crapping is crapping.


----------



## purk

It could be thread crapping but I found many of these opinions very valuable.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *sacd lover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Why would someone questioning the actual sound quality of the Imod setup in relation to a cd player make them have a "hater attitude"? When I see claims that the Imod is good as a $1500 cd player .... like Icarium .... I also think what $1500 player. Moreover, posts like Icarium's are very clear about what he compared and how they compared. I dont see any bias in that post .... just a well thought out opinion. Furthermore, why would people purposely be intent on disliking the Imod sound or anything else for that matter? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Moving on .... preconceived notions can work both ways. After all this basically unsubstantiated hype people could be predisposed to like the sound of this combo regardless if the sound is anything special or not. Looking at this objectively, I truly dont see how the inclusion of two high quality caps in a docking station will magically transform and elevate the performance of an Imod to equal a good quality cd player. The newer Imods I have heard dont begin to touch my $1500 cd player .... or my $1200 cd player .... or even the $750 retail Eastsound E5 you know see selling used for as little as $400. For a home source I dont see why you would not just get a ~$500 cd player. The cd player will be more durable and less expensive .... and sound as good or better.

 Just my $.02_

 

I apologize and did not mean to imply that any one particular thread was having a hater attitude. They are easy to find in this thread. I am not singling anyone out and many of the points made are very valid except for the ones from people that have not heard a V-dock which is just about everyone on the thread. No seriously I get being a sceptic on this one I do. The authority in which objections are stated is what is crossing the line. Listen First, Comment later! 

 To question the V-dock is very very reasonable considering but to say it is not possible or isn't capable of a certain thresholds without a listen is thread crapping period.


----------



## tyrion

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_When I was 5 years old, back when dinosaurs ruled the planet and am (not fm) was where all the cool music was (WABC), I couldn't understand how all of the bands fit into my mother's radio. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I think I have it figured out now. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

It scary that I an remember back to the WABC days. Fortunately it was not long after that we had WPLJ (Jim Kerr, Carol Miller), WNEW (Scott, Muni, Allison Steele, Pat St. John, Vin Scelsa) and of course, WLIR.

 As to the dock, imod and cdp's. I think a lot of people are just expressing their opinion that they are skeptical about the comparisons to $1500 cdps. Unfortunately, it's not always done in the most diplomatic which creates the problem that often leads to mod intervention. 

 I think the imod is a great device with excellent sq. I'm skeptical that it would out do say a used Ayre 7xe which can be found for $1600 to $1800 or even an Apollo at $1000 retail with the addition of the dock, as a couple of examples. Granted, I haven't heard it wth the dock and wouldn't pass judgement until I do but I don't think it's harmful to voice skepticism as long as it's done in a way that isn't attacking someone elses beleif. I recognize that I could be proven wrong. I don't own any ALO or RWA gear at the moment but have enjoyed both in the past.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tyrion* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It scary that I an remember back to the WABC days. Fortunately it was not long after that we had WPLJ (Jim Kerr, Carol Miller), WNEW (Scott, Muni, Allison Steele, Pat St. John, Vin Scelsa) and of course, WLIR.

 As to the dock, imod and cdp's. I think a lot of people are just expressing their opinion that they are skeptical about the comparisons to $1500 cdps. Unfortunately, it's not always done in the most diplomatic which creates the problem that often leads to mod intervention. 

 I think the imod is a great device with excellent sq. I'm skeptical that it would out do say a used Ayre 7xe which can be found for $1600 to $1800 or even an Apollo at $1000 retail with the addition of the dock, as a couple of examples. Granted, I haven't heard it wth the dock and wouldn't pass judgement until I do but I don't think it's harmful to voice skepticism as long as it's done in a way that isn't attacking someone elses beleif. I recognize that I could be proven wrong. I don't own any ALO or RWA gear at the moment but have enjoyed both in the past._

 

In all fairness maybe a statement like "sounds as good as" should have just been left from the conversation because different people have many dif opinions of 1000ish cdps anyway.

 I guess that was my way of saying it sounds damn good.


----------



## immtbiker

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *bebanovich* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I am an outside observer to this thread in the sense that I'm not really in the market for an iMod or a mid- or high-end CDP. I've got to say that I've never seen this much concern trolling about how people choose to spend their money in a thread before.

 I don't know what causes it but it comes across as a bunch of thread-crapping with specs and statistics to try to justify it. To me, it doesn't matter if you read National Enquirer or Scientific American in the can - crapping is crapping._

 


 I am truly not saying this out of any sort of disrespect, but...

 ...isn't your post in itself a thread crap?


----------



## tyrion

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_In all fairness maybe a statement like "sounds as good as" should have just been left from the conversation because different people have many dif opinions of 1000ish cdps anyway.

 I guess that was my way of saying it sounds damn good. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

If you feel it "sounds as good as" a $1500 cdp, that's great, assuming you've heard the cdp you are comparing it to. Just bear in mind, there will always be thread crappers and trolls to bring down threads such as this one. Sometimes it's better just to ignore them (I wish I could follow my own advice more often).

 I look forward to seeing a bunch of the ALO Docks at the next International Meet so I can compare them to a bunch of great cdps.


----------



## mrarroyo

I have a 4th Gen iModded iPod. Is it better than my $750 (MSRP) Arcam DiVA CD73? I don't know and I don't care. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 The two have different uses and in their specific uses they are fantastic. I mean I carry with me a bit over 2,100 lossless files in my 60 Gb iPod and that is enough to keep me happy. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Will I ever get a 5/5.5 Gen iModded iPod? Right now I would say no, who knows tomorrow ... maybe.


----------



## immtbiker

Also, just to put things back in perspective just a little, let us not forget that the whole come about of the iMod and LOD's were made solely for the enjoyment of _equal to _or _near to, _sounding home CD players, while you're *on-the-go*.
 The V-Dock came about because people wanted to burn-in their caps for 200+ hours without the need of recharging the Ipod battery every 12 hours. That cost me almost 20 charges out of 200 where battery life will only be 80% of it's original maximum time, eventually leading to battery replacement.

 Then beautiful wood and better caps came about during the design because it started a whole new thinking process of Ken and Vinnie's innovations of previously uncharted territory.

 So, I truly believe that for anyone that has a decent CDP at home, shouldn't be using this for a substitute for home gear. 
 I bartend house parties and I see lot's of people playing 8 hours of playlists using their Ipods through rca jacks on their receiver as an external source. That's perfect!

 But why should it be a home listening substitute. If that's the case, then we can eliminate other forums on Head-Fi and stick to the "Portables as a Source" forum. Then we would use Audio Asylum and AudioCircle as our home system resource.

 The V-Dock is just another way of obtaining audio nirvana that we all seek and makes us hangout here and interact.

 It has it's purposes just as any other "setup" and can be enjoyed in many ways. 

 As self-confessed audiophiles, can we really maintain our status if an Ipod is our only home source? That's for Sharper Image and Crutchfield patrons.

 The iMod and V-Dock are great innovative ideas that have added, yet another outlet in our music listening sessions. Comparing them to home systems is the same as using Foobar and a EMU 404 soundcard into a USB DAC as a substitute home showcase. It takes all of the great componentry (IC's, PC's, DACS, Transports, amps and headphones) out of the hobby.
 I don't want this to sound insulting, but that is what you use when you are in high school or college, using your computer as a source and are working your way up to a killer system that's a keeper. Just like your first car being a used one while saving up for a dream car within your reach, or buying a small house or condo, while you wait to be able to afford the nice size house with a backyard and 2 car garage.

 I think that this has gotten lost in the sauce because of attacks and defense maneuvers in the first series of pages, and we really lost sight of what a V-Dock is for.


----------



## stevenkelby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_..._

 

I think you're right for most people, but that's not the case for me. 

 I want all my music in one unit so I can keep listening to the same playlist at work, in the car, in bed, in my hammock, in the lounge room, at my PC, at friends houses etc. My imod is perfect for that, surely the best source that can do that?

 I plug it into a $10,000 car and $15,000 home stereo and am happy with it. I don't aspire to a better source as anything currently available won't do what I need.

 Even if a CDP for the same monet did sound better, it wouldn't suit me at all.

 I do have a good CDP and a great DVDP that I use for discs sometimes but hear no difference to flac through the imod so why not use it for a high end source? 

 I would like to hear those v-caps though...


----------



## Skylab

And let's not forget that "home" means the *whole* house. My iMod+Vdock lives in my bedside rig, which is my main headphone rig. A CD player there would never get past the wife. So the big decks live in the family room, but the awesome iMod/VDock live in my bedroom, which just so happens to be where I end up getting the most time to listen, after the wife falls asleep...


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Also, just to put things back in perspective just a little, let us not forget that the whole come about of the iMod and LOD's were made solely for the enjoyment of equal to or near to, sounding home CD players, while you're *on-the-go*.
 The V-Dock came about because people wanted to burn-in their caps for 200+ hours without the need of recharging the Ipod battery every 12 hours. That cost me almost 20 charges out of 200 where battery life will only be 80% of it's original maximum time, eventually leading to battery replacement.

 Then beautiful wood and better caps came about during the design because it started a whole new thinking process of Ken and Vinnie's innovations of previously uncharted territory.

 So, I truly believe that for anyone that has a decent CDP at home, shouldn't be using this for a substitute for home gear. 
 I bartend house parties and I see lot's of people playing 8 hours of playlists using their Ipods through rca jacks on their receiver as an external source. That's perfect!

 But why should it be a home listening substitute. If that's the case, then we can eliminate other forums on Head-Fi and stick to the "Portables as a Source" forum. Then we would use Audio Asylum and AudioCircle as our home system resource.

 The V-Dock is just another way of obtaining audio nirvana that we all seek and makes us hangout here and interact.

 It has it's purposes just as any other "setup" and can be enjoyed in many ways. 

 As self-confessed audiophiles, can we really maintain our status if an Ipod is our only home source? That's for Sharper Image and Crutchfield patrons.

 The iMod and V-Dock are great innovative ideas that have added, yet another outlet in our music listening sessions. Comparing them to home systems is the same as using Foobar and a EMU 404 soundcard into a USB DAC as a substitute home showcase. It takes all of the great componentry (IC's, PC's, DACS, Transports, amps and headphones) out of the hobby.
 I don't want this to sound insulting, but that is what you use when you are in high school or college, using your computer as a source and are working your way up to a killer system that's a keeper. Just like your first car being a used one while saving up for a dream car within your reach, or buying a small house or condo, while you wait to be able to afford the nice size house with a backyard and 2 car garage.

 I think that this has gotten lost in the sauce because of attacks and defense maneuvers in the first series of pages, and we really lost sight of what a V-Dock is for._

 

I have to disagree with your thought process here. NO the V-dock does not replace the need for an ultra high end cdp or dac. However I dont believe (and correct me if Im wrong Ken or Vin) that it was designed simply to have a resting place for you ipod to burn-in and look pretty! (_*In fact you are only burning in the Vcaps in the dock and not an iMOD cable anyway*_)

 The fact that you eliminate the ipod as a good home source is a bit narrow minded IMO. There are many Head-fier's that dont have 1,000 cdp's or anything close to that and Maybe $1,000 unit is all someone will own. Those of use that have been enjoying the hobby for a while without question have better gear than most members but to rule out the iMod as a home source (with a 1,000 budget) simply because it was originally designed for good mobile sound seems unfair.

 You say you dont want to sound insulting but however thats exactly what you are doing. Especially as a MOD you would think you would have to remain on the neutral side of any argument (I could be wrong here) but I think you should not make comparisons to sharper image etc.

 If people want to use the iMod as a home source and it sounds good to them isnt that persons choice?

 There is always better sources or something thats costs more and no matter how good you think your gear is there is someone that has something better in their mind. This will never end.

 The point of the thread is if you like the iPOD (iMOD) interface? You like having 30 or 80gb of music on hand to scroll through? Would like a high quality portable source and with the addition of a V-dock (a mid level cdp quality) home source then consider the V-dock.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It is true that a Ipod dac cannot compare with those of a mid to high end CDP_

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* 
_So, I truly believe that for anyone that has a decent CDP at home, shouldn't be using this for a substitute for home gear._

 

I think these statements are a bit bold (not listened too) especially for a MOD!


----------



## tyrion

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I
 You say you dont want to sound insulting but however thats exactly what you are doing. *Especially as a MOD you would think you would have to remain on the neutral side of any argument (I could be wrong here) but I think you should not make comparisons to sharper image etc.*

*I think these statements are a bit bold (not listened too) especially for a MOD!*



_

 

We didn't give up our opinions or ability to post them when we agreed to be mods. Some of us wish immtbiker did but that's another story (just kidding Aaron).


----------



## Nebby

I believe mods are people too, and as such they should be able to voice their own opinions. It's not like he's saying his opinion on behalf of Head-Fi or anything....


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I believe mods are people too, and as such they should be able to voice their own opinions. It's not like he's saying his opinion on behalf of Head-Fi or anything.... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

OK you have a point and I noted I could be wrong with opinions lets not blow this out of proportion now too.

 To say for it not to be considered a substitute for home gear is insulting to ALO and REDWINE IMO.

 Aaron,

 These guys advertise on Head-fi this has got to be crossing some sort of line!

 To tell other head-fiers not to consider an advertised product as a substitute for home gear????? (when thats what it is HOME GEAR)

 I dunno man!


----------



## immtbiker

EDIT- Sorry, I was writng my long winded response while Nebby and Tyrion posted theirs. Didn't mean for it to contain any redundancy.


 I am a member first and a mod second. I do not voice my opinions based upon being a mod, I voice them as a member who has opinions. As long as I don't violate any rules, thinking that I am going to steer my posts differently because I try to help keep a forum running smoothly and stop injustices, scam artist and slanderous behavior, is a ludicrous thought.

 You have been reading my posts since you started here and should know that 99% of my posts are level headed. l feel what I said was pretty level headed, but that doesn't mean anyone has to agree with me.

 One thing that I can say as a mod, is that you do not have to take up half a page with a full quote on the same page, 3 posts down from the original quote. 

 Todd, I have always had respect for you, but I feel as if your are taking this thread as a personal affront to anyone who doesn't agree with you. You are responding as if you make the dock yourself and are the company spokesperson. You have almost doubled your postcount in this thread alone. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Also, quoting me and saying that my statements are a bit bold, especially as a mod, is silly. First off they are not bold statements unless your spidey sense is peaking, second off, what does being a mod have to do with the fact that I think one DAC is not as good as another.

 I own a 5.5G imod and until 3 days ago, also owned a 4G. I own 3 of Ken's cables (mini-mini, dedicated 5.5G LOD, and a X5L line out) so I think I can safely say that my opinions about DACs is not speculation. I could be wrong, but that is my opinion, mod or not.
 I listen approx. 2 hours a day to my iMod and LOD and it gives me an immense amount of joy and the sound quality is wonderful. However, except for a few exceptions (like Skylab's) I feel the V-Dock shouldn't take the place of a primary home system, unless it has multiple uses, including the ability to take it to work, on a Forum of members that dedicate a large amount of time buying and selling gear for fun and satiation.


----------



## Nebby

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_OK you have a point and I noted I could be wrong with opinions lets not blow this out of proportion now too.

 To say for it not to be considered a substitute for home gear is insulting to ALO and REDWINE IMO.

 Aaron,

 These guys advertise on Head-fi this has got to be crossing some sort of line!

 To tell other head-fiers not to consider an advertised product as a substitute for home gear????? (when thats what it is HOME GEAR)

 I dunno man!_

 

On the contrary, I believe it to be a good sign. When I see moderators blindly praising advertiser's products I can't help but go "Hmmmmm...." 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 And tyrion....darn you, you beat me to it


----------



## trose49

I guess we have to agree to disagree. No disrespect intended!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I have no problem with you having your own view. 

 I would have though Skylabs post would have made you think twice about being so matter of fact about it thats all.

 All is good!


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Nebby* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_On the contrary, I believe it to be a good sign. When I see moderators blindly praising advertiser's products I can't help but go "Hmmmmm...." 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 And tyrion....darn you, you beat me to it 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I didnt mean to imply that a mod should be favouring something that is advertised etc...

 Man you guys can find a needle in any haystack!


----------



## immtbiker

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_To say for it not to be considered a substitute for home gear is insulting to ALO and REDWINE IMO.

 Aaron,

 These guys advertise on Head-fi this has got to be crossing some sort of line!

 To tell other head-fiers not to consider an advertised product as a substitute for home gear????? (when thats what it is HOME GEAR)

 I dunno man!_

 

Edit- Again I was writing similar thoughts as Nebby was typing his (damn 2 finger typing).

 To tell other Head-Fiers not to consider an advertised product as a substitute for home gear, is just my opinion, whether it is right or wrong, and Ken and Vinnie know me, and I would hope that they aren't taking my statement as personally as you.
 Mods are constantly falsely chastised for aiding and abetting sponsors so that Jude can make money, and here you are, promoting that thought. 
 When Apple invented the Ipod, I'm pretty sure their intentions were soley for portability and when aftermarket companies started making plug-in speaker systems, it opened a whole new opportunity for them, although most of the speaker systems are lo-fi and Bose-like and are not what the average Head-Fier strives for. Vinnie and Ken took a nice DAP and brought into the arena as a serious piece of equipment. Whether it can be substituted as a primary home system is a matter of opinion, and obviously, I stated mine.


----------



## trose49

Any special demo tracks? Im taking requests at this point? to put on my iMOD for the show!

 See you there I hope!


----------



## immtbiker

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I didnt mean to imply that a mod should be favouring something that is advertised etc..._

 

Honestly Todd, that sort of is, what you implied when you wrote what you wrote.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Honestly Todd, that sort of is, what you implied when you wrote what you wrote._

 

Honestly I did not! What I meant was imagine a noobie sees a post from a MOD stating not to take a product seriously as a home source?

 Are you not seeing that this can be taken the wrong way? If I was Ken or Vin I would be upset to say the least.

 Your off on this one Aaron. You are entitled to your opinion but go back and read how you posted the comments as facts not opinions.


----------



## trose49

How about?

_*IMO* the dac in the Ipod can not compete with that of a midlevel cdp? Regardless of what mods have been done._

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* 
_*THESE ARE NOT MY OPINIONS AND SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT!*_


----------



## trose49

Honestly Im at the point where I don't even think I want to attend the show.

*WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!! Im taking my ball and going home!*


----------



## Nebby

Who gave you a ball, and why are you taking it home?


----------



## en480c4

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Honestly Im at the point where I don't even think I want to attend the show.

*WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!! Im taking my ball and going home!*_


----------



## bebanovich

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I am truly not saying this out of any sort of disrespect, but...

 ...isn't your post in itself a thread crap?_

 

Taken without disrespect because I understand where you are coming from. I may be crapping on what the thread has become but, come on, this was started as someone excited about a new purchase - not unlike hundreds of HeadFi threads. I think the amount of comments - sound unheard - about the OP wasting his money are the epitome of thread-crapping. I think the discussion has gotten heated on all sides since then and I don't really want to dissect it and take a position because I think that's bound to happen with the amount of crapping that's taken place.

 You could make a better argument that I'm trolling but I hope it doesn't turn into that. I just don't like seeing people reamed for their purchasing decisions. I didn't like a recent discussion bemoaning threads for budget phones and I don't like the similar attitude here. I think there is room on HeadFi for people with all sorts of sonic and budgetary priorities and I don't like to see members brow-beaten over a decision without any real justification.


----------



## immtbiker

I agree with you on that beba...I think this thread has run it's course.

 There are so many threads that could take the same route. $7000 for an Orpheus...$10K for a bling amp, $1700 for a sub $1K pair of HP-1's and so on.

 I always use the example of how much R&D and symmetry a $900 computer has associated with it, and a Maurice Valency (sp?) couch can cost $3 grand.


----------



## bebanovich

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I agree with you on that beba...I think this thread has run it's course.

 There are so many threads that could take the same route. $7000 for an Orpheus...$10K for a bling amp, $1700 for a sub $1K pair of HP-1's and so on.

 I always use the example of how much R&D and symmetry a $900 computer has associated with it, and a Maurice Valency (sp?) couch can cost $3 grand._

 

If taken a step further, you could answer those threads with charts and graphs showing how long that money could have fed a third-world family and - while it might be true - it's really not the point and a big downer. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 I think we're on the same page.


----------



## immtbiker

Page 18.


----------



## Nebby

^You made me lol on that one. Kudos


----------



## Filburt

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I agree with you on that beba...I think this thread has run it's course._

 

I was hoping I could get a response from Vinnie on our discussion


----------



## Elephas

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_...The iMod and V-Dock are great innovative ideas that have added, yet another outlet in our music listening sessions. Comparing them to home systems is the same as using Foobar and a EMU 404 soundcard into a USB DAC as a substitute home showcase. It takes all of the great componentry (IC's, PC's, DACS, Transports, amps and headphones) out of the hobby.
 I don't want this to sound insulting, but that is what you use when you are in high school or college, using your computer as a source and are working your way up to a killer system that's a keeper...._

 

I thought it sounded insulting, in some ways.

 Calling a computer-source "what you use when you are in high school or college" has some negative implications I'd rather not get into here. It also has positive implications, though that probably wasn't your meaning.


----------



## Nebby

I agree, I originally only skimmed thru what immt wrote so I didn't realize it. But it does sound insulting. In general, comp-as-source can sound very good, but requires much more time and effort to get working well than straight out-of-the-box solutions.


----------



## slwiser

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ It takes all of the great componentry (IC's, PC's, DACS, Transports, amps and headphones) out of the hobby._

 

For me this sounds like a great ideal getting to a simpler configuration as long as it sounds good enough. 

 This is one reason why I probably will never go balanced. I had a balanced headphone once and I failed to enjoy having to plug it in twice to a plug that had to be oriented properly twice. For mine is was in the back of a unit as well, the Lavry DA10. Compared with a simple TSR plug the balanced one was a pain to use. Call me lazy, but this is for my pleasure and relaxation and not a DIY project each time I want to change a headphone or amp. This provides a good reason for devices like the Mapletree LR-1 line router. It has the potential to make a balanced system more palatable to me but still I don't think I am going there. This is just me though.


----------



## n_maher

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Elephas* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Calling a computer-source "what you use when you are in high school or college" has some negative implications I'd rather not get into here. It also has positive implications, though that probably wasn't your meaning._

 

I highly doubt that Aaron was trying to be negative or insulting. Rather, I think the greater point that he was trying to raise was that there are some inherent limitations to the setup proposed. Many of us have found through experimentation that as much difference as an amp or DAC can make the power supply can also have a significant impact (I'm not talking power cords here). There's no getting around the fact that an Ipod or Computer based source is going to be severely power supply limited. Furthermore that's not to say that any of those setups can't sound good or even great, only that some of us would believe that there are improvements to be made. Just my 2¢, feel free to ignore it.


----------



## Elephas

There are inherent limitations to any audio reproduction system. Standalone CD players have their own limitations, advantages, tradeoffs, etc. So do CD transport+DAC combinations, analog rigs, and computer-based (or hard drive-based) systems.

 Sure, he didn't say computer-based systems are only used by kindergarteners and 1st graders. But the implication was there. I don't see the point, besides arrogance, in saying that computer-based systems are only used by those who are younger and/or less financially endowed. I think many older, and presumably financially successful, people might not have well-informed opinions about computer-based systems.

 This kind of attitude reminds of the reaction by the local Pass Labs distributor when I told him I use headphones and a computer-based system. Snooty and dismissive.

 There was a lot of skepticism and curt dismissiveness of the V-dock's sound quality by people who haven't heard it. Maybe there's a parallel with dismissive attitudes towards computer-based systems?


----------



## Icarium

Well, I do think there is some sort of inherent limitation to computer based systems as far as sound quality goes though they can sound quite good (My set up right now is computer based). 

 I am using a DAC that retailed for 3500 and I think is quite decent, but I can say with sureness (Thanks to much testing) that while computer -> Cosine DAC sounds better than some stand alone cd players in the 3 (And a few in the 4) digit range, cd based transport (Even my relatively cheap one) -> DAC is significantly better sounding than computer -> the same DAC. I have found this to be true with my Monarchy M24 DAC and the EMU 0404 USB. Of course my DAC is hardly the end all and be all of DACs and I do plan on moving up the food chain at least 2 more times in the next two years as money permits... but no matter what I upgrade to I don't see this changing much. I've heard even that Nova Memory Player gets crushed by a decent cd system 

 Is this due to jitter? Is this due to the noisiness inside a computer thanks to power supply and other issues? I don't know. Am I crazy and the only one that thinks cd transport -> dac will be better than computer -> the same dac? Maybe. 

 Of course there is the convenience factor to such a set up (Like there is with an Imod set up) which is very, very important. Even if Aaron was making some sort of snooty statement (Which I don't think he was), it's not like he does not have a computer based set up, because he does. He speaks very highly of the Transporter/SB3 and owns both. Very, very decent sound matched with convenience, etc. But he still has top notch transports in vinyl and digital for critical listening when he can forgo that convenience. I dunno maybe I'm portraying Immtbiker wrongly. If so, correct me.

 I too plan on getting a cd/sacd/dvd-a transport when I can afford the one that has caught my eye. I don't doubt that even after that at least 60-80 percent of my listening will still be through my computer because of the convenience but when I need to lose myself in music nirvana, that's when I'll break out some cds/sacds/dvd-a.


----------



## esmallits01

I truly understand the different viewpoints you guys are coming from. 

 a. Some must be wondering, how could a consumer gadget like ipod be made to some as good as a system audiophile has trusted over the years. Is technology at our current era that advance that something so puny is able to replace the whole room of equipments?

 b. Some advocates the otherway. We are so advance, nothing is impossible and do not make judgement until we have experience it ourselves.

 c. Other various views..

 Well, in my capacity as a public accountant, I do appreciate and advocate skepticism. It is through this endless questioning and probing do we find out faults, seek improvements and filter the real from the fake. 

 Do not fault those who are skeptical about the quality of the iMod and V-docks. For those who owe these equipements, ask yourself. When you first bought these stuff, did this question pop up, " How in the world does this thing sound so darn good???"

 See, for people who first got their hands on iMod, you spend the first few days and weeks wondering how it sounded so great. You are skeptical too.

 Let not this spirit of skepticism end. I believe Vinnie and Ken appreciates our skeptical views and suggestions to spur them to create better products and fulfill our neverending hunger for better music.

 I do not own a V-Dock, not because I do not believe in it, but because its not within my budget yet. I must admit, $550 is pretty pricey, but value is relative to everyone. I own a iMod 4G. Coupled with a Xin Reference and modded Triple.Fi, I have truly enjoyed audio bliss. Credit goes to iMod. The difference what an iMod does is truly obvious. 

 Thus I do not doubt what iMod is capable of achieving. Maybe the pricing is putting people off and thus creating so much hostility among people. But do note this is a niche market. Not a mass market consumer gadget. 

 Lastly, let us all be reminded that we gather here in light of our common hobby, common love for better music. Do not hurt feelings over our views on equipments. Constructive suggestions in seeking improvement is the way to go. We are afterall, brothers in the love of music.

 cheers.


----------



## stevenkelby

Amen.


----------



## Skylab

Wow that may be the best second post in the history of head-fi. Welcome to head-fi, esmallits01!


----------



## immtbiker

If I insulted anyone or sounded snooty because of my computer-based comments, then I am truly sorry.

 I *did *preface it with, "I don't want this to sound insulting", though. As Icarium stated, I do own and enjoy multiple computer-based systems. I use my Transporter at least 30% of the time for my listening enjoyment. I also have a Dared MP-5 (modestly priced) hooked up to my usb output for headphone listening while I'm on the computer.

 What I *was *stating, and if anyone takes it as a "snooty" remark (which to anyone who knows me, knows that I am the farthest you can be from snooty or condescending) then let the chips fall as they lay...is that in our quest in this hobby to get the best sound, using the highest grade, indivdual components (separate amp/preamp, DAC/transport, power supply and cabling, and so on) compared to a computer based home stereo system, is like comparing a nice $200 quartz watch with a $3000 jeweled automatic.

 They both keep good time (the required result), but the fun and the beauty of buying, selling, researching and comparing nice automatics is lost in using a quartz for *all *of your watch duties. The quartz is great when you are hanging out or playing sports, but I would want the detailed and hand crafted automatic when I go out to a nice restauraunt or to a watch meet.

 When I was in High School and College, the $200 quartz made me very happy.
 As I got older, was in the audio business, got an engineering degree, and eventually formed a family with a wife and kids, my tastes changed, as would most people's, and I started to head up the path of what I could afford by buying and selling equipment, adding a little money when I could, to acquire the best sound that I could, in both home and portable use.

 I *also *stated that I use my iMod and amp and IEM's about 3 hours a day, including park and pre-sleep listening sessions. But to use the V-Dock as my *only *primary home listening rig, and forego all else, would have been something that I would have done when I was younger and then I wouldn't need to be on Head-Fi anymore. I'd be done with the learning and sharing proccess that we do here. There would be no reason to go to the other parts of this forum.

 I don't think that what I am saying is insulting, certainly don't mean it that way, and if anyone still thinks so, there's nothing I can do about it. I don't mind if you disagree with my opinion, but I do mind if you mis-understand my intent and have given it a couple of paragraphs to explain where I am coming from.

 Peace out.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_compared to a computer based home stereo system, is like comparing a nice $200 quartz watch with a $3000 jeweled automatic.

 They both keep good time (the required result), but the fun and the beauty of buying, selling, researching and comparing nice automatics is lost in using a quartz for *all *of your watch duties. The quartz is great when you are hanging out or playing sports, but I would want the detailed and hand crafted automatic when I go out to a nice restauraunt or to a watch meet._

 

There you go again Aaron. You dont want to insult but you do!

 Fact is, you have not heard the iMOD V-Dock system and should not comment on its capabilities *period!*

 Again you if want to say "In your opinion you dont think it would compare to a mid level cdp" fine! But I wont put the words in your mouth. Please say them yourself!

 You take one foot out of the dodo and then put the other right back in again.

 I am suprized at you are so addement to make this point as a matter of fact! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Talking about what you thought was good in your college days vs what you have now and them asymilating it to the capability of a product you have not heard is snooty and pompas and really *BLANKS* me off!


----------



## circularlogic

^

 He was making a fair assumption based on his prior experience with an iMod - sure, a V-Dock would conceivably improve the sound, but one component change (a coupling cap) will, fairly, not propel the unit into high-end-land.

  Quote:


 Fact is, you have not heard the iMOD V-Dock system and should not comment on its capabilities period! 
 

Oh yes, because _everyone_ on head-fi has heard _every_ component they comment about. To be fair, without many points of reference to compare the iMod to, those reciprocal assessments of how good it sounds are just as baseless. I'd say most people who comment on anything at all haven't heard enough high-end audio (not just headphone) equipment to _justifiably_ make quality comments any their equipment anyways! I've been to shows (CES, CEDIA) meets (head-fi) and auditioned a whole bunch of stuff and I don't feel in the least qualified to comment on much at all (because it still isn't enough)! But at least if you've heard a lot of equipment, one can have a good idea where other equipment can fall rather than saying "it's just as good as $xxxx CDPs" without even hearing more than a handful of $xxxx CDPs. Without doing so, such praise of any product is THE SAME if not worse than speculating about a product that is very, very similar to one they have heard before, even if it isn't the same thing.

 Be fair, let people state opinions.


----------



## immtbiker

Wow Todd, I really think you are taking this too personally. 
 I did not *repeat *anything about it being comparable to a mid-level CDP.
 I simply expressed my opinion about the V-Dock being used as the sole source for a home stereo system. Also, I believe that my last point focuses more on the fact that it eliminates the need for us Head-Fier's pursuing the thrill of the chase of constantly looking and listening to different components and tweaking, which is a large part of what we do here on this forum. 

 Even if I had a Burmester 001 and some $150,000 Wilson speakers, I would still be involved in the hobby, which includes constant listening and comparing. If the V-Dock is the end all and finalization of someone's home system, then they don't need to particpate in anymore threads here.

 I'm not sure why you are getting so angry, and if people agree or diagree with me, please feel free to chime in here, but it was not my intent to make you so vexed with me.

 I have explained myself, and none of this is personal (or at least I didn't intend it to be). I only hope you can let go of what I said, and we can go back to being friends again. I am holding out an Olive Branch here. 

 If not, you can't say that I didn't try.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *circularlogic* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_^

 He was making a fair assumption based on his prior experience with an iMod - sure, a V-Dock would conceivably improve the sound, but one component change (a coupling cap) will, fairly, not propel the unit into high-end-land._

 

Knowone said ever High-end-land? I said mid level cdp land an I never comment on things I have not heard myself.

 I have been in the professional audio industry as a high profile DJ/sound engineer since 1984 and have heard many systems with a list wayyyy to long to even try to remember. IMO if the V-dock/iMOD even comes close to a highly praised Rega 2K or Skylabs Rotel its quite an accomplishment and _*(IMO and SKYLAB's it does!) *_it should be praised not dismissed.

 I have not heard an Apollo yet which would be a new highly prasied $1,000 cdp. I think this would be a good challenge for the V-dock/iMod maybe would could arrange a compared listen at the meet this sunday.

 Anyone have an Apollo thats coming sunday?

 I do not claim this is the end all be all of home audio so would people please stop making sound this way please!


----------



## aluren

well, a lesson learned today: don't insult a man's v-cap dock! it's like insulting the man's wife/gf when you haven't spent a minute with her....


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If not, you can't say that I didn't try. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 


 Dude we are all good, what I cant get PO'ed at my friends?

 So Im a little hot right now it is nothing to worry about. I just dont agree with your thought process on this one.

 Im OK!!!
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	










 I swear Im gonna duck tape my DT-990's to your head on Sunday till you say UNCLE!


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *aluren* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_well, a lesson learned today: don't insult a man's v-cap dock! it's like insulting the man's wife/gf when you haven't spent a minute with her...._

 

Thanks aluren nice way to cut the ice!!!

[size=large]ROTFL!!![/size]


----------



## Skylab

Todd, my friend, you need to relax! Nothing Aaron said was insulting. He's simply stating his opinion! I share your enthusiasm for the iMod+VDock, but it's not a personal affront if others don't agree, even with the principle of the thing. That's their opinion.

 Trust me, I have had people on head-fi accuse me (personally) of all kinds of stuff that was an ACTUAL personal attack. I have also over-reacted to stuff that wasn't; we all do. But we all have to work at not doing that - exchange of opinion is what makes head-fi fun!


----------



## trose49

IM FINE IM FINE!!!!


----------



## Skylab

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_IM FINE IM FINE!!!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

OK, good - I want you to live long enough for your VCaps to fully break in


----------



## immtbiker

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Skylab* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_OK, good - I want you to live long enough for your VCaps to fully break in 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

That would be 1400 hours in dog years


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *immtbiker* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That would be 1400 hours in dog years 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Im pretty much at the 200hr mark now if fact it's running it at home as we speak. I dont want to have to explain caps arent burned in on Sunday! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I should be able to get 300+ hours if I cut down on my portable iMod use! I cant help it and usually take it to work for those rare moments I can listen.


----------



## trose49

I now have about 250 hours and have not noticed any changes in the last 50 hours or so... I wonder if it will really change any more ???


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I now have about 250 hours and have not noticed any changes in the last 50 hours or so... I wonder if it will really change any more ???_

 


 read this:
http://www.v-cap.com/oilcapcomments.html

 at least 300 hour mark.


----------



## trose49

I took a peak under the hood of the V-dock. I will not post pics so please do not ask.

 All I will say is that I thought I was looking at a time bomb! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Man the Caps are *[size=small]BIG![/size]*


----------



## tourmaline

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I took a peak under the hood of the V-dock. I will not post pics so please do not ask.

 All I will say is that I thought I was looking at a time bomb! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Man the Caps are *[size=small]BIG![/size]*_

 

Think these are big, look at the audio note silver or copper caps or the jensen caps.LOL even bigger at the same value. Compared to the 50 cents cap, every custom made cap IS big.


----------



## i has a can

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Compared to the 50 cents cap, every custom made cap IS big._


----------



## Icarium

Post one of the Alo thread pretty much has all the pics one needs anyways to gauge the size of the caps:
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...41&postcount=1


----------



## EFN

Big? you should see Mundorf M-Cap Supremes. Coca Cola cans more like it LOL!


----------



## trose49

It looks like even the inside of the dock was well thought out in terms of Cap Placement etc.


----------



## trose49

Any more V-docks out there?


----------



## itsborken

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *trose49* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Any more V-docks out there?_

 

Pending...


----------



## trose49

Anyone else get wooden or new portable V-docks? I would love to read others thoughts and impressions?


----------



## RIDE

Reviving thread...as I have an 80GB iMod with portable Vcap and Jumbo Cryos on the way! I am SOOOOO very excited! Also ordered up a Hornet to power it all and a Yo Tank to protect it.

 Can't wait to report back on my thoughts!

 RIDE


----------



## rxc

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *RIDE* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Reviving thread...as I have an 80GB iMod with portable Vcap and Jumbo Cryos on the way! I am SOOOOO very excited! Also ordered up a Hornet to power it all and a Yo Tank to protect it.

 Can't wait to report back on my thoughts!

 RIDE_

 

Dang, you're one of the guys that beat me to that P-Vcap dock.


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *RIDE* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Reviving thread...as I have an 80GB iMod with portable Vcap and Jumbo Cryos on the way! I am SOOOOO very excited! Also ordered up a Hornet to power it all and a Yo Tank to protect it.

 Can't wait to report back on my thoughts!

 RIDE_

 

Congrats:


----------



## tourmaline

Are the vcaps burned in yet? How do you like em now?!


----------



## trose49

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tourmaline* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Are the vcaps burned in yet? How do you like em now?!_

 

I honestly did not notice any sq dif after about 200 hours. Most changes were 0-100hrs with some slight improvemnt in the highs from 100-200hrs.

 The Bass freq seem to tighten and go deeper after about 50-60hrs I would say.

 Sounds amazing.

 I am going to set up a music server (19"LCD>Apple TV>DAC>Raptor>DT990 (600ohms) with an external DAC for my new Raptor that is coming soon.

 But I am going to try the V-dock as a source first and compare the sound of the HR-2 and the Raptor with a source that I am familiar with (V-Dock).


----------

