iPod Classic as a HiFi source? Options

[Antigen]

Hi to all,

do you think that an iPod Classic 160 GB + Dock with external DAC can be an HiFi audio solution?

I'm evaulating this solution to replace my old CD PLAYER that is broken.

Thanks

[probedb]

I don't see why not. Have you tested it to see if you're happy with the sound? Surely that's what's important?

[Antigen]

I don't have an iPod Classic, I'm evaulating it for hearing my music at home after conversion to AAC or MP3 with my HIFI

Another solution is FLAC + Hard Disk Multimedia Box (for example Western digital) but in this case scenario, i need a TV and turn on it to hear my music.

This post has been edited by Antigen: Jun 13 2012, 19:54

[Nessuno]

I don't have an iPod Classic, I'm evaulating it for hearing my music at home after conversion to AAC or MP3 with my HIFI.

I see from another thread that you use XLD, so you have a Mac: a third solution, if your computer is not too far from your amp (as to say: some rooms apart), could be using it and an Airport Express, linked via Wi-Fi or Ethernet cable. Much cheaper and way easier to manage.

[saratoga]

Hi to all,

do you think that an iPod Classic 160 GB + Dock with external DAC can be an HiFi audio solution?

Sure, the analog output is quite good, and if you don't mind paying for very little gain, there is also an option for digital out.

[JJZolx]

It could be, yes. But I've never really understood why anyone would use a DAP as a source in a home audio system. First, there's the limited user interface. Secondly, if you want to use lossless files then you'll be limited to under 500 CDs in that storage space.

[skamp]

I'm willing to bet most people have less than 500 CDs… and they can always use lossy audio that's perfectly transparent, at a fraction of the disk space.

This post has been edited by skamp: Jun 13 2012, 22:13

[Antigen]

I'm willing to bet most people have less than 500 CDs… and they can always use lossy audio that's perfectly transparent, at a fraction of the disk space.

500 CD?! Ahem.... i think that most people have 100-200 CD not more

And if they have more CD... they can use AAC at 256 or MP3 at 320 that is transparent.

In alternative to ipod classic/dap what do you suggest?

This post has been edited by Antigen: Jun 13 2012, 22:16

[JJZolx]

In alternative to ipod classic/dap what do you suggest?

Uh... maybe a computer??

[Antigen]

In alternative to ipod classic/dap what do you suggest?

Uh... maybe a computer??

But a computer cost more thanan ipod.

What do you think about ipod touch + itunes match? Can be a cost effective solutions?

[DVDdoug]

I agree that the user interface and small screen seems a bit in convenient for a home stereo, but it still might be more convenient than CDs.

But a computer cost more than an ipod.

Not by much... I paid more than $200 USD for my iPod classic that plugs into my car stereo (~14,000 MP3s won't fit on an iPod touch). I paid less than $400 for the laptop that's connected to my home stereo (running Winamp)... So, maybe the computer was $150 more than the iPod. I didn't actually buy the computer for that purpose, but it "lives" in the living room now. (At some point, I'm going to upgrade to a laptop with a Blu-Ray drive and HDMI.) My home stereo (home theater system) also has a CD player and a DVD player that can play CDs.

This post has been edited by DVDdoug: Jun 13 2012, 23:13

[Soap]

Or, for far less money than an iPod, a dock, and a DAC, you can get an Apple TV, and have streaming audio AND video. Get one you can jailbreak and you'll be glad you did. Spending $250 for home entertainment hardware which can't run XBMC is a crime. The iPod's greatest asset (and what you're paying for!) sits unused when you have it docked at home.

This post has been edited by Soap: Jun 13 2012, 23:45

[db1989]

The iPod's greatest asset (and what you're paying for!) sits unused when you have it docked at home.

But then you leave the house, and it’s back!

Actually, never mind. This leaving-the-house thing sounds like too much.

[Engelsstaub]

Antigen, beware that the latest generation of 160 Gb iPod Classics have some serious buffer-issues. It seemed almost ever file (ALAC, high bitrate AAC, etc) over a certain size paused annoyingly for a second or three about 2 minutes and 30 seconds into the song to buffer.

Apple's forums, as well as a general Google search, would seem to indicate that this is a hardware limitation with the HDD and the buffer.

(I like to refer to it as a product defect that would have been recalled if it was an all-important iPhone or some other device that Apple tends to support appropriately. You're not even safe with a brand-new 64 Gb iPod Touch...I have two of them. You'll have lag and unresponsiveness issues under iOS 5 that won't affect the iPhone either. The iPhone has a better CPU and apparently Apple likes to test everything with it and the iPad while iPod-customers can just suffer a half-assed experience. Refreshes on these devices are even less frequent than those on a Mac Pro.)

[EagleScout1998]

500 CD?! Ahem.... i think that most people have 100-200 CD not more

My last count had me at 1,000 CDs.

[db1989]

Antigen, beware that the latest generation of 160 Gb iPod Classics have some serious buffer-issues. It seemed almost ever file (ALAC, high bitrate AAC, etc) over a certain size paused annoyingly for a second or three about 2 minutes and 30 seconds into the song to buffer.

Apple's forums, as well as a general Google search, would seem to indicate that this is a hardware limitation with the HDD and the buffer.

(I like to refer to it as a product defect […]

It definitely is. This is basically unforgivable! I hadn’t heard about it until now.

I thought that the persistent inability of apparently top manufacturers as Creative and Sandisk to implement the fairly trivial ability to play gaplessly was bad enough, but Apple’s selling products with predictable drop-outs is a new low; ironically, their support of gapless playback was exactly one of the things for which I would have commended them.

[…] that would have been recalled if it was an all-important iPhone or some other device that Apple tends to support appropriately.

Hmm, this makes sense, I suppose: make iPhone users feel like the important/valuable/consequential person whose image the product promises to bestow upon them, but people who just want a functional and otherwise understated (read: not weighed down by bells, whistles, and shiny) music/media player – for whatever reason, the weirdoes! – can get sent to the back of the queue, albeit not without shouldering a few gimmicks like (the horribly slow) Cover Flow. </directionlessvent>

This post has been edited by db1989: Jun 14 2012, 00:12

[andy o]

First, there's the limited user interface.

As opposed to what, exactly? You can get docks with remotes which are the same or even much better (like radio instead of IR). Even in the iPod Classic, the click wheel can be quicker than trying to navigate playlists on a hardware player, even worse on an mp3-capable DVD or CD player. And unless you're willing to keep a monitor or TV on while only listening to music, the interface is probably going to be dot-matrix.

And if we're talking about an iOS device, it's even better, with AirPlay support and custom interfaces. I use FlickTunes, though I bought it a long time ago, and it's pretty outdated, but there should be a bunch more.

[JJZolx]

First, there's the limited user interface.

As opposed to what, exactly?

Foobar, JRiver, iTunes, Winamp, etc.

[probedb]

First, there's the limited user interface.

As opposed to what, exactly?

Foobar, JRiver, iTunes, Winamp, etc.

But they all require a computer with a monitor or TV attached.

Some people (like me) just want a nice simple interface and don't want to have to turn on the TV to listen to music.

This post has been edited by probedb: Jun 14 2012, 08:08

[JJZolx]

But they all require a computer with a monitor or TV attached.

Some people (like me) just want a nice simple interface and don't want to have to turn on the TV to listen to music.

I'd never suggest using a TV, or worse still - requiring one - for an audio system interface. But that is an approach that some people like. A system with a small monitor and mini keyboard is very compact, if that's a concern. Using a laptop or netbook is also a possibility, although the onboard audio quality can be hit or miss and some may feel that it requires an external DAC.

My ideal player has always been a networked audio player like a Squeezebox. The Squeezebox Touch gives you a lot of user interface options - a touch interface, IR remote, iOS and Android apps for smart phones and tablets, and a web interface. Requires no computer or hard drives in the listening room (yes, the Touch is a very low power Linux computer) and doesn't need another screen. Relying on a central server that streams audio to networked players has advantages such as the ability to sync multiple Squeezeboxes for multi-room audio. Its network capability also gives you access to internet streaming content like online radio stations and services like Pandora and MOG.

If you already have:
- a home network (with wifi if there's no ethernet jack near the audio system)
- a computer (PC, Mac or Linux) that can run Logitech Media Server
- (optionally) an internet connection

Then for about $235 (on Amazon) you can add a Touch and be done. The SB can send out WOL packets if you don't want the computer running 24x7, or you can set up a low power dedicated server to run full time. It's also possible to run the server on some NAS devices.

[greynol]

All of that can be done with an iPhone or iPod Touch too.

[probedb]

Indeed, greynol is right Or pretty much any smart phone these days with the right app.

JJZolx, I've had a Squeezebox since they were Slim Devices You can pick them up cheap secondhand as well.

[JJZolx]

I've seen smart phones used to stream Pandora in a bar. It kinda sucks when you receive or need to make a phone call.

One thing that nags me about using a portable player as the main source component in a home audio system is that you'll probably want to take advantage of that portability and take it, for instance, in the car to play tunes. (If it's a smart phone, you'll probably be taking it with you anyway.) What does that leave anyone in the house to listen to? Seems like its a solution only if you live alone or you never move the player.

[skamp]

…or, if everyone has their own iPod.

[JJZolx]

Can multiple iOS players streaming from an iTunes server be synced together? One thing I really like, especially for parties or when I'm running around the house doing housework, is being able to sync three or four Squeezeboxes in different rooms.