Music Specific Machine?

The Classic has become part of my life now. I am 57 years old and began my music addiction with what is now called "Vintage Stereo Equipment" (most hand built in Japan). This equipment is still in most cases superior to anything available today and many older pieces are being restored and sold in preference to modern Chinese offerings. I have gone through Lps, and 45's, CD's (originally advertised as immune to scratches), and now learn that many audiophiles directly connect their computers to their 70's gear and play it that way.

Others like me transferred 30 years of music onto their iPod. Actually it was a blessing because radio has become so specific that I hadn't heard anything new other than Rap (Yuech!)  etc since 1985. I found about 20 years of great music on iTunes which I purchased, and even with the relatively low audio quality it was often superior to that of many older albums and with some of my equipment even that was fixable.

I can't describe the delight and amaxement to have my whole, or almost whole library on a small device like the iPod. Most of you younger people are used to lousy stuff like 3 dollar computer speakers and Apple ear buds.If you love music you need to hear it live or have great equipment.

But from the very beginning you could see the iPod's death. Why? Because it involved no monthly fee. This has always been the goal of these technical marvels. TV's were losers because after they sold the TV programming was free and the providers had to sell advertising. Apple as a company almost died from being greedy; wanting to own both the device, operating system and programs.Microsoft and IBM made money by licensing their designs etc.

The Cloud is worthless to me as it's free storage is small and I have no portable device that needs it, nor do I want one. I'm retired and bored and so used to do surveys, Apple ran survey after survey hoping that everyone would go to an iPhone, but a lot of people want their phone a phone.

I looked at the touch, but the programming was very different from the iPod and totally inappropriate both in design and capacity for music. Predictably, Apple has been forcing the music people out. First it was no more games, and hey some were fun, if I really want to play I go onto my computer or the xBox.., next was the end of the 180 g, and now the end of the games and soon the Classic. I have two spares, and my LP collection, so at some point I will just be forced out as a customer of Apple.

Instead of this craziness, why not make a really great entertainment device with flash or harddrive storage, clickwheel or whatever, I could care less... if it works, and I don't have to pay a monthly fee and control my own software. Make it great for music and games and pictures. A click out click in battery would be great for watching movies or playing games.    

The last first. If you use up all of the battery life say watching a movie (those battery times are often wishful thinking) you have to recharge which is NOT fast. The replaceable battery was part of the original design overridden by Jobs himself.

The disagreeable programming i mentioned was the Touch's inability to form playlists etc. This may have changed, because hey, I didn't want or need one. At any rate, music use was not at the top of the list when designing the device. Insofar as the scrolling etc, I thought that I made it clear that that was no advantage to me one way or another. A click wheel is far more intuitive than the average cell phone and I'll argue that all day.

Greedy is a term. Where do you place greedy? 5%, 15%, 20% 2,000% where? Business models used to be made, and worked on far lower profit margins. I do know that whatever Apple is making on say the "Classic" is quit a bit more than I earn on my CD's at the bank. The reason for the rush into cell phones and their ilk is that you do not buy something and walk away. You pay the cell company money each month. I cannot believe that Apple doesn't get a portion of this. To select more space in the cloud over the 5G's that it comes with has a monthly fee, unlike the original ipod. And of course, if your music is all in the cloud, so  what's to stop Apple from charging a small monthly fee for access to your music? If the Touch can be made with 128 gig memory and appropriate programming I might go there when my iPods die, but until then I have to ask, "Was there some screaming demand for this product?"

Th subscription model may be a failure (yuk,Yuk talk to Comcast, and Verizon about that), but anything that has you paying a monthly fee is an ongoing expense. My phone costs me 29 dollars a month after taxes etc, what does yours cost? You kids think that a cell phone is essential and it isn't. How did we all get by before we had them? My guess is that doctors, firemen, policemen etc NEED cell phones, everyone else wants to play. I was one of the very first in Seattle to use one of the first "Bricks", and carried a pager before that. Whenwe went from pagers to phone all of a sudden there were all sorts of messages that we just had to deal with on the phone, most just annoying junk.

You've challenged me on the market research, but you just don't know what you're talking about. Okay maybe THEY don't they just hire some other firm to do it for them, but I have taken the research polls. "Is there any circumstances under which you might use a device which included a phone besides the other features?" etc Swear by the Almighty, I TOOK those polls. The Touch is extant because some people simply do not want a phone in their music/entertainment device.

While I'm at it how about a strange device called a "Gasp!" phone! A device dedicated to providing long and clear phone reception and coverage. These new phones have worse reception than the old bricks! 

I can see that you are an Apple "True Believer" Handle snakes too? How many times do I have to say that the Touch exists is because after repeated polling which I actually, personally participated in there are pepople who just do not want a phone to be part of their entertainment system.

The market model almost dictates that Apple generates more money from the new devices, than the old. The largest difference is in the regular after purchase fees. If Apple isn't getting kickbacks from the cell phone companies, they're getting it from the apps or somewhere else. I can't support that factually, but the business model being pursued dictates that the link is there.

Once again I really do not care how the lousy screen works, so long as it works welll and long. The early Touch's were not set up for music with no playlists and no real classification of music etc. It's probably improved, because theyare discussing tossing out the Classic. I could care less really. I am no tech addict who needs the latest machine. Perhaps you are? My brother in law spent hours programming an early personal calendar and notebook. We all asked him if a simple paper notebook and a pencil wouldn't be faster (and cheaper) but he essentially said, "But this is cool".

The decision to not allow replaceable batteries was made directly by Jobs. Read it in Wired magazine. The battery was/is the first part to go bad, and usually that estimated time is just for laughs. It isn't that movies are so long, it's how long do you want to wait to charge your unit. Heavy video/game usage sucks the battery and lowers it's life.

I can't believe that you bring up this short search feature! I mean just how short does it have to be? With a click wheel the maximum time to find a specific recording is perhaps 5 seconds. Buddy, if this is too short for you I hope to never be in back of you in a que.

You assume that people would want a phone in one of these devices. Why? The Touch was originally developed beside the first iPhone simply because some people didn't want the d--n phone. I don't want, and a lot of people don't want one device that costs a mint and does stupid pet tricks and dances a hornpipe as well as play music and is a camera, phone etc. Some people want the best music device that can be made, the best phone and a great game machine, others a great portable computer. Why do all of thes have to be in the same device? To quote from "The Quiet Man" "When I drink whiskey I drink whiskey, when I drink water I drink water". I have a very new cell phone that cost about $100 and the plan. (I let my daughter pick it out). Neither the reception or battery life is as good as the original brick or the Motorolas that came out in 97. I couldn't find a cell phone that allowed me to use my fingers to text with,(need a stylus). I'm not impressed.

And again you prove my point with the cloud. Justified or not, you pay. More memory is a onetime payment. You say that it is justified for the servers, fine. Give me the hard drive instead

And no the sound quality is not just the com guys fault. I used to set up cell towers etc, was an industrial Electrical Contractor for 20 years. The reception is bad partly because of holes but also because of the design of the phones. Better receptions meanssending out a more powerful signal which requires more power and a bigger antennae. Reception is the same. Also the receivers have limited range to cancel background noise, but if a person has a big head a lot of what they say is lost.

You still refuse to address the main point. Why not a device designed around just music with some gaming and photos thrown in? 

It's been said before. A man who argues with a fool  is afool. You have consistently contradicted yourself and ignored what i had to say. I and a lot of other people really don'd like phones. This is incomprehensible for a lot of people. But Hey I didn't know why my aunt gave me a world globe with a transistor radio in it either.

Whatever the Touch is now, it was not designed to be a music specific device. Why they made it I do not know but must have taken 20 surveys exploring the ins and outs of the device with or without a phone what we wanted out of an Apple device etc.

Wax poetic over the human heart, but being able to replace a part that often goes wrong such as the battery is an advantage to the consumer.

You have tech knowledge of phones, but you know as well as I do that it takes a lot of juice to broadcast a signal out of a heavy dense building or over distance. This is the phone that I want. It isn't sold so I don't use a cell phone. I own one for taking on trips, but what I am interested is a phone machine that allows me to own my music without monthly fees and have it all available all of the time. If Apple screws the pooch as it has before, I will use old tech or load directly to my computer and connect it to my stereo.

If the Touch has the programming and capacity that Ineed when my Classics wear out in say 7 years, I will give them a good lookover. Examine any group of Ipod users and there is a strong group who are audiophiles and use the device specifically for that. I used to lay in bed at night listening to music and playing some arcade game or other.

If Apple really hasdesigned the Touch as an entertainment specific device with the classifications, playlists etc that the Classic has, and a 140 g capacity, perhaps they should be advrtising it for this purpose. I will not pay extra for cloud service. Presently the whole cloud biz is just very irritating;  more control for Apple, and totally designed for the bells and whistle mobile devices with no room for a hard drive. 

Okay, let me get this straight because I don't want to leave anything out. Apple doesn't do market research before introducing new products, but if they do it's done by a third party so it doesn't count.

Aplle doesn't make more money off of their new line than the old line, but, okay they do and that's just part of the Capitalist Dream and we should all rejoice at the privilege.

They don't make monthly income from their current line, well okay they do but that's through apps so it doesn't count, and anyway it's more fun and once again we should rejoice in our participation in The Capitalist Dream.

The Touch has plenty of space for music on it's hard drive except for the high volume user (the people I have been discussing myself from the beginning).

I should switch to the Touch because it's more fun, not more suitable as a music device.

The cloud doesn't cost, except that it does if you want to store anything much on it, which is the purpose of the cloud and if you bother to read the posts concerning the cloud the capacity is a fairly large complaint by a lot of contributors.

Somehow it's odd that I would wait for my curren devices to wear out before buying a new one. Does living green mean anything to you? Ring a bell?

The battery size isn't a problem as it lasts 10 hours. You must know that 10 hours is VERY optimistic if the screen is being used for a video/game application, but optimistic in any case. Battery powered tools began with replaceable batteries allowing uninterrupted use of the tool as did "The Brick". Why? because out of the box it was used in a power intensive situaition. The cell phone push for some reason was to reduce it's size to almost unusable proportions. The same was done with the iPod although I never heard any complaint about it's size. Hell, the iPhone is substantially larger than most cell phones and no one seems to care, but this size issue also made for small batteries and buttons, antennaes etc. I use my iPOD plugged into a transformer most of the time. My Blackberry will be dead if I leave it uncharged and unused for 4 or 5 days and this is about typical for phones. You can or could change the batteries and go on, but they do not come with extra batteries or a battery charger and their installation isn't friendly to the mechanically challenged. If built in batteries are the answer, why is it when I got to Starbucks the best armchairs have someone rooted there using a laptop  plugged into the wall? I visited Barnes & Noble this week and counted about 12 people throughout the store with laptops plugged into the wall.The display is the juice sucking culprit. The same reason that the original Kindle has such an outrageously long battery life. They have a non standard monochrome display that just flips display polarities and does not generate light. 

I would be perfectly happy to own a small laptop with a 200G hard drive designed to manage my music that I could plug into my stereo. Many audiophiles are doing something similar, but have not researched this completely yet. These folks are not using MP3 players, CD players or turntables. This is the breaking edge, but not my generation. If there was a very small computer made for the purpose I would buy it. If I had such a thing I would be fine with a creepy Touch with a 2G memory, for when I travel. 

I'm sure that the touch is very cool. If I liked phones and items that did cool tricks I would probably be sucked in by the iPhone. If I had ANY use for the tablet I would probably own one. Apple is in the business to make money, I get it. Apple should also remember that it was almost traded with the penny stocks not so very long ago because of their insistence upon controlling hardware, operating system and software. Who buys Mac's? The people I know who do are authors and artists with too much money. When it comes to biz it's some version of the PC. Maybe Apple will pull this off give them the ultimate control over the data allowing people to have their "Dick Tracy Watch" or similar instead of laptop or desktop. I just want a machine designed for the high use music user who needs a lot of space and doesn't want to pay monthly fees.

I have no idea who or what you  are. I have said repeatedy that the Touch doesn't interest me because what DOES is a music specific machine. Did you even read the title of the post? I KNOW that the Touch was not designed for music. It may have been made more compatable than it originally was, but that doesn't make it an audio specific machine. I feel somewhat better about buying one if my Classics all die, but until then I couldn't care less that it has a touch screen or claims 10 hours of battery life etc.

If you are going to complain that I'm a "troll" you might be "polite" enough while insulting me, to tell me what one is (outside of a fairy tale.). I talked about movies etc on the music device, because it was nice to listen to music while I played a game, and it WAS nice, I'll admit it, to have a machine that did more than one thing. However, I have game machines, and since you managed to take the discussion everywhere EXCEPT the audio only device, I responded. You brought it up, you got my answer.

Listen up Trolls, fairies, gremlins or whatever else you are, there are serious music listeners out in the big forest. Many of the serious audiophiles have switched to using music directly stored upon their computer and are bypassing CD players, Turntables and so on altogether. I would do the same if I had not invested so darn much money in iTunes. What I am talking about is a small laptop say 8"X6" that is pre-programmed for music, with notes and links between players, groups etc and also to make it easy to arrange your music library. It would need RCA plug jacks for out put as well as whatever else is current on modern amplifiers. A large hard drive of about 180 G's of memory would be necessary. This would negate the need for a lot of connecting cable between my computer and stereo, and allow me to move it from room to room.

I am not an Apple fan. I do not like their business model, and I am not the only one. Apple came very close to closing it's doors and not so very long ago either. Microsoft is soft these days as well. The key to business success is to give people what they want at what at least seems like a bargain. I resent the way my suggestion and I were treated here. If all you care to do is stroke your Apple products be my guest. I, like most people, want what I want, not to just enrich some corporation.

One last time. When I want a phone I want a phone that works and I don't want it to dance and whistle "Dixie". I want a sturdy quality product made specifically to do one job.

I visualized the music machine in the same way. The iPOD began as a music machine and somehow it has become lost or scrambled together with a telephone!? Unbelievable. 

For once someone other than my usual tormentor commented. "Tallest Skil" is that you? I looked up "Troll" and frankly it sounds more like YOU!   If I knew how to store music on my computer and directly transfer it to a Receiver made circa 1975, I would probably be doing it, but prior to NOW i had a wife who was not a big audiophile. She died about 5 months ago and since then I have gone back to my bachelor ways and live with my stereo. One of the artifacts from the days while my wife was still alive is my iPod. I could access my music and listen to it on a $400 pair of earphones. Now I listen to that iTunes music through a Marantz CD player that has electronics to enhance the mp3 type file to sound much more analog which it does in fact do.

While repairing my receiver I was told by the seller of a turntable that most modern audiophiles put their music  directly upon their computer and connect it someway using ethernet cable etc to their amp to directly load their music. I do not know how to do this and have invested a large amount of money in iTunes music. It occurred to me that Apple COULD create a small laptop type device designed especially for music  including software to educate you and tie your music together. Example? Who played on this album-song whatever? Who else did he play with, was he a  regular contributor etc. Yes, Yes, this is available seperately but the idea is an audio device set up to have it all present upon the one device.

Whether the Touch is equal or superior to the Classic is neither here nor there if it has the same hard drive capacity. If I have to pay for storage on the cloud I just won't. All of you can love your Mac's and iPhones etc and I could care less. The only reason that I brought any of that up is that I feel that Apple's need for control has not always been healthy for the company and "Tallest Skill" took the discussion in that direction. I  am somewhat reassured that if my iPods die that there is a replacement waiting, but playing with the Touch holds little interest for me.

You guys just don't get it, and mr Troll (yes, I've learned the term now), or " Tallest Skil" as he calls himself seems to have set himself up as some sort of personal nemisis.

If you want to just run a playlist any of these handhelds will do that. I would be interested to know what ALAC is, but again Mr Tall didn't READ my post. I am an audiophile from the 70's. The heart of my equipment are two "Vintage" receivers, the Sansui 9090 DB  made in I think 1975, and refurbished last year and a Concept 16.5 when I want to blow the doors off. I have a Technics 1300 turntable with two cartridges: a shure IV and a Pickering. Some of the styli are very hard to find and prohibitively expensive so do not use the turntable except for rare occaisions. I also employ a graphic equalizer and a dbx 228 that adds back in top and bottom frequencies taken out of recordings at the booth and removes the dust scratch sound from older records. I have 6 7 speakers at the moment, a pair of the original Epos 2-way speakers, two Polk floor speakers (recently offered $4,000 for the pair) and two Orb speakers with a 10" subwoofer.

I employ qa Marantz cd player after on of my kids poured a coke into my vintage Sony, but the Marantz has a special MP3 hook-up that allows you to run your ipod through the Marantz sound enhancement system. Not perfect, but it about does for the mp3 recordings what the dbx does for the poorer lp's. I am sorry but it doesn't take me any 22 seconds to look up a specific recording unless I'm dealing with say ten different recordings of the Brandenburg's.

What I have been trying to say is that the mp3 player is a compromise from the beginning because the file cannot contain as much info. I am not savvy to modern tech, but know that while the sound can be surprisingly good when put together with a $400 pair of Shure earbuds or top of the line Westone's, the experience is lacking when compared to a room environment. 

Something like the proposed "High" capacity Touch comes close to providing ME with a replacement for my Classic, the other gizmos are of little value TO ME, or to a person wanting an audiophile machine. The capacity has to be big because standard MP3 files would not be used, and to make it attractive it would have to have software onboard to appeal to a music person. People would like to see the original album cover, the  studio, the studio musicians , perhaps what the other musicians did later as well. What's wrong with a regular keyboard? It would be rarely used. Most listeners would make playlists and then just run them. Genius never works for me by the way. How it manages to avoid using my own song ratings is incredible to me. Too many people like yourselves assume that everyone both lusts for new tech and knows how to use it. Such is not the case.

Instead of protecting the Touch as if it were your own three year old, why not consider a new device? If Apple is such a genius outfit they could put back a lot of what is taken out of a file to make it an MP3, back IN,  like digital cameras do with their vision of reality. I find it pretty pitiful to go to a party and have people turn on their computer and iTunes and play something through their $25 computer speakers. My son in law came over when I had my stereo playing some Pink Floyd and he insisted upon staying for almost 6 hours saying that he'd never heard music like that before. He didn't mean Pink Floyd either. We went through all of his favorites.

Again, the device could easily be a small laptop like those baby Acer's, but with input and outputs specific to the audio world, and helpful and intuitive programming. One thing that I give Apple very high marks on is their ladder system of organization. On the classic it's swirl, click, swirl click and you're there. I got lost on an iPhone because it just does so much random stuff. If all that it did was be a telephone I'd buy one.(With a replaceable battery). I really don't understand you guys. I ran a large, very successful, Industrial/commercial Electrical contracting business for 20 years. We used a lot of batery powered tools, but would NEVER have purchased one that had to be recharged. They all came with a spare battery and a charging unit.. You had NO downtime with the unit and it was expected to take a lot of abuse and still work. Have none of you used these tools or this arrangement? My audiophile music system could easily be a stationary plug in device, but anything mobile just seems lacking with those built in batteries.  

If you all were more familiar with audio equipment this all would be an easier conversation. If I had realized that this was a forum for Apple fans I probably would not have posted here at all. I was led here by Google after cheking to see if Apple by some fluke had offered any new games, and then hearing rumors that the Classic was to be scrapped.

IMHO NONE of the devices currently offered by Apple is "music Specific" from an audiophiles, or musically obsessed person's point of view. I'm sorry and I apologise in advance, but if you are satisfied with the sound coming out of ANY of the current Apple machines, your musical standards are not especially high. And I totally take your point that definitionally a "Shuffle" or whatefer is a music Specific Machine, but you are really just splitting hairs to win an arguement.

You all seem like bright people, so I have to assume that you are simply defending equipment that you believe to be wonderful. My apologise. No one insults someone's mother without drawing down wrath.

I am NOT a computer savvy person. I was 40 when I got my first computer and 46 when I first messed with the internet. Still, I have not heard of a music specific computer, or websites that sell complete song files that go to a specific program designed to play on a first rate Stereo. This ALPAC or whatever seems like what is being used, but I am not familiar with it and this is so, why not a sub section of iTunes to sell to the users, upgrade of song to these full standards, and then finally. why not a device specifically designed for the purpose?

So many people under 40 have never even listened to music from a first rate stereo. Younger friends and family are blown away when listening to mine and it certainly isn't the ultimate machine. Why RCA plug jacks? Look at the back of any standard Audio amplifier. It doesn't take a small headphne jack and there's a reason for this.Some of the newest audio equipment uses other hook-ups but so many of the older models, (still the preferred models by the way), use RCA plug jacks. The connection has a lot of area and is under spring tension preventing signal loss or distortion.

I'm sorry about your speed issues, but I have around 120 G's of music and it takes me around 5 seconds to find an album. Individual songs I put in playlists.

The attractions of the device I've been trying to describe are: 1.) Set up to receive music downloads without any special programming effort on the user's part, 2.) The ability to transfer iTunes library (for a cost good capitalist!) into full audio files. 3.) the ease of doing a search that is not stupid like the itunes search but is spelling forgiving 4.) software readout on the album, where recorded, musicians etc 5.) Perhaps a secondary memory for back up. 6.) A screen large enough to show details and album notes so common on albums recorded before 1985. 7.) Output jacks compatable  with your audio equipment that do not necessitate a special "Y" splitter, and giving up your headphone input. 8.) Space for all of your music library 9.) a mechanical keyboard. Ask any gamer, or CAD user why they prefer mechanical keyboards. The "virtual" keyboards are inexact and tiring to use. My large fingers makes it necessary for me to use a pencil to text, The gestures of a virtual board necessarily means holding your arms out which becomes tiring. An actual, mechanical button lets you know when you are pushing it and not the adjacent key. You will ask, so, my wrists are 10" around and my left index fingertip is 1" across.

Finally, just to define terms is a machine that does apps, movies, music, photos, books, telephone, be considered a Music Specific Device?  

Mr Tallest Skil, who appointed youeveryone's spokesperson? Do you have a Napoleon complex as well as being extremely rude? Do you write adictionary or something similar? Use specific means just that, used only for one thing and designed and maximized for one thing.

I get that you are all Apple-O-Philes and no intelligent response can be expected here about an Apple product, rather just cherished when found. But over and over every one of you refuses to comment upon my proposal. At some point, if this conversation was carried on long enough, someone might actually give me a decent description of ALAC, or I would research it myself, but I could tell you something similar. "Hey dude, just get a laptop and put all sorts of stuff on it. You don't need no "Touch" or iPOD or whatever. Do it all on your PC". You'd talk , as I have done, about the benefits of specificity and I could just laugh at you. It's rude and dumb.

If Apple DID build my machine, would you all be jumping up and down and proclaiming another Apple masterpiece? This isn't complicated. I know how to jury-rig an iPOD to work with a stereo, but that was never the idea. The IPhone and Touch and Classic and Shuffle were meant to be very portable multi-use money makers. There's a reason why people pay to go to the Symphony rather than to a one man band. One attempts to do everything adequately, the other does it's specific function superlatively.

You know so little. You assume that I even knew what an MP3 file was when I began to buy them. I was married to a lovely woman with Bi-Polar disorder. Much of our loose money went to her care. I was disabled in a construction accident. I replaced most of my LP's with iTunes music. I mean, hey, you all defend Apple products with every breath you breath, why should it be any diffeent now? Did Apple tell the buyer that these files were inferior to CD, or LP recordings prior to purchase? They were cheaper which was my concern at the time. 

I Listened with earpods so as not to disturb my wife. My main receiver is over 40 years old and needed to be repaired. Extra money went to my now dead wife thank you very much. Being an audiophile can mean two things. (By the way, why am I defending myself to you? Who are you? What are your credentials?) It can either mean someone who loves music and has the best equipment that he can afford or someone who is rich and can indulge him or herself in the latest gear etc. I have never been in the 2nd category until now. So put your opinions about my being an audiophile where the sun doesn't shine. Who are you to even have an opinion? I've laid my cards on the table. Who are you sir?

Why should I worry about my "credibility"? Am I applying for a job, or standing before the Supreme Court? I am here just like you. In my opinion you ALL have almost NO credibility since you simply defend Apple products without discussing them rationally, or critiquing my suggestion in an intelligent manner. Are YOU an audiophile? Do you consider yourself one? How familiar are you with vintage equipment? Are you aware that there is a whole cottage industry which restores and sells vintage equipment because it is considered superior to modern offerings? If you doubt me as usual, look at the Ohm speaker website as a small example.

And by the way "Tallest Skil" your last statement is sheer...nonsense. Speakers are a huge part of music sure, but so is the power and how it's supplied, with what level of reliability, depth and length of ability to transmit power especially during heavy extended bass loads such as are found in  certain sorts of classical music. And as I am "sure" you are aware, most music is altered as it is recorded distorting it really before it goes on the CD or whatever. This was recognised decades ago. Lp's have great sound reproduction, so why did I want a dbx unit for? Because the guy mixing the music in the booth shapes the music to better suit consumer sound equipment. This usually consists of cutting off the lower and higher decibels, to reduce obvious voice distortion on high notes or sheer failure to reproduce on the lower ones.

I will say this one last time. Everything that the various functions that the Apple products do could be done by a PC and a telephone. And yet, you buy Touches, iPhones etc WHY? Why not just program your computer and use a land line which produces superior reception? The answer is obvious. The Apple products are design specific. You don't have to alter something , it's already ready for it's use. That is what I've been suggesting for my proposed machine, and maybe a premium music section at iTunes.

Mr Skil, You have added virtually nothing to ths discussion except volume. You know very little about stereo equipment. If you ever went to an audiophile site you would have realised that audiophiles identify themseles online by describing their system. "Bong" disqualified! as you are quite happy to say about me.

For anyone who has actually read this with any interest, esp anyone at Apple, consider what I have proposed. Exchanging insults is a stupid and nonproductive pursuit. To Apple developers; the device that i have described here would work equally as well as a home theater device or home audio device.I know of no DEVICE which is preset, programmed and designed  for this task. Handhelds do what they do and are what they are. For every equipment line there has to be a Cadillac or Lincoln. For your handhelds it seems to be your iPHONE, you have no such ultimate device for those with home stereo or home audio. Those tech savvy can get around this , but why the iPOD was a success was that you has a package that was easy to use

I used to look at MP3 players but didn't buy one because I had no idea about how to get music onto it. With the iPOD there was iTunes. There are bluray players but they were out before they were in. CD's are dieing. Look to the future.