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.
I would be interested to know what ALAC is, but again Mr Tall didn't READ my post.
Lossless audio, as opposed to MP3 or M4A. These files retain that sound quality, at the cost of size, of course.
What's wrong with a regular keyboard? It would be rarely used.
Then what's wrong with a software one?
Too many people like yourselves assume that everyone both lusts for new tech and knows how to use it. Such is not the case.
That's why I'm saying use the iPod touch as a music player only.
Instead of protecting the Touch as if it were your own three year old, why not consider a new device?
Hey, now you just have to ask that question of yourself.
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.
Or you could get an iPod touch or plug in your iPod classic.
On the classic it's swirl, click, swirl click and you're there.
On the iPod touch it's swipe, type, touch 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.
Home Button takes you back wherever you are.
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?
No, we just don't have any downtime since we charge at night.
I think ALAC and a higher capacity is exactly what the OP wants.
Or use a laptop, and again, ALAC.
Why would a laptop need RCA output, for goodness' sake? You don't lose any sound quality by using a simple 1/8" to RCA Y-adapter, and you could use the audio port for headphones as well.
ALAC is "Apple Lossless Audio Codec". It preserves 100 percent of CD audio quality, which is way better than any mp3 with any DA conversion algorithm. It's built in to iTunes. In iTunes just change your import settings. But that won't help the quality of the mediocre AACs and MP3's you're "invested" in. You should have stuck with physical CDs. Amazon is a good source.
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?
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.
Listen to us. We're not going to repeat this again. ALAC is lossless audio. It differs from records and CDs in one way, which is you can't scratch an ALAC file. The device has NOTHING to do with the quality of audio. All Apple devices can hold and output lossless audio of the quality you desire.
…why not a sub section of iTunes to sell to the users, upgrade of song to these full standards…
Some of us are asking the same thing. Hopefully they will offer lossless audio one day.
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. 8.) Space for all of your music library
And for the, what, seventh time, even though you couldn't care less, the iPod touch does all of this.
7.) Output jacks compatable with your audio equipment that do not necessitate a special "Y" splitter, and giving up your headphone input.
iPod touch will do this, too. You just need an adapter for whatever isn't 3.5mm.
9.) a mechanical keyboard.
Nonsense. Your iPod classic doesn't even have any sort of keyboard and you get along fine. Virtual ones work perfectly well and are far less tiring since you're not actually requiring force to push against any objects.
Ask any gamer, or CAD user why they prefer mechanical keyboards. The "virtual" keyboards are inexact and tiring to use.
I use whatever kind of keyboard the Apple one is plus a trackpad for gaming. None of this "low latency mouse" mumbo-jumbo.
You will ask, so, my wrists are 10" around and my left index fingertip is 1" across.
I'm holding up my hand, trying to picture one twice its size… and I have large hands, so this is problematic.
Note also that the iPod touch searches (searches, plays, and commands) for music with your voice, as well. If the keyboard is too small, even in landscape, Siri removes that problem entirely.
Finally, just to define terms is a machine that does apps, movies, music, photos, books, telephone, be considered a Music Specific Device?
Yes. Because you can go ahead and NOT use it for ANYTHING except MUSIC. By this criteria, no device ever made is specifically for music.
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 lost all credibility when you claimed to be an audiophile who has purchased a large amount of music in iTunes.
Audiophiles don't do that. ITunes music is currently limited to 240kbps compressed audio, which will never sound as good as a CD, no matter what equipment you have.
An audiophile who wanted to use a computer/iPod setup would buy the music on CD (or better), rip it as ALAC and either listen through quality headphones, or connect it to their stereo through a dock connector that has line out, and yes, a y-cable. That's what would produce the best possible sound quality. It doesn't matter really whether the iPod or computer connected through that y-cable is a Classic or a Touch or a Mac Mini. The sound quality is what matters, not the device.
You're not an audiophile. You're a stubborn old fogey with antique equipment who doesn't listen to well-intentioned advice.
I get that you are all Apple-O-Philes and no intelligent response can be expected here about an Apple product…
Dang, was I ever right! But again, kudos for being so subtle about it.
But over and over every one of you refuses to comment upon my proposal.
You want to waste money on an entire laptop computer dedicated for the playback of music and music alone. We're ignoring your proposal because it's nonsensical, not because the thought of having all of your media in one (small) place, accessible easily, is silly.
If you want to do this, feel free. Spend over $1,000 on hardware far more powerful than you'll ever need for the lifespan of its use and which will do the technology equivalent of sitting and rotting away. Or $350 on a Windows laptop that you'll need to replace every two years.
You refuse to listen to our repeated attempts to save you that money by telling you the iPod touch does everything you want and is a dedicated music machine. That's why it exists; to NOT be a phone. Use exactly what you want exactly how you want it. And you can command your music with your voice!
At some point, if this conversation was carried on long enough, someone might actually give me a decent description of ALAC…
Already did. Twice. It's your fault for ignoring it.
"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".
That's basically what you're proposing. We're saying this isn't the only way. In fact, there are many better, cheaper ways, all of which you're dismissing because you refuse to listen to any information other than what you provide yourself.
If Apple DID build my machine, would you all be jumping up and down and proclaiming another Apple masterpiece?
Of course not. It's an expensive niche product that hasn't been needed since the late '90s.
There's a reason why people pay to go to the Symphony rather than to a one man band.
There's a reason people use lossless audio files instead of 128kb/s MP3. But both can be put on any iPod.
One attempts to do everything adequately, the other does it's specific function superlatively.
No music player is going to give you better anything than any of Apple's hardware. Apple's hardware doesn't inherently play back files in better quality than anyone else's stuff. Lossless is lossless. If you have the files and the hardware to play them, it's all dependent on the speakers.
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.
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?
What responsibility are you claiming they had in this regard?
They were cheaper which was my concern at the time.
Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick two. It's how every industry works.
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?
I assume this is directed at tonton. Your questioning him does nothing for your point.
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.
Just as some of our opinions about your audiophile status are wrong, so too is this opinion, borne of zero fact or reason, of yours.
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.
Please tell me you don't buy Monster cables. Data is data. Yes, you can have a cable longer than is recommended in the specification, but that's just not going to happen in this specific use case. The file will sound the same regardless of what cable it was passed over.
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?
One last time:
Because we use our computers elsewhere and don't want to be constantly messing with wires*.
Because the iPod family is a cheaper solution that compromises NOTHING on the audio quality side.
Because it's ludicrous to have to deal with the power draw of a full computer when you could sip power with an iPod on your speaker set
Because OS X is about the experience of use and the integration of hardware and software.
Because there are thousands of tiny, everyday things that we just don't have to worry about anymore thanks to the engineering that went into both devices. Because we shouldn't have to ever worry about these things.
You would buy the iPod touch to be a standalone music machine because it is a standalone music machine.
You would buy the iPod touch to save cubic meters of space on CDs and LPs.
You would buy the iPod touch to have software designed specifically for feeding you up music and software designed specifically for the navigation thereof.
You would buy the iPod touch to have your audiophile-quality files all in one place and to use an industry standard connector to serve that audio up anywhere you chose.
That's it. You'll never receive a different answer from anyone else, anywhere else. If you want to go back to the '70s and have an entire room full of your music, that's your call. We're telling you that all of your music can sound just as you want it and fit in your pocket.
Believe whatever you want to believe.
*AirPlay of audio is often done, though. Again, no loss of quality, just a few thousandths of a second of lag as you input commands.
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.
If you ever went to an audiophile site you would have realised that audiophiles identify themseles online by describing their system.
I don't care about e-penis measuring. What does this have to do with anything?
"Bong" disqualified! as you are quite happy to say about me.
That's hilarious. Claiming I'm not an audiophile because I didn't tell you about my machine. Good stuff.
For anyone who has actually read this with any interest, esp anyone at Apple, consider what I have proposed. 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.
Nope. Their existing devices already do. So they're not going to waste their time with this.
Handhelds do what they do and are what they are.
The iPod touch, for example, is a great little number that people plug into their stereos and through which they control their music.
…you have no such ultimate device for those with home stereo or home audio.
Except for the iPod touch.
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
Wonder why the iPod touch is a success, then. Because it's hard to use?
There are bluray players but they were out before they were in. CD's are dieing.Look to the future.
It astonishes me that a man can be so right about some things and so hypocritical about others.
At this point, shouldn't you notice that either:
A) You refuse to listen to anything said to you in any respect at any time
Apple doesn't make a device like you want (no one does), so you'd be better served looking at some other company for one (don't; no one does).
Comments
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.
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway
I would be interested to know what ALAC is, but again Mr Tall didn't READ my post.
Lossless audio, as opposed to MP3 or M4A. These files retain that sound quality, at the cost of size, of course.
What's wrong with a regular keyboard? It would be rarely used.
Then what's wrong with a software one?
Too many people like yourselves assume that everyone both lusts for new tech and knows how to use it. Such is not the case.
That's why I'm saying use the iPod touch as a music player only.
Instead of protecting the Touch as if it were your own three year old, why not consider a new device?
Hey, now you just have to ask that question of yourself.
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.
Or you could get an iPod touch or plug in your iPod classic.
On the classic it's swirl, click, swirl click and you're there.
On the iPod touch it's swipe, type, touch 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.
Home Button takes you back wherever you are.
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?
No, we just don't have any downtime since we charge at night.
Or use a laptop, and again, ALAC.
Why would a laptop need RCA output, for goodness' sake? You don't lose any sound quality by using a simple 1/8" to RCA Y-adapter, and you could use the audio port for headphones as well.
ALAC is "Apple Lossless Audio Codec". It preserves 100 percent of CD audio quality, which is way better than any mp3 with any DA conversion algorithm. It's built in to iTunes. In iTunes just change your import settings. But that won't help the quality of the mediocre AACs and MP3's you're "invested" in. You should have stuck with physical CDs. Amazon is a good source.
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?
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway
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.
Listen to us. We're not going to repeat this again. ALAC is lossless audio. It differs from records and CDs in one way, which is you can't scratch an ALAC file. The device has NOTHING to do with the quality of audio. All Apple devices can hold and output lossless audio of the quality you desire.
…why not a sub section of iTunes to sell to the users, upgrade of song to these full standards…
Some of us are asking the same thing. Hopefully they will offer lossless audio one day.
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. 8.) Space for all of your music library
And for the, what, seventh time, even though you couldn't care less, the iPod touch does all of this.
7.) Output jacks compatable with your audio equipment that do not necessitate a special "Y" splitter, and giving up your headphone input.
iPod touch will do this, too. You just need an adapter for whatever isn't 3.5mm.
9.) a mechanical keyboard.
Nonsense. Your iPod classic doesn't even have any sort of keyboard and you get along fine. Virtual ones work perfectly well and are far less tiring since you're not actually requiring force to push against any objects.
Ask any gamer, or CAD user why they prefer mechanical keyboards. The "virtual" keyboards are inexact and tiring to use.
I use whatever kind of keyboard the Apple one is plus a trackpad for gaming. None of this "low latency mouse" mumbo-jumbo.
You will ask, so, my wrists are 10" around and my left index fingertip is 1" across.
I'm holding up my hand, trying to picture one twice its size… and I have large hands, so this is problematic.
Note also that the iPod touch searches (searches, plays, and commands) for music with your voice, as well. If the keyboard is too small, even in landscape, Siri removes that problem entirely.
Finally, just to define terms is a machine that does apps, movies, music, photos, books, telephone, be considered a Music Specific Device?
Yes. Because you can go ahead and NOT use it for ANYTHING except MUSIC. By this criteria, no device ever made is specifically for music.
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.
Audiophiles don't do that. ITunes music is currently limited to 240kbps compressed audio, which will never sound as good as a CD, no matter what equipment you have.
An audiophile who wanted to use a computer/iPod setup would buy the music on CD (or better), rip it as ALAC and either listen through quality headphones, or connect it to their stereo through a dock connector that has line out, and yes, a y-cable. That's what would produce the best possible sound quality. It doesn't matter really whether the iPod or computer connected through that y-cable is a Classic or a Touch or a Mac Mini. The sound quality is what matters, not the device.
You're not an audiophile. You're a stubborn old fogey with antique equipment who doesn't listen to well-intentioned advice.
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway
I get that you are all Apple-O-Philes and no intelligent response can be expected here about an Apple product…
Dang, was I ever right! But again, kudos for being so subtle about it.
But over and over every one of you refuses to comment upon my proposal.
You want to waste money on an entire laptop computer dedicated for the playback of music and music alone. We're ignoring your proposal because it's nonsensical, not because the thought of having all of your media in one (small) place, accessible easily, is silly.
If you want to do this, feel free. Spend over $1,000 on hardware far more powerful than you'll ever need for the lifespan of its use and which will do the technology equivalent of sitting and rotting away. Or $350 on a Windows laptop that you'll need to replace every two years.
You refuse to listen to our repeated attempts to save you that money by telling you the iPod touch does everything you want and is a dedicated music machine. That's why it exists; to NOT be a phone. Use exactly what you want exactly how you want it. And you can command your music with your voice!
At some point, if this conversation was carried on long enough, someone might actually give me a decent description of ALAC…
Already did. Twice. It's your fault for ignoring it.
"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".
That's basically what you're proposing. We're saying this isn't the only way. In fact, there are many better, cheaper ways, all of which you're dismissing because you refuse to listen to any information other than what you provide yourself.
If Apple DID build my machine, would you all be jumping up and down and proclaiming another Apple masterpiece?
Of course not. It's an expensive niche product that hasn't been needed since the late '90s.
There's a reason why people pay to go to the Symphony rather than to a one man band.
There's a reason people use lossless audio files instead of 128kb/s MP3. But both can be put on any iPod.
One attempts to do everything adequately, the other does it's specific function superlatively.
No music player is going to give you better anything than any of Apple's hardware. Apple's hardware doesn't inherently play back files in better quality than anyone else's stuff. Lossless is lossless. If you have the files and the hardware to play them, it's all dependent on the speakers.
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.
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway
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?
What responsibility are you claiming they had in this regard?
They were cheaper which was my concern at the time.
Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick two. It's how every industry works.
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?
I assume this is directed at tonton. Your questioning him does nothing for your point.
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.
Just as some of our opinions about your audiophile status are wrong, so too is this opinion, borne of zero fact or reason, of yours.
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.
Please tell me you don't buy Monster cables. Data is data. Yes, you can have a cable longer than is recommended in the specification, but that's just not going to happen in this specific use case. The file will sound the same regardless of what cable it was passed over.
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?
One last time:
Because we use our computers elsewhere and don't want to be constantly messing with wires*.
Because the iPod family is a cheaper solution that compromises NOTHING on the audio quality side.
Because it's ludicrous to have to deal with the power draw of a full computer when you could sip power with an iPod on your speaker set
Because OS X is about the experience of use and the integration of hardware and software.
Because there are thousands of tiny, everyday things that we just don't have to worry about anymore thanks to the engineering that went into both devices. Because we shouldn't have to ever worry about these things.
You would buy the iPod touch to be a standalone music machine because it is a standalone music machine.
You would buy the iPod touch to save cubic meters of space on CDs and LPs.
You would buy the iPod touch to have software designed specifically for feeding you up music and software designed specifically for the navigation thereof.
You would buy the iPod touch to have your audiophile-quality files all in one place and to use an industry standard connector to serve that audio up anywhere you chose.
That's it. You'll never receive a different answer from anyone else, anywhere else. If you want to go back to the '70s and have an entire room full of your music, that's your call. We're telling you that all of your music can sound just as you want it and fit in your pocket.
Believe whatever you want to believe.
*AirPlay of audio is often done, though. Again, no loss of quality, just a few thousandths of a second of lag as you input commands.
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.
Now, if you want to make the best of what IS available, Tallest has very good advice to give. If you'll back off and listen.
Originally Posted by drjohnmarkway
If you ever went to an audiophile site you would have realised that audiophiles identify themseles online by describing their system.
I don't care about e-penis measuring. What does this have to do with anything?
"Bong" disqualified! as you are quite happy to say about me.
That's hilarious. Claiming I'm not an audiophile because I didn't tell you about my machine. Good stuff.
For anyone who has actually read this with any interest, esp anyone at Apple, consider what I have proposed. 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.
Nope. Their existing devices already do. So they're not going to waste their time with this.
Handhelds do what they do and are what they are.
The iPod touch, for example, is a great little number that people plug into their stereos and through which they control their music.
…you have no such ultimate device for those with home stereo or home audio.
Except for the iPod touch.
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
Wonder why the iPod touch is a success, then. Because it's hard to use?
There are bluray players but they were out before they were in. CD's are dieing. Look to the future.
It astonishes me that a man can be so right about some things and so hypocritical about others.
At this point, shouldn't you notice that either:
A) You refuse to listen to anything said to you in any respect at any time
If you would listen to what I and Tallest have to say, you could actually get more quality music performance from what is available today.
Best regards,
Ben (not an audiophile -- thank God for that -- but certainly an audio quality aware music lover)