And remember the words of Adolph Hitler: The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one. I seem to be missing something here: what "Lie" are the masses falling to in the case of the iPod?! What has Apple, and or Steve Jobs done to make you see fit to fit them in to a reference to Hitler? I'm serious...can you explain what it is specifically that you are objecting to? Your previous references are inflamatory at best, with the possible exception of the simple statement, "...it's not for me," which is perfectly clear. I can understand that it's not for you, but what makes you believe so strongly that it's not for anyone else, and or that the masses have been brainwashed into buying some kind of poisoned snake-oil? Or are you just trolling the Internet seas? Marco |
I'd agree with all the initial responses: If it makes him happy, why pinch a loaf in the middle of his listening room? OTOH - since you are soliciting opinions, which are worth the aforementioned pinched loaf; I have done a bit of back and forth listening of my iPod (line-out with Signal Cables Silver IC's), through both my systems as well as through a great headphone setup. If it's not critical listening, but is being used for background music instead, I could see using it for the convenience. But I'm pretty confident I could tell the iPod from my front-end, and even from PC-Audio, every time. It is not as resolving, and does not get my foot tapping and my head bobbing. Through heaphones the differences are magnified even more. It's a great way to take lots of your music with you. I've used it at work, working out, on the road, and in the car. In all those non-critical listening scenarios works brilliantly. If you have a decent front-end at your disposal, and the software to play the music, I see no reason to use an iPod as a front-end in a home stereo. Now who's going to clean up that mess in the middle of the room? It's starting to stink in here! Marco PS Per the tomato condiment dude - There is no native digital output on any current iPod (that I'm aware of) - you cannot go to an external DAC witout serious modifications. The best you get currently is a line-output, which still uses the mediocre DAC in the iPod for conversion. There is at least one company doing a digital-output conversion at a very significant price tag (why bother). Apple supposedly did release some kind of USB protocol for the Ipod, but has not implemented it in any of the models at this point. |
Albert - Pandora is great, but does have limitations. Nevertheless it does fill a gaping chasm that radio has left largely unfilled (with the possible exception of Public Radio and some College stations). Sampling music over the Internet is all well and good if you can discipline yourself to dedicate time and effort to the task. Pandora will only give you one song at a time and you have very limited control over what gets played (I think you can only make a few rejections over a period of time). With Pandora you cannot sample an entire CD, you can hear one or two cuts perhaps. As Seantaylor99 points out, one or two hits does not necessarily make for a great CD, and with retail prices of a CD at around $13-18 finding those one-hit wonders is not much fun. I end up buying most of the music I actually take a liking to anyway, and tend to buy more CD's by the same artist unheard at that point. Sometimes that is a disappointment, but most of the time it is not. Interesting point you make about the RIAA and CD's Seantaylor99. I don't know if it makes that much sense to me, since by the same logic you should be able to get your money back if you didn't like a movie you paid $10 to go see at the theatre. What if the entire world operated on the same money-back guarantee that seems to be more and more expected here in the U.S.? So if your employer wasn't completely happy with your day of work you don't get paid. If you don't like the taste of the donut you chose, return it. If the doctor didn't cure you demand a refund. At some point, and we may be there, this stuff gets way out of hand - the expectations of a overly litigious, capitalist society where the finger of blame always seems to need to point elsewhere. As far as Steve jobs, and the cost of developing a popular gadget and the software that makes it whirr - I too doubt very much the expenses to make those things are $25. According to this article from PC World from 2/05, at that point it was estimated Apple was making around 40% profit on it's iPod Shuffle. I agree, if Apple can make its customers happy, and make a profit, all the power to them. It is a luxury item used in a leisurely pursuit of enjoyment. Purchasing it is a matter of choice. If you want to talk about abuse of an industry that is out of control, take a look at the pharmaceutical industry. In that case the product is not a luxury item, but a necessity for many, sometime making the difference between life and death. If you want to make references to masses of victims of a capitalist society fostering corporate greed and misplaced priorities, you can talk about our medical care system, our education system, and care for our elderly population. An iPod seems like a pretty silly thing to be making such a fuss over in that perspective, especially with the kind of moral outrage that would prompt references to Hitler. Marco |
I started a response earlier this morning, but just don't have enough time to spit out all that comes to mind. Here's what my initial response was:
For many years now,I thorougly research individuals and the the companies they run, before I buy their product. I believe if we all did due diligence before the purchase, we as consumers would have a greater impact on the market place than we do.
Just a further note on the same topic; I'd bet if most of us did the same due diligence on their wardrobes they'd be walking around in the Emperor's New Clothes. Do you do the same kind of research on everything you buy? What about the chips in the computer you're typing on? Who wrapped the transformers in your audio gear? Yes, I agree, if more people did that, the world might start to change. But it seems to me like a daunting task to actually consistently follow through with. Again, of more urgent concern to me are the more national issues I mentioned in my previous post, simply because they are more about our immediate fundamental needs, and the future of our youth and our planet. Our country consumes on the order of five times more of the natural resources of the world, than the world average, and is so far behind on regulations that would curb our horrendous contribution to poking a hole in our atmosphere. Not to say a world-view should not be ignored, but it seems we need to take care of things at home before we tackle those much more broad-reaching issues. What any of this has to do with the quality of an iPods output is beyond me. As far as Apple and Steve Jobs is concerned; I agree with Albert, they make brilliant products that actually function as they should, are easy to use, and look good as far as working with those materials are concerned. My understanding is that Bill Gates' benevolance is more far-reaching and profound than Jobs. I still find no reason to condem either of them for running a successful company. Marco |
But as far as the encoding was, I have no clue. But one would think If your trying to sell a product one would use the best format. It would make a HUGE difference how the music was formatted. I'm sure at Best Buy they were pushing MP3's to show off the capacity of the unit, as most folks clearly just aren't that discriminating about the quality of the sound, judging by what sells, and how popular downloads have become. The iPod holds far more music in compressed formats, and that would be something they'd be bragging about too, especially if it were one of the smaller units like a Nano. Not to wish more abuse on your ears, but you may want to give it another try with files that are uncompressed (WAV) or compressed in a lossles format (Apple Lossless), and make sure to use a decent pair of earbuds (like Shure E4's or E5 or E500). You may not have the hot Latino to make the experience as memorable, but I bet you'd be more impressed with the iPod. Then again, maybe not. Do you understand the concept of compression as it is related to audio files? Marco |
Yes I do understand the concept of compression as i was in the music business with CBS for many years. However I am not up to speed on compression as it relates to downloaded music.So enlightenment there is warranted. If you understand compression, then you understand the notion as it relates to downloaded music. Most downloaded music is highly compressed to facilitate fast transmission. There is at least one smaller service that is offering less compressed music as downloads..can't recall the URL, but the big boys (iTunes) is highly compressed and you may as well be sticking nails into your ears if you are expecting hi-fidelity. I believe the losses are not just in the actual musical content, but also just as critical, in the timing of the music. All that information is held in those zeros and ones. When you start eliminating a whole bunch of those binary digits, the processor has to interpret what was once there as best it can. That "interpretation" is what is driving the stakes into your skull...that, and perhaps a crappy pair of headphones. Somehow I don't think the Latino babe will be able to answer your question about formats, but hey, there I go stereotyping. Good on you for fighting for the rights of the artist. Somehow I can't help but believe that the artists could be getting a better shake from the corporations that distribute their work as well. There seems to be a movement of more and more artists forming their own labels. As far as anti-piracy - there is more than one side to that coin. If you are viewing it as black-letter law, then the agenda is very clear, but I don't believe the world is so black and white. Certainly I believe that on a mass scale piracy does hurt everyone. But I have to confess, I openly receive CD-R's from friends who have wanted to introduce me to new music, and have done the same in sharing music with friends. In many cases it has lead me to hear music I otherwise would never have heard, and to both buy and recommend music by same artists. Same thing applied to cassete tapes shared the same way in my younger days. Having heard a cut or two while visiting a friend, or previewing at a retail store would not have convinced me to necessarily buy or recommend same music. Does that make it ethically 'right'? No. Am I hurting the artists I enjoy? I really don't believe I am because I'm actually buying their stuff, recommending them to others, and seeing their shows in many cases. Had I not recieved the CD-R, I'm sure there would be many, many artists I would simply not be supporting in that way. You have a unique viewpoint having been on the other side. I'd be interested to hear what you think. Marco |
Ferarri - your recent post brought to mind a documentary I saw recently. The series "30-Days" originally done by Morgan Spurlock (of "Supersize Me" fame). The first two seasons are now available on DVD. The series is an extension of what Spurlock did in Supersize Me in that he takes an individual and puts them in a situation, place, condition and or circumstances that they would not normally experience (a fish out of water)....for 30 days. The first episode of the first series is the only one Spurlock was the subject of, along with his fiance. The two of them locked away their credit cards, gave themselves the equivelant of a week's worth of minium wage pay (around $260), flew to a town in Ohio and tried to live for 30 days on minimum wage (which has not changed since 1997, and is only now being seriously considered). This doesn't speak to sweat shop labor, which is less, of course. The two of them got whatever jobs they could (diswasher, day laborer) and got a taste of what it might be like to have to survive on minimum wage. I found that episode to be devastating. The entire series is definitely worth watching, especially if you enjoyed Supersize Me.
I didn't suggest you turn a blind eye, just that I don't know how far you'd get in trying to adhere to a rigid practice of such high standards. Bravo to you for holding them and practicing them yourself.
You are mistaken in describing the ipod's limitations to listening to downloaded music only. The secret to getting the most out of an iPod is, as has been previously pointed out, to use hi-resolution files. You can extract (rip) these files directly from CD's (or LP's if you prefer, though you will get the same surface noise) using a computer and appropriate software (iTunes, Foobar, etc.). Most downloaded music comes in the form of low-resolution (compressed) smaller files. I suspect that's where the daggers in your ears are coming from.
Marco |
Thanks for the tip, Ferrari. I've put it on our Netflix queue. It's not listed there by title, but it is part of a larger collection of Murrow listed as part of a set where it is disk #4. Alternatively, it is listed on imdb, here. Thanks. Marco |
as a friend of mine in IT once said, 'bits is bits.' I agree; bits are bits. That says absolutely nothing about converting them into music though. The devices that are in between the bits and the energy coming from the speakers to your ears can make a world of difference in how those bits translate into sound. Not to mention just how many bits there are that represent a given passage of time, and how they were extrapolated from that passage of time in the first place, and eventually processed between that process, to end up on whatever media they currently are embedded into. The saying is about as silly as pointing out that LP's are LP's or a groove is a groove. On the other hand, I like your idea of the lilipution orchestras embedded in the medium...how the heck do they get'em in there?! Marco |
