Is an IPOD hi-fi?

Ferrari,

Okay, tell you what I'll do, in the near future, will try the I-Pod again and ask them what format the files are in using the knowledge from this thread. Yes I do understand the concept of compression as i was in the music business with CBS for many years.

Ferrari, be aware of the preset EQ settings imbedded within iTunes.

This allows the user to do massive boosting of both high frequencies and bass.

There are also slider controls which can be used to set levels throughout the spectrum, drastically changing the original program. This EQ can be set up to transfer (EQ and all) to the iPod's hard drive for final listening.

Why do I mention this?

Have you ever gotten into a rental car and had your ears blown out? Checking the controls you find the volume at near maximum and all EQ controls at 100% boost.

I suspect the guys at Best Buy are the ones that had that rent car before us. They go back to work and "help out" with MP3 demo material by creatively adding EQ and volume to cinch the sale.

It kills us but the average 10 second listener is so blow away, he hands over his Mastercard with a smile.

Marco:

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 received 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.

If radio stations were doing their job, you would not have to resort to that means of exploring new music. FM radio today is a wasteland of tired, overplayed music that follows promotion guidelines.

If you love Britney Spears you're in luck. But if your searching for alternate art or an emerging garage band, forget it.

I own a 30GB iPod video and with lossless, uncompressed files and a $300.00 set of Ultimate Ears (buds) I get decent sound.

My home two channel system is light years ahead of it, but I find it difficult to board flights with it, what with bin space so limited.

Even at the gym where I'm welcome to bring along the Dali's and VTL's, by the time I get everything in the truck, I'm too tired to leave home.

Seriously Ferrari, I have never download a single song nor have burned a single CDR of borrowed music. Everything on my iPod is from CD's I purchased new.

Albert, if the RIAA were doing their job we could rent music and then pay an ownership fee if we wanted to keep it. With practically all other products I am able to return it if I really don't like it, but with CD's I'm supposed to fork over $15 and hope that the album I'm buying isn't a couple of cool tracks and a bunch of turkeys.

The RIAA gave people virtually no legal way to sample music, and now they're paying the price.

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 dare say a fire storm has been ignited over the reference to the Hitler quote. I only offered that quote because in light of the so called global economy we have now. However in 1938 Time Magazine gave its man of the year award to Adolph Hitler and the following year Joseph Stalin won the award and of more recent times in 1979 the award went to Ayatullah Khomeini. History has now shown the results. No this is not to disparage Steve Jobs or Apple, the jury remains out on that one.

However I do have concerns that this is purported to be the Holy Grail of portable music delivery systems, after what I heard, but will give it another chance.

Also this product is made off shore in questionable facilities. See below.

Worker exploitation:

On 11 June 2006, a British newspaper Mail on Sunday reported that iPods are mainly manufactured by workers who earn no more than US$50 per month and work 15-hour shifts.[37]

Apple investigated the case with independent auditors and found that, while some of the plant's labor practices met Apple's Code of Conduct, others did not: employees worked over 60 hours a week 35% of the time, and employees worked more than six consecutive days about 25% of the time.[38] Apple's supplier—which initially denied the abuses—[39]has promised to disallow workers from working more hours than allowed under the Code. Apple has hired a workplace standards auditing company, Verité, and joined the Electronic Industry Code of Conduct Implementation Group to oversee these measures.

On December 31, 2006, workers at the Taiwanese factory (owned by Foxconn Technology Group) in question formed a union. The union is affiliated with the All-China Federation of Trade Unions, which is controlled by the Chinese government.[40]

First of all this should not have been allowed to happen and Apple only after the fact took some action. In my opinion this is shear profiteering at the expense of others to make yourself rich. The robber baron mentality is alive and well.

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. But instead we run out and can't wait to get the latest gizmo and fork over the funds for it, totally believing in the hype. Remember the hype is their for one reason and one reason only, and that is to sell you the product. Perhaps it was my years at CBS, that has always prompted me to do research before acting and to ask the hard questions.

As far as the piracy issues go, it is by far more prevelant in todays digital age than in the 70s and early 80s and far harder to catch and remedy.

The music business was a guaranteed sale item. If the sale did not take place it could be returned for full credit, the risk was assumed by the label. Well when you get back more of a title, than you pressed, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that piracy is at hand. Just ask Boston on their first release, that was pirated to death. I could go on and on, but you get the idea and the aftermath of the piracy on the label and artist. I would be more apt to download music, if the assurance was there that royalties were being paid. For I have seen first hand the results of piracy. Countless jazz musicians died in near poverty and some worked till they dropped to support themselves. I am long removed from the battlefield of the music industry so I do not have a first hand account on sales practices today. But sales tracking at the retail level with the UPC code, was something we only dreamed of at the time.

I for one applaud everyone that continues to support the retail chain in the music business. It is my hope that in the future downloaded music will totally support the industry and artist. I firmly believe that the music industry can be killed. If there is not an incentive to create all will be lost. This hobby which we all enjoy, to me is much more about the music than the gear that is used to reproduce it. Music is the critical element, without the music, the gear means nothing.