[Bill Baker]

It appears this is taking off. I am starting to incorperate a mini jack on the front panel of our custom 3205 tubes amps so an iPod (or similar) user would not have to reach in the back of the system to connect.
 I figure with this being more of a mobile media, having front inputs would allow for a more user friendly setup.

 Just wondering how many here are using some type of modile source.

[boead]

I’ve done enough comparisons with an iPod and a couple of Creative players to tell you that they don’t even come close to the quality of a CD Player. I know they sound nice but they just don’t sound all that great. They lack detail, weight, transparency and soundstage.

I’ve done a number of side by side comparisons with an ipod and a creative Zen playing MP3’s (maximum quality) and WAV’s to an M-Audio Audiophile 2496 card.  Neither of the portables showed any differences between the MP3 and WAV while the PCI card clearly did. Then compare a WAV from an M-Audio Audiophile PCI card to an Audiophile CD Player and again there is a significant difference.

Fact is that an iPod may be convenient and it certainly doesn’t sound bad but it just doesn’t have the ability to be an audiophile source.

[Bill Baker]

Fact is that an iPod may be convenient and it certainly doesn’t sound bad but it just doesn’t have the ability to be an audiophile source.

 Thank you for your comments. I agree with the statement above but wondering if others might find this a justifiable feature on our tubes amps. While they are obviously not an audiophile source, one must admit they do sound much better played back through a decent system rather than the cheapo speakers designed for them?

[boead]

Absolutely!

The problem I’ve run into is the lack of gain.

I’ve run the iPod and Creative players into headphone amps and preamps, even directly into my little SET amp and its just ok at full gain. The gain on a component is MUCH higher and the sound just starts to come alive.

I have a couple (and have had a half dozen) M-Audio sound devices. A friend was using an M-Audio Revolution 7.1 PCI card in his system for some time. Its output was on par with his Creative Zen Touch which is a little higher then my iPod.

He had an M-Audio Audiophile 2496 PCI card which he wasn’t using. The drivers don’t integrate into Windows as well as the 7.1 card. He was considering getting a CD Player for his desk because after tying one, he realized how much higher the gain was and how much better the overall sound was then MP3’s or even WAV’s from his PC or Portable with a low gain output.
I told him to try the Audiophile card which he didn’t think would make much of a difference. Well that couldn’t be further from the truth! The gain on the Audiophile 2496 PCI card was as high as a CD Player. Both MP3’s and WAV’s sounded ten times better with the added drive into anything we used it with (a hand full of different headphone amps) made all the difference.
And as I’ve said before, there is no discernable difference between a WAV and an MP3 from a Zen or iPod. However, there IS a difference through an Audiophile 2496 so there is an obvious limitation of the portables.

This is a nice device:
http://us.kensington.com/html/6529.html

[Jon L]

It appears this is taking off. I am starting to incorperate a mini jack on the front panel of our custom 3205 tubes amps so an iPod (or similar) user would not have to reach in the back of the system to connect.
 I figure with this being more of a mobile media, having front inputs would allow for a more user friendly setup.

 Just wondering how many here are using some type of modile source.

What's "taking off" is not really people connecting iPods to high-end amps.  It's people using iPods with the cruddy stock earbuds, connecting them to cute little iPod system/mini speakers, and connecting to their car stereo.  This is the millions of people in the general public.  Nobody here is getting audiophile-quality sound this way.  

Even among the audiophiles, only some whackjobs (including me) have actually tried connecting iPod (w/ line out) to their high-end systems.  I've tried this in a couple of systems, and while iPod w/ line-out and apple lossless sounds good and pleasant, it's just not got the extension, resolution, and dynamics of great $3-4K audiophile players.  

iPod IS a legitimate source for my mid-fi bedroom system, where it's sounding great through some vintage Pioneer integrated.

Bill, even if you put a mini-jack input on your tube amp, the millions of masses will not buy the amp anyway.  Audiophiles won't buy it b/c they'd "rather" use their audiophile-approved CDP's.  

If you want to tap into a real market, that's be the headphone crowd.  Ironically, they wouldn't care about the mini-jack input b/c the most of them hate the mini-jack and would rather use sturdy RCA inputs.  Headphone crowds, such as seen on www.head-fi.org sort of look down on iPods and MP3 players as a decent source anyway, unless portability is needed.  They use good CDP/DAC's with RCA/AES input into their headphone amps.  So instead of mini-jack input, what would sell your tube amp among them is a 1/4" Headphone Jack on your amp, a la Cary 300SEI!

[Bill Baker]

Very well put Jon,

 I knew the iPods are very popular but did not know where/how this would tie into the higher-end croud. My initial thoughts were that those buying tubes amps probably were not looking at this type of media for their source. I don't even own any type of moble media thus being the reason for asking for opinions here.

[boead]

If you want to tap into a real market, that's be the headphone crowd. Ironically, they wouldn't care about the mini-jack input b/c the most of them hate the mini-jack and would rather use sturdy RCA inputs. Headphone crowds, such as seen on www.head-fi.org sort of look down on iPods and MP3 players as a decent source anyway, unless portability is needed. They use good CDP/DAC's with RCA/AES input into their headphone amps. So instead of mini-jack input, what would sell your tube amp among them is a 1/4" Headphone Jack on your amp, a la Cary 300SEI!

I just bought one of these:
Antique Sound Labs (ASL) UHC transformer


I also tried a 100 ohm resistor in series on each positive speaker binding posts to +L and +R earphone and a 10 ohm resistor paralleled across + to - on each of the speaker terminals.  
 
BINDING POST LEFT
      (+)--------100 ohm----(+) left side headphone (tip)
       \
        10 ohms
         /
        (-)------------------(-) Headphone(sleeve)
 
BINDING POST RIGHT
        (+)------------100 ohm------(+) Right side headphone
         \                                            (ring)
         10 ohms
           /
         (-)------------------------(-) Headphone (sleeve)
               
 



This worked but the ASL device is better. It has more weight but less detail which is fine because my amp is a detail whore!

My Van Alstine Preamp has a very good headphone section but this (above) is more interesting and enjoyable although not as neutral balanced.

ven among the audiophiles, only some whackjobs (including me) have actually tried connecting iPod (w/ line out) to their high-end systems. I've tried this in a couple of systems, and while iPod w/ line-out and apple lossless sounds good and pleasant, it's just not got the extension, resolution, and dynamics of great $3-4K audiophile players.
iPod IS a legitimate source for my mid-fi bedroom system, where it's sounding great through some vintage Pioneer integrated.

Yeah, I agree although the iPod is only on par with a $200 chep’ish CD/DVDV Player form someone like Denon, Pioneer or Sony.

You know I can hear the most subtle changes in power cords, IC’s and certainly tubes. But there was just NO difference between a maximum quality MP3 at 8MB and a Lossless/WAV at 48MB from either an iPod or other players. Using great Interconnects to micro/RCA converters, tried a ZuCable micro-RCA cable and so on, Apple Lossless and WAV certainly display more detail and transparency from a better source but seriously, I read about people using lossless from their portables, even requesting and requiring that the portable does it and I can’t imagine for what reason. I think they compare a 128k MP3 or AAC too it and immediately assume the WAV is better meanwhile if they had just improved the quality of the compressed files they would see that the portable players are all too limiting. I’ll archive music on my computer as WAV, for some time I used a digital out to a CAL tube DAC that made even MP3 sound better then they have any right sounding, but...

[slwiser]

Using an iRiver iHP-140 optical out with and Headroom MicroDAC into my Headphile AE-1 via IC from Rnb Black Diamond RA mini into my ATH-A900LTD.

Sound good to me..

Planning on updating my home sound to us the iHP into a Lavry DA10 this spring.  That would be as high end as I want.  This conbination has recently been shown to be the equal of some high-end CD players.

[boead]

Using an iRiver iHP-140 optical out with and Headroom MicroDAC into my Headphile AE-1 via IC from Rnb Black Diamond RA mini into my ATH-A900LTD.

Sound good to me..

Planning on updating my home sound to us the iHP into a Lavry DA10 this spring.  That would be as high end as I want.  This conbination has recently been shown to be the equal of some high-end CD players.

Interesting facts I just found:

Portable players (MP3/CD) have an line-output of 0.775Vrms (according to the hi-fi industry "standards") headphones generally have a little more. The iPod is apparently closer to 0.85Vrms. Red Wine Audio’s iMod brings the Line-Out to about 1.0Vrms.

The average CD Player is about 2.0Vrms. My Arcam FMJ is 2.3Vrms and I know of a couple of players that are about 3.0Vrms.

Shit in, shit out!

I can’t get over how many of you audiophiles are excited about the iPod or even the Squeezebox in your system. They just aren’t all that good, is this a placebo factor?
Or is this based on a ‘it doesn’t suck for cheap’ factoid. Because that I can understand.
Sorry, I just don’t get it! Umm, I mean hear it.

[Bill Baker]

Or is this based on a ‘it doesn’t suck for cheap’ factoid.

 I think it's the convienence factor. A media to allow you to have music with you anywhere you go and then also be able to come home and plug it into your system.

 I never suspected a super high quality from these but since I have never even heard one, cannot comment. If it were up to me, I would have them start installing turntables in cars again

[boead]

Using an iRiver iHP-140 optical out with and Headroom MicroDAC into my Headphile AE-1 via IC from Rnb Black Diamond RA mini into my ATH-A900LTD.

Sound good to me..

Planning on updating my home sound to us the iHP into a Lavry DA10 this spring.  That would be as high end as I want.  This conbination has recently been shown to be the equal of some high-end CD players.

That combination that had recently been shown to be the equal of some high-end CD players, was by whom?
And compared to what CD Players?

Sorry I don’t mean to be a dick but it’s ALL so subjective.
“…sounds good to me…”
Yeah, I understand and that’s part of the problem. No substance, just opinion.

[boead]

Or is this based on a ‘it doesn’t suck for cheap’ factoid.

 I think it's the convienence factor. A media to allow you to have music with you anywhere you go and then also be able to come home and plug it into your system.

 I never suspected a super high quality from these but since I have never even heard one, cannot comment. If it were up to me, I would have them start installing turntables in cars again

I think your right but I still don’t get it. Its convenient in the car or when I go away on vacation. But at home? That’s just being lazy.
 

[Bill Baker]

I think your right but I still don’t get it. Its convenient in the car or when I go away on vacation. But at home? That’s just being lazy.

 I'm with you. I have no problem sacrificing convienence for sonic quality. I cannot understand how anyone who has a decent system with a good quality CD player or better yet vinyl could live with anything providing any less sound quality when at home.

 I will still experiment with an iPod as my 13 year old son wants one anyway. I will have to snag it from him for some playing at the shop!

[slwiser]

That combination that had recently been shown to be the equal of some high-end CD players, was by whom?
And compared to what CD Players?

Sorry I don’t mean to be a dick but it’s ALL so subjective.
“…sounds good to me…”
Yeah, I understand and that’s part of the problem. No substance, just opinion.

Here is a link I read concerning the iHP-140 and the Lavry DA10:

http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?p=1847747#post1847747

Specifically post number 105 on that page.    By the way, I just went over there and ask what components were compared.  Just keep reading later and maybe you will find out what was compared.

Isn't all this, opinion form start to finish?  This is why we are here, to hear others subjective opinions.  

I think the ATH-A900LTD is the equal to my old DT880s with cardas cables but many many others would take issue with that and that is find because both are simply subjective opinioins.  Subjectively, I enjoy my ATH-A900LTDs more than my ATH-W1000s as well, but others may not agree with this either.  Again showing the subjective nature of this enterprise;that is, reading post on a forum like this.

Everything is Subjective here right?  What isn't?

Cheers...

     

[bhobba]

I will still experiment with an iPod as my 13 year old son wants one anyway. I will have to snag it from him for some playing at the shop!

Sounds like a good idea.  The buzz about the Ipod may have stemmed from the following:
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/ipod/ipod.html
Red Wine Audio evidently mods them so they sound really good;
http://www.redwineaudio.com/iMod_Testimonials.html

Thanks
Bill

[slwiser]

I got my response and it does appear that the comparison was lacking in strength...so the we must wait for some further comparisons it seems.

[boead]

Isn't all this, opinion form start to finish? This is why we are here, to hear others subjective opinions. ...

Oh you see I’m not here for your opinion, the world is full of them and they aren’t worth much. If I had a nickel for everyone’s opinion…I’d have a lot of nickels.

I’m here for intelligent description which is a lot more difficult to find. Comparison that don’t simply tell me this is good because I though so. Or worse yet a ‘this is fine for me.’ Gee, that’s nice for you but there is no gauge of reference for me. The English language is full of words; I’d be nice if people would try to use more of them or is that that ‘lazy factor’ again?

I don’t care necessarily what YOU like or don’t like but rather seek your observations. That’s really what we are here for besides some idle chit chat.

I’m guilty sometimes for the very thing I’m complaining to you about but I try to be descriptive to make my point. Red Wine Audio’s description of the iMOD is very descriptive, he points out what it does poorly and how it’s improved.

BTW: Your post about using the iRiver digital out to a DAC to a headphone amp is about as relevant to this topic as your opinion.
Bill is asking if anyone is interested in a simple micro line-in for his amps for people using iPods as sources. What your describing is certainly not that or even similar.

I used a California Audio Labs Sigma-II DAC with a slew of factory upgrades and some choice tubes with my PC for some time. I used a few different digital I/O’s and settled on an M-Audio Delta DIO2496. I have about 15,000 songs archived on my drive, all made myself (NO crappy downloads!) mostly max-Q MP3 and some WAV’s. As you would expect, the quality and texture to the conversion was that of a high quality DAC. The CAL is very analog (vinyl) sounding and somewhat dark and warm and that is what I like. Very large soundstage, deeply layered instruments with decent focus. Recessed vocals and an overall presentation that is anything by neutral. Most DAC’s, especially relatively cheap ones with poor power supplies tend to all be the same. They don’t suck but that are usually lively, very detailed, have small soundstages and are usually analytical which I believe leads to something that is unappealing and boring. Like Bill, I’m a vinyl fan at my heart and soul but I just don’t have the patients and time anymore to enjoy them so I seek a digital source that best mimics it. Tube components get me allot closer! Replacing my CAL DAC wasn’t easy; I listened to a slew of players at various price points. One of my favorites under $1000 was the Jolida but that a different conversation for a different time.

Point is that the iPod is the furthest thing from any of this! Your iRiver uses an optical output so you can go to any DAC you want which is a full blown component, NOT a portable.

[Jon L]

For those that can't move around the web and find these types of reviews, here is a link I read concerning the iHP-140 and the Lavry DA10:

http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?p=1847747#post1847747

Specifically post number 105 on that page.    By the way, I just went over there and ask what components were compared.  Just keep reading later and maybe you will find out what was compared.

I'm heading out to Head-Fi SoCal meet this morning.  As you know Lavry Black, Benchmark DAC-1, and AQVox DAC will be there, and it looks like somebody is brining iRiver H120.  "If" I can find the iRiver and have time, I will try to see how iRiver/Lavry combo does compared to other digital transports, including my Empirical modded Transit.  To be frank, I have my doubts any portable optical out can compete with battery-powered Empirical Transit, but heck why not give it a shot?

[slwiser]

Sorry I touched on such a sore point with you.

Oh you see I’m not here for your opinion, the world is full of them and they aren’t worth much. If I had a nickel for everyone’s opinion…I’d have a lot of nickels.
.

[boead]

Sorry I touched on such a sore point with you.  So I will shut up on this thread and hope others will provide the opinion that can be considered fact.

Lighten up their dude, its not such a sore point.