Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mercury-hg
1) brandon, of all people on the board, is claiming that sound quality isn't paramount? what the hell is going on here? anyway, i listen to my iRiver H10 (and once listened to my Karma (RIP)) at work, in a quite environment, for hours a day. the HP filter on the output of the headphone amp on the iPod creates a noticable degredation in bass response for the sake of battery life. not to mention its sound quality is generally inferior. the extremely customizable equalizer on the Karma is very effective for accounting for environmental and headphone variations.
2) for what it offers, the iPod is the most expensive player on the market packaged with the fewest accessories.
3) i found the interface of the Karma to be MORE intuitive/convenient than the iPod, and the iRiver on par with the iPod
4) life is easier with 192 VBR mp3s and without iTunes.
|
Yes, yes, strange as it may sound, I'm not fussing about sound quality on this note. Again, maybe there are some differences between the two players can be revealed when used in a "perfect" environment. But, truth be told, this simply is not how a portable music player will be used. Who really listens to an iPod or Karma or whatever as a home audio component? I stand by my statement above. Take an iPod and a Karma out into the world (like it will be used) and I promise you that you won't hear any difference. When competing against city noise, navigating around people, bus/train noise, the differences just aren't readily apparent. iPods and such are used most frequently as something to listen to when going somewhere or doing something else. There is just too much other stuff going on around us in the world do consciously notice the sound quality or lack thereof of a digital audio player. And that my friends, is why Brandon, the undying audiophile/perfectionist, is not concerned with the sound quality of his digital audio player.