Good points all. Our discussion was a little muddy, so we could use some clarification. I meant to say, lossless or a better encoding version like Ogg. The weird thing is I was actually thinking of flac not Ogg, because They Might Be Giants sell their albums as MP3s or flacs if you want better quality.
I didn't realise iPod couldn't play Ogg. Obviously I've never tried or I'd know that. Thanks for the info.
That's a great explanation of lossless vs. lossy. I think our point was that the iPod just doesn't sounds as good as some other players.
Thanks for listening!!
In your 2/28/06 discussion on the buzz out loud podcast on the new hifi product from apple, you guys talked about how higher end speakers could reveal the limitations of ipod?s sound quality?
Point 1 - While I think ipod is capable of really great sound quality, the limitation comes from lossy compression codecs, not ipod - which you did point out. However, you sited ogg as a ?lossless? format ? it is also lossy, like an mp3 or aac (although some claim that the results are better) and also, ipod?s do not currently play ogg files (would be really nice if they did). Uncompressed formats like WAV, AIFF or even lossless compression formats like Apple Lossless will yield sound quality on par with cds from the direct output of an ipod (from the dock connector, not the headphone output), and you could still hold a plenty of WAV or even more Apple Lossless files on a 60gb ipod if you are that critical about sound quality.
Point 2 ? most lossy codec?s use psycho-acoustic based algorithms to determine audio data that is ?masked? or not perceived as being heard by the listener, and therefore only include the data that is perceived as being heard by a human listener to reduce the size of an audio file. Sometimes limitations of these algorithms are revealed as artifacts in the audio - very commonly, phasing among the higher frequencies (that high end swishing sound you sometimes hear in a poorly encoded compressed audio file). That said, compressed audio that we typically listen to uses sample rates of 44.1khz (just like cds) and can cover the audible frequency range (which is considered 20hz to 20khz ? sample rates of 44.1khz can produce frequencies up to 22.05khz) and also have a dynamic range close to that of cds. Conclusion: compressed audio files can definitely benefit from high end audio amplification and speakers.
Point 3 ? I completely agree with you guys on the uselessness of apple?s new hifi. Anyone that would care enough about audio quality to drop 350 on a powered ipod speaker will likely have already integrated their ipod with their much higher end home system.
Keep up the great podcast. I listen almost everyday. Nice to see Veronica gradually coming out of her shell in Molly?s absence. By the way, what was with Molly?s raspy voice today? very sexy!

Chowhound
Comic Vine
GameFAQs
GameSpot
Giant Bomb
TechRepublic