Is the use of an iPod or iTunes played through one's middle to high-end audio equipment thoroughly frowned upon by the true audiofile? I currently have my entire music collection in iTunes (some recorded in Apple Lossless and some in MP3 VBR format). I really like the convenience of just pulling up a selction or Playlist and playing it through my home audio system. However, it appears that a lot of attention and concern is paid to the specs of individual components in the system. If I'm throwing in a PC or an iPod into the mix, am I completely negating the benefit of those other costly components; i.e. pre-amp, amp, speakers?

All that really matters is whether or not YOU are happy with it. If it sounds good to you, and you are content, don't worry about what others think.

Lossy compression audio formats such as MP3 can and will often provide a "lesser" version of the original data. How much impact there is depends on a number of factors - how much compression is applied or how good the components in the rest of the signal path are. Lossless compression should yield results that are very close to indistinguishable from the original CD.

Having said all that, the question really is what works for you. If you have good speakers and good electronics but also like the convenience of MP3's, then maybe you want to experiment with Apple Lossless or FLAC for lossless archiving. You may even want to go with lossy compression and use iTunes for casual listening but keep a CD player around for those occasions when you are doing more serious listening. Owl's_Warder summed it up well - do what you like. That's probably one of the best bits of advise in this hobby. Your ear and your tastes should dictate what you buy, not other people's opinions.

I've been using MP3 for music listening at work for ages now, and when I got an iPod for Christmas I tried hooking it to my 990 - there was a clear advantage to the original CD over the MP3 (better components are more revealing of the compression), but I've still got a cable tucked back in the equipment rack so I can hook up the iPod on occasion because it is convenient. Once I run some network cable to the equipment rack (probably next weekend, since we'll be in Chicago this weekend), I may even think about getting a device like a Squeezebox or Soundbridge to make use of that convenience. I'll still keep my CD's handy so I can toss them in when I have the opportunity to really sit down and listen to the system, but for those times when I'm doing other stuff and just want some background tunes I could see using the iPod or a media server instead.

Gonk is right--it's what works for you. I just evaluated Apple lossless against several other levels of compression (bitrates) in MP3 and I can tell the difference. I archive to disk with lossless compression.

Perhaps more important is to make sure that the iPod is connected to your system by the dock line out and not a ministereo connector plugged into the headphone out jack. iPods have very good DACs and send a pretty respectable signal to the line out--not so with the headphone out in the circuit. There are patch cords available that plug into the dock and give you the line out. There is no way to get the digital signal out (PM me if you can't find one) and according to several audiophile reviews, no real reason to want it because the DACs are quite ok.

Find a level of compression that sounds good to you and use the line out on an iPod and you will have a nifty little media server. An iPod should hold about 250 CDs compressed with ALC.

Correction from my last post: That part about the PM referred to the line out patch cord not the digital out. PM me if you can't find a vendor for a line out patch cord.

I asked this question a few months ago in another thread, and I'll ask it again here because I still feel I'm in the monirity and trying to determine if I'm doing something "wrong" by ripping to .wav format:

If your playing through a PC and have a large hard drive, why compress the audio? Hard disk space is so cheap. What's the big deal with all these different compression schemes? Is there something to be gained other than smaller file size?

The only benefit to compression is smaller file size - which was great back in the 90's when MP3 got its start, and is still handy for portable MP3 players. Ripping to .wav is basically using the hard drive as a disc transport for many, many CD's at once - in my mind, it's the most ideal way of storing audio for playback (if you've got the disc space). A lot of folks have turned to FLAC because it's lossless (and therefore should be indistinguishable from a WAV file) and takes about half the space. Of course, a WAV file should also be more universally compatible than FLAC.

AudioBear just gave me a good idea. I might grab a basic iPod dock and hook it to the stereo since that has a line out that is fed from the dock connector. Hmm....

My reply to the OP:
I ripped all my CDs in wav format. I use a Xitel USB-to-Toslink device plugged into my laptop and play the files on MusicMatch (recommended by Xitel and works with my 1st gen iPod). The other end of the Toslink cable is plugged into one of my 950's inputs.

I've done side-by-side tests playing the same track on both the laptop and the original CD in my DVD player (using optical connection) at the same time. I can easily and quickly switch back and forth between the two sources mid-track and, after many tests, can not hear difference between the two. This makes sense in my mind because all we're moving around is ones and zeros. As long as all the ones and zeros are still in the same order from both sources, the 950 sees the same data and provides the same output.

I also occasionally bring my XM SkyFi 1 in from the car and plug it into my system. The sound qulity of sat radio providers is generally considered to be poor (somewhere between FM and CD). Even so, it sounds fantastic on my home system; waaay better than in the car.

I'm with you, avlis, when you pay for CD quality there's no reason to cripple the sound quality with crappy compression. I'm planning a new home network, and I'm including a 1TB network drive in the plan, on which I intend to directly copy all of my music CDs. With my AirPort Express and iTunes, I can then run my music to and from anywhere in the house.

Just a quick note about lossless compression. John Atkinson from Stereophile did a quick test once regarding apple lossless compression. The method was take a Wave or other PCM file, compress it, and then restore it (play it back), and compare bit by bit. The result...no difference. If I can find the article I'll post it. It was by no means a definitive test but rather a quick side note.
I see no reason not to use a lossless compression and save space.