Wadia 170i and Benchmark Dac1 - anyone try it?

My question is why would people want to use an ipod doc instead of their computer as a transport?

I "guess" suggested answers are, simplicity/comfort level and kowledge.
Simplicity/comfort: Using the 170 is basically using a piece of audio gear just as we have always been accustomed too.
Knowledge: Using a PC seems like a daunting task, though I believe it is getting easier all the time. Furturemore, not everyone has their computer in close proximaty to their stereo, nor want it there.

I'm looking for anyone who's had experience with the Wadio 170i (good or bad

Before the introduction of the 170 I was intrigued by the idea of a hard drive based system. Once I read about the 170 I was sold, I liked the simplicity of it all.

Having had my 170 for many months now, which I am using with a PS Audio Dac III (w Cullen mods), I have no regrets! Furthermore, going this route caused me to purchased an iPod, as I didn't have one; I really like owning one.

IMO, if you purchased one and weren't happy with the results, I'd look at the DAC, not the Wadia/iPod. The reviews in TAS and Stereophile mirrored my results.

When I knew I was going the route of using an iPod, I researched the "best" way to store files and I quickly learned that there are many opinions on this. This led me to do a couple comparisons myself comparing AppleLossless, WAV and AIFF. In the end, I could hear no difference between them.

Having done this, I am comfortable in my choice of using Apple Lossless and saving space. If others feel there is a difference, it does not sway me.

FWIW, here are a few quotes...

"As expected, the iTransort sounded like the DAC to which it is connected. I store my music on my iPod using Apple Lossless, which provides perfect bit-for-bit accuracy to the original with about a 40% reduction in storage requirements compared wit uncompressed WAV files. In listening comparisons between the iTransport and the CDs from which the music was ripped, I thought the iTransport had a slight advantage" -- Robert Harley, TAS Issue 186

"...You're actually given 3 options in iTunes---Apple Lossless, WAV and AIFF---which preserve digital files losslessly. Any of these deliver CD-quality music." -- Steven Stone, TAS Issue 183

You are not pouring gas on a fire, there is nothing wrong with sharing your experience. That said, something doesn't seem right. (I am not doubting your results, just questioning the why.) I question this based on the many ways I tested things myself and the experience of many others.

I believe there is a lot of misinformation and wrong thinking on digital, me included, as I am certainly no expert.

An observation of mine is that I think many of us have an analog mentality of copies when thinking of digital. To clarify, think of taking a photograph and making a copy on a copying machine, then taking the new copy and making another copy, etc. In doing this we expect the quality of each successive photo to be worse.

This is the mentality carried over to digital, which I do not see as an accurate view. I read comments from some where I can tell there is disbelief or hesitation that the iPod copy can sound as good as the CD it was copied from, because it is a copy and “loss” is assumed.

A good analogy I have read to debunk this thinking is of a computer program, it is 1 and 0’s just like digitally stored music. You can copy that program as many times as you want and it will work, if there was any loss the program would fail.

Besides the 1’ and 0’s, there is clocking information passed along in the data stream, this is the information that a DAC can make a difference with, what is known as “reclocking”, not all DAC’s do this. (The DAC in question within this thread, the DAC1, does reclock.)
Again, I am no expert, so anyone more informed than I can feel free to correct and/or add to my comments.

If all I say is accurate, there is no reason the iPod should sound worse than a transport. It is my opinion it is about the DAC one uses.

As for Apple Lossless, many, including myself in the past, viewed this as a compressed format that losses data. This is not the case, if it has been explained to me correctly, hence why those in the know classify it with WAV, AIFF, etc. Here is how it was explained to me. If you have a data string of ‘00000’ (5 zeros), instead of storing all 5 zeros, it would be stored as ‘50’. In doing so, the Apple Lossless file can be converted back to the original ‘00000’, whereby nothing is “lost”.
One more time I’ll add the disclaimer of stating I am not an expert on this.

Fascinating since the Wadia is playing the digital copy of the CD.

This is exactly the thinking/mentality I was alluding to above.