I know this is a little subjective, but how would you rank sound quality between Satellite, iPod, and CD? Still trying to decide on a Satellite install.

Brian

 

CD, Ipod then Satellite in that order.

 

I would think that the ipod is dependant on the sampling rate. if done at 160 or less... satellite might be better. true they can both be direct connections... and with satellite you don't get commercials like with regular radio. And the variety of music can be nice.
just my thoughts.

 

Last time I checked satellite is 128kbps with Sirius (think it was Sirius), and 96kbps with any of the other services, basically sending a stream comparable to mp3 quality. MP3s can go up to 320kbps. CDs are uncompressed digital audio and thus the best of the bunch. But honestly, whether you can differentiate between the two depends on how perceptive you are--it's easy to tell between 24kbps and 128kbps but something like 160kbps and 320kbps is hard for me to tell, and it really depends on the encoding more than anything. Some encoding is just crap, and I've heard 192kbps MP3s where you could hear pronounced cymbal distortion and 128kbps of the same song where you could not.

 

SACD player. CD player. Ipod. Sat.

Although not too many artists produce CDs in SACD format, SACDs are currently the highest sound quality offered in digital audio. I don't know if there's car stereos that can play SACDs yet, but I imagine if there are, they're pricey.

(Also, anything downloaded from the net will not be SACD quality - only factory produced CDs will have that high of a bitrate.)

 

Yep.