View Full Version : BitPerfect for iTunes on OSX
One of the main issues repeatedly voiced over the use of iTunes has been the inability of the software to change sample rates and bit depth on the fly.
So while iTunes will play, for example, 24/96 files you need to manually change midi settings every time which can be a pain.
Player add-ons such as Amarra get round the issue but as considerable cost, but now there is a solution which seems to work extremely well and only costs £2.99.
It sits in the background so you use the iTunes software as usual.
It also 'hogs' the output feed preventing other applications using you commuter output.
Well worth a look:
http://bitperfectsound.blogspot.com/
sburrell
25-08-2011, 23:15
Looks interesting. According to the most recent reviews on the Mac App Store, this app isn't compatible with the Airport Express. Another reviewer claims a huge increase in distortion, and asks whether this app simply boosts the volume.
Anyone here with a decent system willing to take the plunge and offer a review?
Am I the only person on Earth being shocked about the fact that Apple lets third party companies charge $$ (be it £2.99 or whatever) for an essential (core) digital reproduction feature... ? :scratch:
When I think of the price these computers cost, I can't help going :steam:
Anyway... thanks for the info.
@Simon: None of my acquaintances has complained about "increase of distortion" while using it, btw.
dave2010
26-08-2011, 08:13
Am I the only person on Earth being shocked about the fact that Apple lets third party companies charge $$ (be it £2.99 or whatever) for an essential (core) digital reproduction feature... ? :scratch:
When I think of the price these computers cost, I can't help going :steam:
Not sure, maybe it really does depend on price. How much is the Bit Perfect app? I can't find out right now as currently using an iPad.
I guess your issue is that Apple "should" be providing software with this functionality already. Maybe, but some other well known companies have managed to sell their systems with software which is incomplete, difficult to use, and sometimes totally rubbish, and then competition in the software arena has gradually brought something close to sane solutions to be made available. I'll draw a veil over how some companies (possibly the same one/s) have tried to kill off competiton when it suited them.
(Anyone remember Word Perfect?)
Some people think that business is like war - only losers play fair!
I guess your issue is that Apple "should" be providing software with this functionality already.
This is exactly my point, Dave. This should be a Quicktime core feature. ;)
That looks like a lot of juice for a little money.
Will buy this and test against Fidelia, thanks for the heads up.
I have it on my Macbook running Lion OS and it sounds excellent to me, its as good as Pure Music, won't play Flac files though without Fluke:(
sburrell
26-08-2011, 16:41
This is exactly my point, Dave. This should be a Quicktime core feature. ;)
Really? Why? Personally I don't think you can justify that statement, but I'm open-minded and curious to hear your response. :)
EDIT: Actually, it hasn't been specified _which_ feature you're referring to. The "hog-mode"? The ability to automatically change Audio MIDI to the bit-depth etc of the current track? I think the former would be unjustifiable, though nice; the latter - I can think of good reasons why this isn't included with iTunes and QuickTime as default, which, given Apple's ethos of simplicity, I don't think the auto-change facility could be justified either.
Quicktime should be able to change the bit depth and sampling frequency depending on the track. That's what everybody does on other OS's.
But, as we believe in the "Ethos of simplicity" you have to pay a tribute of £2.99 on the Altar of iTunes if you want to play music of different sampling frequencies without exiting your application and manually modifying the Quicktime parameters... ;)
sburrell
26-08-2011, 17:13
When you say "other OSes", you presumably mean Windows 7 and Linux. I'd appreciate a link in support of your claim, as I've got Windows 7 and when I was tweaking it for optimum sound I don't recall it having the ability to switch output bit-depth and sampling frequency on the fly. Linux - well, it's so fragmented that I'm sure there's at least one flavour that does it.
EDIT: btw I don't believe in the ethos of simplicity, I believe in the value of a stress-free life with my computer, something that OS X has provided for me since 2004 - I still get that sick feeling inside when I realise I'm going to have to interact with a Windows-based PC *shudder* And I'm not exaggerating.
Simon, I agree that Mac is simple, no worry here. But this feature has been broken for years. It may not be a big deal to many, but I find it a pity. :)
On Win7, you need not change the bit depth etc, simply because it is software controlled by the using application, afaik.
Chippy_boy
26-08-2011, 17:26
Well, interesting timing if nothing else!
Having pondered for a while on whether to fork out £100 for Channel D Pure Music, yesterday I took the plunge and bought the software. And then 1 hour ago, I find this for £2.99. Brilliant.
The software would appear to work fine too. One of my DACs (one that displays the input frequency) clearly shows 44.1 or 96KHz as I switch source material. And the HDCD light comes on with appropriate material too. And my only DTS CD rip plays music not noise. So for CD's at least, it definitely is outputting 16/44.1 bit perfect.
But, for some unfathomable reason, this software just does not seem to sound as good as Channel D's Pure Music, especially with 24/96 material Whether that's psychological - or wishful thinking! - I just don't know. But for whatever reason, it doesn't seem to have the same sense of space and openness. Everything seems just a bit more muddled and veiled.
I have Channel D outputting 24/44.1 or 24/88.2 - can't decide which I prefer, or if there's a difference, but I *think* the 88.2 sounds better. Maybe the 24 bit output from Channel D is what's making it sound better than the £2.99 software, but again, I can't see how.
Maybe the "BitPerfect" software is mangling the 24/96 material? Again, I don't see why it should be.
But for some reason, it just isn't floating my boat. Don't get me wrong, I wish that it would. The itunes integration is better than that of Pure Music. It's a smaller footprint piece of software, and it allows better control of itunes. The playback position is kindof messed up with Pure Music. And there's the small matter of it being 1/33rd of the price!
sburrell
26-08-2011, 17:29
But this feature has been broken for years.
I'm still not sure this is a "feature". What happens when you have more than one source playing at the same time? For example, a game in windowed mode and the TV in another? Which one takes precedence? Is this controlled manually or automatically?
Ok, so it's not available for QuickTime or iTunes by default, but at least the feature is available in the API, otherwise a 3rd-party programmer wouldn't be able to implement it in a MAS-approved app.
My Mac's in bits just now, but when it's back up and running I'll have to test your hypothesis that the Win7 native audio software changes the output bit-depth and sampling frequency on the fly. However, you'll have to state which software you're referring to.
If it does turn out that Win7 does this in native sound playback software (eg. WMP) then I'd suggest the AoS digital-audiophiles collaborate and send a feature request in for a future Lion update, pointing out that the competition does it already :)
sburrell
26-08-2011, 17:31
Chippy Boy: does the £2.99 app still offer a worthwhile improvement to the default iTunes playback?
Chippy_boy
26-08-2011, 20:34
Chippy Boy: does the £2.99 app still offer a worthwhile improvement to the default iTunes playback?
I haven't done exhaustive tests but overall I would say not. Definitely not if you are prepared to manually change your output settings in Audio Midi. But even if you leave it at 24/96 and let OSX do the downsampling to 16/44, I can't say that sounds any worse than with the BitPerfect software.
To be honest though, suggest for £3, try it for yourself.
ITunes should switch on the fly and Apple should make it a standard feature.
But they don't, and this looks like the cheapest stable option that works with Lion.
Someone mentioned AE compatibility, but that device is fixed at 16/44.1 IIRC.
You also need to disable it when using iTunes Radio as it doesn't seem to like radio streaming.
Other than radio, I've had no issues with it running on both Macbook Pro and iMac into a Dacmagic or Audiosmile DEQ2496.
Here is my take.
I have done some extensive listening tonight of iTunes, BitPerfect, PM
System
MacBook
Latest iTunes 64bit/Lion OSX.
Ibasso D1 dac/headphone amp/JK modified HiFace
AKG 701 phones
Standard Redbook cd ripped to AIFF, no upsampling shit.
1:iTunes-good but a bit harsh,fatiguing,sibilant, ok for background listening.
2:BitPerfect- Better, not so harsh, easier on the ear.
3:PM - Better again, similar to BitPerfect but with more impact to instruments.
All the differences noted are quite small but for long term listening PM wins for me, for anyone on a tight budget BP is a no brainer.
I have tried the trial version of Fidelia and that is very good .
Can't resist the temptation, got the BitPerfect early this morning.
I have 3 players on the Mac at this mo; BitPerfect, Pure Music & Audirvana.
Well my impression is that they rather sound quite similar to each other and at the end of the day it will all boil down to personal preference on their respective 'presentation'.
Pure Music - sounds the sweetest (with a tinge of dryness) and puts a wee bit more emphasis on instruments.
BitPerfect - is like a diet version of Pure Music, with better sense of air/space and 3D rendition albeit within a smaller soundstage. It plays Streaming Audio!
Audirvana - got both the characteristics of BP & PM, and plays with better Timing too. The most analog sounding among em.
Apparently Audirvana will still be my player of choice, but the new USD5 player is a keeper. Streamed music has never sounded this good...
Ahhh..life is beautiful.
Chippy_boy
27-08-2011, 06:48
Here is my take.
I have done some extensive listening tonight of iTunes, BitPerfect, PM
System
MacBook
Latest iTunes 64bit/Lion OSX.
Ibasso D1 dac/headphone amp/JK modified HiFace
AKG 701 phones
Standard Redbook cd ripped to AIFF, no upsampling shit.
1:iTunes-good but a bit harsh,fatiguing,sibilant, ok for background listening.
2:BitPerfect- Better, not so harsh, easier on the ear.
3:PM - Better again, similar to BitPerfect but with more impact to instruments.
All the differences noted are quite small but for long term listening PM wins for me, for anyone on a tight budget BP is a no brainer.
I have tried the trial version of Fidelia and that is very good .
Did you try any 24/96 material? That was the bit that left me sound underwhelmed. My few 24/96 albums sound utterly tremendous through PM but through BitPerfect, they sounded dull and muddled.
Did you try any 24/96 material
The only 24/96 material I have is in Flac format and BP/Fluke will not do hi rez :(
sq225917
27-08-2011, 10:31
Bit perfect does absolutely nothing to the audio chain whatsoever on the mac, all it does is look at the word length before each track is played and adjust the settings in audio midi accordingly. it's a subroutine that piggybacks the 'next track' API call in itunes.
Ask the guy who wrote it, it cannot make any difference to the quality of playback vs the correctly, manually selected sample rate and word length.
I just downloaded this. I'm not convinced by the idea of software music players. I use iTunes and an airport express to my stereo, or my grado headphones plugged into an iMic, which is just a little USB audio device.
So, for only 2.99 I thought I'd give it a go. However, to compare I obviously need to switch back to iTunes, or disable bitperfect, but bitperfect seems to own the imic device so I can't get iTunes to route through it. Very odd.
It sounded good, but I couldn't compare so.......any thoughts?
Chippy_boy
27-08-2011, 16:35
The only 24/96 material I have is in Flac format and BP/Fluke will not do hi rez :(
I've given up with flac to be honest. Every time I buy a new HD album, I spend 2 minutes to convert it to apple lossless and then itunes can play it. Its the most straightforward and painless way for me.
agentsim
27-08-2011, 21:24
Bit perfect does absolutely nothing to the audio chain whatsoever on the mac, all it does is look at the word length before each track is played and adjust the settings in audio midi accordingly. it's a subroutine that piggybacks the 'next track' API call in itunes.
Ask the guy who wrote it, it cannot make any difference to the quality of playback vs the correctly, manually selected sample rate and word length.
As the guy who wrote it, I'd object to that.
The first things to be done when making an audiophile music player are sample rate switching and exclusive mode. After those basic things come memory play, optimizations for gapless playback and whatever secret sauce each player uses.
I expect, if you tested BitPerfect against iTunes with the sample rate set correctly you would still find BitPerfect to have superior sound quality.
Hi Tim,
Welcome to AoS :)
Could you do me a favour please and pop into the Welcome area and introduce yourself to our community, by telling us what system you use and what music you like?
This procedure is required by all new members joining our community - cheers! :cool:
Marco.
sq225917
27-08-2011, 22:42
As the guy who wrote it, I'd object to that.
The first things to be done when making an audiophile music player are sample rate switching and exclusive mode. After those basic things come memory play, optimizations for gapless playback and whatever secret sauce each player uses.
I expect, if you tested BitPerfect against iTunes with the sample rate set correctly you would still find BitPerfect to have superior sound quality.
I stand corrected, I assumed it just piggyback PAI calls from itunes and locked out coreaudio.
I have tried them back to back, and I didn't find it sounded any better than itunes. Maybe it makes no difference with my dac, it seems pretty unaffected by such things, Decibel, Audiovarna, Amarra etc.
I'm off to Cambridge on Tuesday to see a mate who work at ARM in their RF lab, I used to work with him at another chip design house on the science park. He's an audiophile I'll have him have a look at the USB output and see what the difference is between BP and vanilla Itunes. He has a huge lab full of MHZ scopes and network analysers, it'll take no time at all. If there's a difference John will find it, that's his job.
I expect, if you tested BitPerfect against iTunes with the sample rate set correctly you would still find BitPerfect to have superior sound quality.
No!
Stop it, stop it, stop it, I'm not listening, lalalalalla ;)
Seriously, well done that app is just what the doctor ordered for iTunes (the auto switching etc).
One question though if I may.
I don't really get why ram playback should give better sound.
I can understand if we were comparing with real time playback from disc, but the stream is already buffered into memory so what benefit does loading the whole track (or multiples) bring?
Vincent Kars
28-08-2011, 18:12
All most all I/O in a computer is buffered.
Audio is no exception to this rule.
The concept behind memory playback is that any activity going on inside a PC generates some electrical noise, be it RFI, EMI, ripples on the power rails.
All this might affect sound quality.
Load a track in memory first and you won’t have movements of the head of the HD (pulse width modulation).
Kill as much system processes as possible and they can’t kick in.
Etc, etc.
A couple of these concepts are put in writing by Damien Plisson, (Audirvana)
http://www.amr-audio.co.uk/large_image/MAC%20OSX%20audio%20players%20&%20Integer%20Mode.pdf
Likewise cMP2 in the PC world: http://www.cicsmemoryplayer.com/
All most all I/O in a computer is buffered.
Audio is no exception to this rule.
The concept behind memory playback is that any activity going on inside a PC generates some electrical noise, be it RFI, EMI, ripples on the power rails.
All this might affect sound quality.
Load a track in memory first and you won’t have movements of the head of the HD (pulse width modulation).
Kill as much system processes as possible and they can’t kick in.
Etc, etc.
A couple of these concepts are put in writing by Damien Plisson, (Audirvana)
http://www.amr-audio.co.uk/large_image/MAC%20OSX%20audio%20players%20&%20Integer%20Mode.pdf
Likewise cMP2 in the PC world: http://www.cicsmemoryplayer.com/
Many thanks for the links.
I'm familiar with the idea that different parts of a circuit sharing a PSU can have some mutual effect, e.g. the transport, control, dacs and analogue sections of an integrated CD player.
However with a modern powerful PC driving an entirely separate dac that's a leap too far for me. I shan't worry about it and ensure my buffer stays at minimum.
dave2010
05-09-2011, 07:23
The claim seems to be that if I install BitPerfect on my iMac, then the sound (through iTunes) will be better. It's cheap enough, but should I invest in something which will perhaps make no difference?
At present I'm not too worried about bit rate changes, which seems to be a matter of concern for some others round here.
One feature which might attract me is the ability to play Flac files directly without having to convert them, though there are other ways to do this - I've just not got round to exploring them.
If the claims are right, then this could make listening via iTunes (e.g. using headphones plugged directly into my iMac) slightly more pleasant. I use this mode more often if I'm working, or if it's the middle of the night. However I presume it'll have no effect on music streamed to my Squeezebox and hence out through Beresford Caiman ->(currently) Bantam Gold etc.
I might give it a go - just to test. Can it be disabled if I don't like it? One useful feature might be to be able to turn it on/off easily, otherwise comparisons will be difficult.
Years back I tried a software system - the MAD mp3 codec, which was claimed to sound better than other systems. Not very scientific testing, but I did feel that that mp3 codec made music sound more musical, though I have been told that most mp3 codecs are now up to that standard, and/or that many devices now include the code. (a pointer to the details - http://www.mars.org/home/rob/proj/mpeg/mad-plugin/). I'm not suggesting that mp3 is any good - I know others round here don't like it - but I did feel that the codec made it sound better.
Perhaps this BitPerfect software will also make some slight improvements with uncompressed music files. Perhaps!
It's 2.99 Dave. Just do it.
dave2010
05-09-2011, 08:02
It's 2.99 Dave. Just do it.Maybe.
In the meantime I've found this possibly useful page - http://www.head-fi.org/t/539740/mac-os-x-music-players-alternatives-to-itunes and also installed SongBird to see if I can hear any difference with that.
Actually just did - download BitPerfect that is. I need to check this carefully, but my first impression is that this makes a big difference - mostly an improvement. Quite why not sure. Some voices sound very different, and slight nuances in the voice now come out and hit me, though some glitch problems as I work on the machine are obvious, so doesn't seem to solve everything. I still don't know if I can switch this on/off to compare though.
sburrell
05-09-2011, 08:09
lol, thanks for the thoroughly illuminating link to Apple's homepage. :lol: Isn't it a bit early in the day for proselytising? ;)
What did you intend to link to?
Hehe.
EDIT: You too webby, with your subtle advert for Nike… You's all getting back-handers for this? I think we should be told!
dave2010
05-09-2011, 08:17
Simon
Thanks/Ooops! Hopefully the link is fixed now.
Re BitPerfect one thing strikes me, unless I've done something wrong, which is that trying to work on my machine while listening now makes any glitches as I move windows around much worse. There can be gaps of perhaps up to a second.
I do have the impression that the sound is, on the whole, improved - but the glitch problem needs to be fixed.
Simon
Thanks/Ooops! Hopefully the link is fixed now.
Re BitPerfect one thing strikes me, unless I've done something wrong, which is that trying to work on my machine while listening now makes any glitches as I move windows around much worse. There can be gaps of perhaps up to a second.
I do have the impression that the sound is, on the whole, improved - but the glitch problem needs to be fixed.
Tinker with the settings. Maybe try increasing the amount of memory it uses.
lol, thanks for the thoroughly illuminating link to Apple's homepage. :lol: Isn't it a bit early in the day for proselytising? ;)
What did you intend to link to?
Hehe.
EDIT: You too webby, with your subtle advert for Nike… You's all getting back-handers for this? I think we should be told!
No backhanders sadly. I could do with the money now I'm unemployed again. Every little helps you know! ;)
sburrell
05-09-2011, 08:36
No backhanders sadly. I could do with the money now I'm unemployed again. Every little helps you know! ;)
This is off topic, and I apologise, but:
Re-e-eally? (in the voice of Jim Carrey in Pet Detective). Let's see how little you're prepared to work for! I've just discovered that QuidCo (http://www.quidco.com/) have an iPhone app that allows you to collect small sums for simply walking into shops! Apparently 25p or 50p at a time, depending on the store. The app uses the built-in GPS to confirm your location and adds the sum to your QuidCo account.
EDIT: From the QuidCo website - "We retain up to the first £5 from your cashback earnings each year". BOOOO!
If you don't have an iPhone, then try taking advantage of some of the offers on TopCashback (http://www.topcashback.co.uk/home). I currently have about £80 waiting to come to me around Christmas, all for doing nowt. A regular one you can do is get £3 a week just for posting valid ads on Vivastreet (http://www.vivastreet.co.uk/).
FWIW, I've done everything I'm recommending to you now except the QuidCo one, but I'm in the process of setting it up as I type! See edit above.
HTH.
Dave, you have a PM, sorry for the delay.
dave2010
07-09-2011, 06:38
Thanks Lee. You have several (duplicates by mistake!) in return.
I'm discovering some problems with this software, and have notified Tim (developer). I believe he's working on them, and hope that most of the problems can be overcome in time.
Maybe.
In the meantime I've found this possibly useful page - http://www.head-fi.org/t/539740/mac-os-x-music-players-alternatives-to-itunes and also installed SongBird to see if I can hear any difference with that.
Actually just did - download BitPerfect that is. I need to check this carefully, but my first impression is that this makes a big difference - mostly an improvement. Quite why not sure. Some voices sound very different, and slight nuances in the voice now come out and hit me, though some glitch problems as I work on the machine are obvious, so doesn't seem to solve everything. I still don't know if I can switch this on/off to compare though.
I've downloaded Pure Music..so am on a 15 day trial. Streaming it from a G5 iMac to a variety of airport expresses. Was just about to do the comparison with iTunes, and came across this..
Obviously interested in doing a comparison with BitPerfect, but can't seem to find where to download it. I'm not running Snow Lepoard, so maybe I can't. I certainly can't access the App Store..
Or can I?
cheers
steve
Steve
You need OSX 10.6 Snow Leopard or later and 64 bit processor.
http://bitperfectsound.blogspot.com/
Steve
You need OSX 10.6 Snow Leopard or later and 64 bit processor.
http://bitperfectsound.blogspot.com/
Bugger
thought as much
Steve
You need OSX 10.6 Snow Leopard or later and 64 bit processor.
http://bitperfectsound.blogspot.com/
Does that mean it wouldn't work via airport express then?
I'd need to output striaght from computer to DAC?
dave2010
09-09-2011, 14:12
I've downloaded Pure Music..so am on a 15 day trial. Streaming it from a G5 iMac to a variety of airport expresses. Was just about to do the comparison with iTunes, and came across this..
Obviously interested in doing a comparison with BitPerfect, but can't seem to find where to download it. I'm not running Snow Lepoard, so maybe I can't. I certainly can't access the App Store..
Or can I?
cheers
steve
I'll be interested to know how you find Pure Music. I'd say hold off from BitPerfect for a little while. I discovered some problems with it which Tim (developer) is looking into.
dave2010
09-09-2011, 14:18
Does that mean it wouldn't work via airport express then?
I'd need to output striaght from computer to DAC?
Wouldn't your DAC simply see your computer.through the Airport Ezpress? So if you have a 64 bit machine running Lion or Snow Leopard it'd see that. In that case what you want to happen should be OK.
Personally not sure as I don't have that kit, but it seems likely to me.
Hi Dave
Just been testing Pure Music with a few favoured tracks.
Over bog standard iTunes, I really noticed the difference (improvements) with Goldfrapps A&E.
Startlingly so.
I think I may well pull the trigger on this, providing I can download it onto this current iMac and then load it onto a new machine when that comes along (I'm thinking this old one is on its last legs really) without extra cost. I'll check it out.
The other major advantage for me is that I'm running two Airport expresses and I notice the improvements in both systems.
For a little more outlay, I can add a third AE into a system that I also use in the dining room. So..major upgrade in 3 systems.
In addition it works using Remote on the ipod touch...so I can access my complete library in all three systems.
]So, whilst its quite expensive..I think fairly good value...especially as I cannot play BitPerfect on this old G5.
Wouldn't your DAC simply see your computer.through the Airport Ezpress? So if you have a 64 bit machine running Lion or Snow Leopard it'd see that. In that case what you want to happen should be OK.
Personally not sure as I don't have that kit, but it seems likely to me.
No..the airport express takes a wireless signal and then optically feeds my Lyngdorf 2200 amp with built in DAC. I think the airport is a dac in its own right, and only feeds the signal at 16/44.1 - so you loose any benefits of higher rates.
It still sounds good, and will do until I find a way of cost effectively streaming higher rates to the main system.
I have BitPerfect and PM on my machine, I prefer PM, BP is fine for the money though.
I was an early PM adopter so got it at an introductory price of about £50 I think.
It does seem to be getting a bit expensive now imho.
I have BitPerfect and PM on my machine, I prefer PM, BP is fine for the money though.
I was an early PM adopter so got it at an introductory price of about £50 I think.
It does seem to be getting a bit expensive now imho.
Its £87 now Andy and after playing around all weekend, I'm not sure its really that expensive really.
In the context of what I've spent previously on cables, mains stuff etc, its peanuts really.
I'm going to buy the code to make it permanent when the demo period ends.
I was doing a direct comparison of tracks using my Ikemi as a transport into the Lyngdorf and then Pure Music through Airport Express. Little in it, although my wife commented that she preferred the CD as it sounded more real.
dave2010
02-10-2011, 19:35
I suspect that I may never had have had BitPerfect working. Apparently it has to work with SoundFlower - not sure if that gets installed during the initial setup. Anyway, I sure have SoundFlower now, but I don't get any output either on my iMacs speakers or through the headphone socket. Maybe it wasn't intended to run that way, but I thought it would.
I have configured SoundFlower to take output from iTunes, but I still get no output. I've also tried to configure things to force the output.
Seems rather unsatisfactory to me. I'd be glad to know if others succeeded more easily.
It may, of course, be excellent software, but with operating instructions written in Klingon, and only available on Planet Zod, in which case phrases about serving tea from chocolate teapots spring to mind.
I thought it was going to be pretty much plug and play, but clearly I was misguided.
I suspect that I may never had have had BitPerfect working. Apparently it has to work with SoundFlower - not sure if that gets installed during the initial setup. Anyway, I sure have SoundFlower now, but I don't get any output either on my iMacs speakers or through the headphone socket. Maybe it wasn't intended to run that way, but I thought it would.
I have configured SoundFlower to take output from iTunes, but I still get no output. I've also tried to configure things to force the output.
Seems rather unsatisfactory to me. I'd be glad to know if others succeeded more easily.
It may, of course, be excellent software, but with operating instructions written in Klingon, and only available on Planet Zod, in which case phrases about serving tea from chocolate teapots spring to mind.
I thought it was going to be pretty much plug and play, but clearly I was misguided.
BitPerfect had an update recently. I've just tried it for the first time since then, and other than having to restart iTunes, it works ok, and indeed has fixed the issue I had with it not releasing the output device. I can now simply switch between itunes output or BitPerfect output by disabling BitPerfect (and restarting the track).
I don't know about Soundflower, and, as far as I can tell, do not have it installed on my imac. I do however have Soundsource, which is an audio output selector menu bar thingy, which may use Soundflower code I guess.
I'm not using a DAC at the moment. This test was made using headphones connected to the imac via my iMic USB device. It's just a little audio i/o unit.
As for sound quality goes, as yet, I cant really tell the difference between iTunes o/p and BitPerfect o/p!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.