PDA

View Full Version : Audiophile output on Mac OSX



Filterlab
31-03-2008, 21:18
Discussions on Mac OS X audio go here.

(Previous post removed).

sastusbulbas
02-04-2008, 18:13
:goodthread:

Filterlab
02-04-2008, 19:14
Cheers.

sastusbulbas
02-04-2008, 19:19
Hi Rob,

What are the specifications and OP of your iMac?

Filterlab
02-04-2008, 19:29
Current Mac is: 2011 Mac mini, 2.7GHz i7, 16Gb RAM, 500Gb internal (512Gb SSD coming shortly). OS X 10.8.3.

Marco
02-04-2008, 20:29
I think it's an excellent thread, too - if only I understood what it was about... :lol:

Nice pictures, though!

Marco.

Filterlab
02-04-2008, 21:22
It's the equivalent of trying out different valves, fiddling until the sound is just so... ;)

sastusbulbas
03-04-2008, 20:57
Hello Rob,

Have you ripped standard CD as WAV at 16bit 48khz and compared this with AIFF at 16bit 48khz?

Steve

Nick
04-04-2008, 09:07
Great post Rob, very useful and well laid out.

Cheers Nick

Alex D
04-04-2008, 10:36
Hi, I'm using a Beresford Dac with a MacBook, and when I open the Audio Midi Setup I don't have any options to tinker with in the audio output... am I doing something wrong? Is that an option for MB Pros?

Filterlab
04-04-2008, 11:54
Hello Rob,

Have you ripped standard CD as WAV at 16bit 48khz and compared this with AIFF at 16bit 48khz?

Steve

No.


Hi, I'm using a Beresford Dac with a MacBook, and when I open the Audio Midi Setup I don't have any options to tinker with in the audio output... am I doing something wrong? Is that an option for MB Pros?

Something's wrong.

SteveW
05-04-2008, 14:11
Hi Rob..

Your post prompted me to sign on !!!
Am just starting to play around with i-tunes library. I suspect like many others, also regretting not ripping my i-tunes libary to a much higher rate. vast majority at 128kbps with AAC. Last few weeks switched to Apple lossless...but am curious to play around, so will try AIFF.
sadly ( well, not really as I could finally ditch our last pc in the house) I have inherited my sons old G4 Powerbook, which lacks optical out. Tried using an old Edirol UA5 via usb...but poor results, so am basically just using the headphone out for the time being.

strange set up though...cable (mini jack to phono) runs from mac through the floor to a second hi-fi in recently refurbished basement, where a small system also doubles up as a home theatre.
We have a spare Imac upstairs...but its not where the hi-fi lives.
Anyway...thanks again for the set-up info.

Steve

Filterlab
05-04-2008, 14:32
Glad the thread helps you out mate.

SteveW
05-04-2008, 14:54
cheers Rob..
Now, getting a toslink onto this old machine is a bloody good idea...thanks. Might even make the Edirol DAC work OK.

...i have a cunning plan, almost.
Whilst setting up the basement, before the plasterboard and plaster went up, I got a 25 meter run of network cable..no idea what to do with it, but had an idea that by plumbing it behind the hi-fi it might get used in the future. I demo'd the Linn DS, mightily impressed...but I'm not forking out that kind of dosh thanks.
And they work on PC not Macs :doh:
Next on the shopping list will be an ipod touch...and then able to utilise this

http://www.alloysoft.com

Even with the current Heath Robinson set up, I spent a pleasant half hour today listening to Goldfrapps new album playing from the hard Drive (just about to rip to AIFF as an experiment !)

Steve

Alex D
05-04-2008, 17:45
Depends on what OS you're running. These are the set-up procedures for Leopard, however the Core Audio settings haven't changed much from Tiger to Leopard.

What digital output are you using?

Hi, I'm using Leopard and I'm using the digital audio out (mini toslink) that comes with the MacBook (regular, white one, not the Pro). I've opened the Audio Midi utility and recognize everything you show in your pictures... except mine doesn't show any options for the audio out!

Cheers,
Alex

Filterlab
06-04-2008, 09:09
Alex, can you do a screen grab of your Audio MIDI Set-up for me and either post it on here of email it to me, I'll have a look and see if there's something not set-up quite right. :)

snapper
06-04-2008, 09:24
When you open Midi set up it probably looks like this

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y198/davhar/n.jpg


click on properties for and choose built in output,then it changes to this


http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y198/davhar/m.jpg


Does this solve your problem?

This is how it looks on my MacBook (non pro)

snapper
06-04-2008, 09:26
Excellent tutorial BTW Rob.

Been using this for a year or so now.

Alex D
06-04-2008, 09:29
Hi, thanks for everything... I finally found out how to change the options... I feel like a right t##t. Hehehe! I'll try the differences now... Ta!

snapper
06-04-2008, 09:59
Hope it works for you Alex.

Let us know.

Filterlab
06-04-2008, 10:59
Good luck Alex.

Alex D
06-04-2008, 14:18
I've been a MacAddict for the last 15 years! However it has been the last generation of Macs that has pushed me towards computer audio, just because of its conveniences and, now, its audiophile possibilities. I'll keep ye all posted...

tr@nz
14-04-2008, 00:04
Hi Rob,

Thanks for starting this thread and the info. I have been spending many late nights researching and experimenting to ultimately reach the goal of better sounding music through a pc/mac music server versus a cd player. There are so many options, it is daunting.

Currently I have a Mac Mini, a Benchmark DAC1 (non-USB), a Squeezbox and a Native Instruments Kore (v1) unit to play with. I am using a Denon multi-player as a benchmark to all the various music server options. McIntosh pre and tubes are powering the speakers.

OS Type

Mac or PC is purely a personal choice on which OS you like better. I went for the Mac Mini as it was such a small, quiet, hide-behind-the-tv unit that will start playing music from sleep mode faster than you can put a cd in the cd player. And it can be accessed through a remote control (front row, Mac remote, Ipaq, iPhone etc.)

iTunes/CoreAudio Setting

For iTunes /Core Audio the 24 bit setting is a given and has been confirmed by many sources to give better results, however, after all the research I can still not get a definitive answer on whether upsampling up to 192Khz is better sounding. And which setting is the best sounding? Some say you need to be at multiples of 44.1, others (Benchmark Media) sample everything to 110Khz as they found that to give the optimal performance. Others say upsampling just adds more noise into the path and should not be done. Confusing!

Media Format

I have currently been ripping CDs to ALAC (Apple Lossless) as it seems easy to use, and from many different sources I read it is bit for bit the same as AIFF or WAV. It is just packed, analogous to a Zip file.

Of course there are many schools of thought, and I would love to hear a definitive answer.

Connection Type

To add more variables into the mix is the question of what connection to use which will result in the best sound; LAN, WLAN, optical fiber, optical glass, coax, USB, USB2, Firewire!?

Many threads will discount toslink/optical and WLAN for introducing too much jitter. Toslink/Optical is also maxed out at 24/96. USB is maxed out at 24/96. And the Mac does not have Coax. That leaves LAN, USB2 and Firewire from the MAC and Coax through from an external DAC.

The permutations are ear-numbing.

At this point I am thinking of getting the Apogee Mini-Dac firewire, so that I can set the iTunes/Core Audio to upsample to 24bit/192Khz, and return the Benchmark DAC1, retire the Kore unit (currently used to try the USB2 connection from the MacMini), and use the Squeezebox (used to test the WLAN, LAN connections from the MacMini) purely for internet radio.

Another option is to use the Apogee as the firewire interface at 24/192 and send coax to the Benchmark for D/A. The only issue I see from a theoretical standpoint is that a 16/44.1 recorded cd is upconverted by Apple's src to 24/192 to then be downconverted to 24/110 by the Benchmark.

What are the best options to obtain the best sound setup? What are the best DAC solutions out there, from money no object to slightly more affordable? Please share blind listening test experienes or shootouts with units such as Dcs, PS Audio, Apogee, Lavry, Mytek, Prism, RME etc.

Look forward to sharing the continuing quest.

Cheers.

Ashley James
14-04-2008, 20:03
Have you tried the analogue output from the Mini because we've had customers who've switched from £1000 hi end CD players and announced that it's much better.

We use the Optical digital out and have had an opportunity to compare it with quite a number of CD players, some costing thousands and have never heard anything better, but plenty that are worse. As they say, Jitter is only a problem when you're A to D'ing or D to A'ing.

Ash

tr@nz
18-04-2008, 07:11
Hi Ash,

Straight from the Mac Mini out using the headphone out?

I will certainly try but if that sounds better or even equal than a dedicated DAC with balanced XLRs I might as well pack up my ears and listen to mp3 the rest of my life. :)

Ashley James
18-04-2008, 10:02
Well, most of the music we buy is made on Macs using Apple Software so where better. The pros use outboards DACs and A to D's though, although I hear that quite a few songs are now recorded on location, simply by singing into the Mike in a Macbook Pro!

They do all work in 24 bit though.

Ash

barnz
02-06-2008, 19:50
Now I use AIFF format which is entirely uncompressed ...

Ok, so to import your CDs at the highest possible sample frequency ...
...
you can turn up the import sampling frequency from its default 44.1Khz (or turn it down if you are pursuing a worse quality sound). By clicking on the 'Sample Rate' drop down menu you'll get the following options, choose 48.000Khz:

http://s560.photobucket.com/albums/ss49/aos_images/audiophile_macosx/importsamplerate.jpg



Thanks for the great post. I'm new here, and just joined because I was searching for a conversation on this general point. (Actually I wanted to discuss AIFF vs. WAV, but let's hold off on that for the moment.)

What piqued my curiosity in your post is the idea of upsampling the import of CDs. While a native 48KHz frequency is certainly better than 44.1, I'm not sure I want to process/resample my CDs at all. It seems like it would be preferable to keep them as they are, and do a bit-for-bit import of the original CD without manipulating it. Have you done listening test on your system with copying the 44.1 files in directly?:scratch:


FWIW
My system is a Mac Mini 2GHz connected Toslink to a Linn 5103 DAC/Preamp.

Beechwoods
02-06-2008, 20:01
I was wondering exactly the same thing. I guess that if you upsample, then any other audio processing going on would occur with less aliasing? I say that, but my ears aren't tuned enough to notice these affects... I have my CDs ripped to 128kbps AAC for convenience rather than critical listening but AAC does it for me (or FLAC lossless for really special stuff). I do most of my listening on a pair of £20 Sennheiser headphones, connected to my stock PowerMac G5 'card headphone output.

I know this is probably shocking talk on an audiophile site, but I feel that AAC does a fantastic job of compressing audio, and the 10:1 compression ratio does make sense when you want easy portability to your portable player.

Filterlab
02-06-2008, 21:09
... It seems like it would be preferable to keep them as they are, and do a bit-for-bit import of the original CD without manipulating it. Have you done listening test on your system with copying the 44.1 files in directly?:scratch:

Yep.

tfarney
03-06-2008, 14:12
Bloody good thread mate! (OK...how's my English? I'm working on cultural integration here. If it just looks silly on me, y'all 'l let me know, huh?)

Anyway, I actually understood a bit of it. Regarding this part:


The difference between Apple Lossless and AIFF was negligible almost, however AIFF seems the most natural to me. Memory hungry, but in this day and age of 500Gb for £70, who cares?

...I suppose I care because I've already ripped hundreds of records to Lossless and iTunes tells me those files are 16 bit/44.100 khz and I don't imagine the 4khz is anything I'll hear. The outstanding question, though, is how to set output. I'm not going into a DAC, but into an Equibit full digital amp that is, essentially, one big high-current DAC with a huge output stage.

I assume it processes at 24/196 when you feed it bits, because I've read that if you feed it analog, an A/D converter at the very front of the path immediately re-digitizes the voltage into data, at 24/196 (or is that 24/96?). So I would further assume that I could set Core Audio to the highest output settings available and the amp would use it. Does that seem logical? And if it is, somehow, wrong, can anything be hurt by trying it?

Once again, great thread, reference thread. It needs a sticky.

Tim

barnz
03-06-2008, 19:20
I tried a little last night - imported some Rickie Lee Jones live material from a concert I attended - and on that material the 48K upsampled AIFF files were preferable. If I told the Mac Digital output to send 44.1 to my DAC insdtead of 48, the difference disappeared. I didn't succeed in determining if the 48K output was overall superior to the 44.1, and will leave that for later, because there is a question I find more important to address first.

The next thing I want to know, and I'm going to contact a mate at iTunes to help connect me with an Apple engineer, is how to get a TRUE bit-for-bit copy of a CD onto the mac and into iTunes - no upsampling, and no REsampling. I also tested files imported into iTunes at 44.1KHz 16 bit (Redbook CD standard, should be {skyquotes}THE SAME{/skyquotes} as the original, right?) versus files copied from the CD through drag and drop in the finder, then played back in iTunes.

These sounded very different. I am presuming that the drag and drop copy is the "correct" file, and that iTunes rejiggered the bits in the direct import. But that's what I want to find out. If I can make an exact copy of my CDs on the hard disk, that leaves the future open for resampling/upsampling or whatever intentional jiggering is determined to be advantageous without the prospect of losing something or the effort of going back to the original CD. But as poor as CDs are, I am loathe to change the material when I archive it on my hard disk - even if it's better some of the time, you know what I mean?

Beechwoods
03-06-2008, 19:35
I use xACT for for the Mac, which is considered by many to be the best CD ripper on OS X.. Exact Audio Copy does a similar job on the PC. EAC even accounts for drive offset and is considered the de-facto standard in music trading circles...

xACT: http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/21952
EAC: http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/

Definitely more reliable than the bog-standard iTunes rip (which just uses the Finder functionality so I've seen elsewhere). Finder copies are not at all reliable - no error correction or 'oversampling' / retrying whatsoever, so be careful of relying on it!

barnz
03-06-2008, 22:17
I use xACT for for the Mac,
...
Definitely more reliable than the bog-standard iTunes rip (which just uses the Finder functionality so I've seen elsewhere). ...


Thanks Beechwoods - I will check out xACT. FWIW I find the assertion that iTunes importing uses 'finder functionality' dubious - based on my experience so far there is a consistent difference of detail/sharpness in finder copies not present in iTunes imports...:confused:

Filterlab
03-06-2008, 22:24
I've only ever imported directly.

Beechwoods
04-06-2008, 05:24
I've only ever imported directly and never dragged files into iTunes so I couldn't comment. What I will say though is that there is definitely an option for utilising error correction whilst importing on iTunes, it's a tick-box in fact.

You're right - hence my reference to the 'bog-standard' iTunes import functionality (by default error correction is off). Give xACT a go and let me know what you think... it goes about doing 'secure' rips in quite a different way to iTunes, and produces a log so you have a far better indication of what it's found while it's done the rip...

Filterlab
04-06-2008, 08:29
I will have a look at xACT, cheers Beechy!

Beechwoods
04-06-2008, 10:17
Thanks Beechwoods - I will check out xACT. FWIW I find the assertion that iTunes importing uses 'finder functionality' dubious - based on my experience so far there is a consistent difference of detail/sharpness in finder copies not present in iTunes imports...:confused:

I wonder (=conjecture on my part!) whether this is something to do with the iTunes 'sound enhancer' option, or something else going on to sweeten the sound... I remember finding some discussion on Finder versus iTunes versus CDParanoia (used by xACT) a while back but can't for the life of me find it now! Ain't that typical. Ah well, let your ears do the analysis!

barnz
04-06-2008, 16:18
I wonder (=conjecture on my part!) whether this is something to do with the iTunes 'sound enhancer' option, or something else going on to sweeten the sound...

I hope not - I have certainly done my best to turn off anything that can be turned off...

I downloaded xAct last night when I got home (on a PC at work at the mo')

and recognized it as an app I have tried and failed to make use of in the past. Frankly it's just too darn compli-mi-cated for my record spinning brain.:doh:

Any English-based tips on using it to copy a CD bit-for-bit?

Beechwoods
04-06-2008, 17:45
Ok...

1. Open xACT and click on the 'Util' tab (Pic 1)

2. Click on the 'Add' button and find the CD you want to rip in the Finder window. Highlight all the tracks you want to rip and then click 'Add Files'. (Pic 2)

3. Click 'Execute' (Pic 3)

4. In the window that opens, find the directory you want to save the ripped files to. Or create a new folder and save them there. Click 'Choose'. (Pic 4)

5. xACT starts working. (Pic 5)

It will take a while. While it's running it's not responsive and there's no way to stop it. This is because it's actually running as a little Unix job in the background, and only 'reports back' to the GUI frontend when it's finished. You can see where it's got to by looking in the folder the files are saved to.

Beechwoods
04-06-2008, 19:33
You get a Log back when it's finished, like this one...

Scroll down it for all sorts of useful and interesting stuff :)

Filterlab
05-06-2008, 10:02
I wonder (=conjecture on my part!) whether this is something to do with the iTunes 'sound enhancer' option, or something else going on to sweeten the sound... I remember finding some discussion on Finder versus iTunes versus CDParanoia (used by xACT) a while back but can't for the life of me find it now! Ain't that typical. Ah well, let your ears do the analysis!

I haven't used the sound enhancer on my system.

Filterlab
05-06-2008, 10:04
I'll definitely have a look at xACT.

Beechwoods
05-06-2008, 11:27
I'll definitely have a look at xACT this evening, seems like a very secure way to import a CD.

Is the track and artist data still compatible with iTunes (Gracenote)?

To be honest, I've never checked. The ripper gets the track info from the internet - freedb I think, but only extracts to WAV and I'm not sure if it writes metatags to the WAV header (I don't think so) - it does use them to name the files with tracks number and name, and writes the other details to the log...

Filterlab
05-06-2008, 11:28
Well, it only takes a few minutes to add the details in manually if need be.

Beechwoods
05-06-2008, 18:27
There's another app called Max (http://sbooth.org/Max/) which some of you may like which also uses CDParanoia, the same Unix library as xACT. Max may handle metadata conversion better. I personally felt xACT was more straightforward so never really tried Max much, but you may like it. It has plenty of ripping options to play with, from simple burst ripping to secure modes and comparison retries (effectively ripping multiple times and comparing the results). Max is made by the same people as are behind Cog (http://cogx.org/), the best lossless audio player for the Mac. I personally use iTunes for AAC playback and Cog for FLAC and Shorten.

Filterlab
05-06-2008, 20:24
I'll have a look into Cog as well then. :)

Filterlab
06-06-2008, 16:24
Well, iTunes has now been retired as I downloaded Cog.

barnz
06-06-2008, 16:45
I tried MAX last night and was also impressed with the results. I'm still a little unsure about the 'correct' ripping setup to use, but anything that takes that long must be good! :eyebrows:

Not ready to give up my GUI just yet, but I will try COG as well. First priority is to get comfortable with an archiving scheme so I can start getting rid of my CDs!

Filterlab
06-06-2008, 17:09
Cog is definitely worth a go.

barnz
09-06-2008, 17:00
So I mucked about with this every free moment this weekend, and I actually came to a conclusion. (Shocking, in itself).

While (to my understanding,) the method I chose does not represent my stated goal of a bit-perfect (aka "secure rip" aka "bit transparancy") rip of the original CD, it's close, and it just plain sounded the best. So this is what I am using for the forseeable future:

CD Ripping in SBooth's MAX (http://sbooth.org/Max/):

Format:
AIFF (Linear PCM) - 32bit big endian signed integer

I tried every flavor of AIFF available through MAX - they all were better than the best results I could manage importing CDs directly through iTunes as uncompressed AIFF or WAV files.

I settled on the 32bit sampling, as I found notable improvements in both detail and body. Bass notes were more in tune, and there was a blacker background.

This was not the result I set out to find, but I chose it because the results seemed to be better all around, and not 'offsetting' (E.G. tests in iTunes would result in one format improving clarity, but the other improving body).

I also found COG (http://cogx.org/)to be a better sounding playback application than iTunes, but because of iTunes better GUI and Frontrow integration, they will continue to co-exist peacefully on my machine for the time-being. :)


PS:
I am connecting my mac mini with autdioquest optical cable to a Linn 5103 serving as DAC and preamp. The Mac Audio MIDI output settings are at 48KHz.

SteveW
09-06-2008, 17:39
Awesome..just downloaded Cog and Max.
Improvements in sound are immediate.
Funnily enough, I had just posted in Musical Compositions about Paul Macca swearing on Hey Jude (2mins 57 secs for the curious)..Through Cog its just so more obvious than through itunes.
Thanks guys.
Steve

SteveW
09-06-2008, 19:08
Only problem I can see is that all my music is stored on an external hard drive..and whilst the 'file' thingy on COG displays itunes library, its not actually the one I use. I wonder how I can quickly access a whole album ...or do I have to add it track by track...?

Filterlab
09-06-2008, 20:04
Only problem I can see is that all my music is stored on an external hard drive..and whilst the 'file' thingy on COG displays itunes library, its not actually the one I use. I wonder how I can quickly access a whole album ...or do I have to add it track by track...?

Just slide the album folder straight into Cog and the whole album appears in order. :)

Filterlab
09-06-2008, 20:06
I've gone with 16-bit AIFF Linear PCM and set my AMS output back to 16-bit too though, but Max and Cog are definitely very much superior to iTunes.

I must give the 32-bit encoder a whirl, didn't try that!

Filterlab
09-06-2008, 20:37
I've just been chatting with Vincent Spader (one of the programmers behind Cog) and he's advised me of a sneaky little cure for any glitches on Leopard. If you set your Updates preferences 'Update Feed' to unstable it will iron out the columns glitch.

If Cog appears fine for you then it's not necessary, but if your columns disappear then you'll know what to do.

:)

barnz
09-06-2008, 23:29
I since 16bit was good and 32bit was better, I also tried 64bit.
That was incompatible with something in my system and played some horrible digital hash, with music buried in there somewhere. :doh: 32bit it is!

SteveW
10-06-2008, 18:38
Just slide the album folder straight into Cog and the whole album appears in order. :)

That works well..except that some albums have the the Artist and Album titles but most do not.
Any ideas?

SteveW
10-06-2008, 18:39
I've clicked the Unstable in preferences, and I'm running Tiger.

barnz
10-06-2008, 18:59
...some albums have the the Artist and Album titles but most do not.

Same experience here. I haven't looked into it, as I'm still satisfied with iTunes for the 'overall user experience.' When I want to play something in COG, I already know what song/album/artist it is! ;)

Have you tried the COG forums to see about this metadata issue?

SteveW
10-06-2008, 19:26
I agree with you...the itunes interface is hard to beat. in addition, I stream wirelessly to an airport express connected to a system in the kitchen.

However, playing exactly the same files through COG is quite remarkable. Comparing In the Daring Night from Van Morrisons Avalon Sunset right now is so telling.

I've always put down the slightly muddy sound of this AAC Lossless file down to the fact that I'm using an old G4 Powerbook, through the headphone mini jack via phono into an old Linn Classic with a pair of Indian speakers I picked up in Bombay.

All this housed inside an old roll-top desk.:eek:

However, now playing through COG, foggy is lifted. Instruments seperated and coherence abounds.

Now to figure out best way to integrate this through the main system. Wish that the aiport express would work with COG..better google that COG forum I think.

SteveW
10-06-2008, 20:14
OH..good call.

Discovered via their forum that I can stream using a program called Airfoil. Funnily enough I had already purchased a program from them previously called Audio Hijack, which records anything that plays through the computer speakers, ie radio, play it again etc. Kind of an up to date version of taping the radio.

2 minutes later, it was downloaded and playing COG through the kitchen system, and I have to say sounding better than I expected. Now..might move the Airport express to the main system, or buy another.

Excellent.

SteveW
12-06-2008, 04:12
Been a bit short on time, but briefly plugged the airport into the main system and streamed Apple lossless files through COG via airfoil and sounded very good.

Want to do some comparisons with my CD player when time permits.

Also hadn't realised that COG will play FLAC files. Which opens the door for all sorts of download opportunities :)

Have downloaded MAX, so obviously need to rip some CD's via this to compare with the lossless files ripped via itunes.

barnz
12-06-2008, 04:26
Have downloaded MAX, so obviously need to rip some CD's via this to compare with the lossless files ripped via itunes.

I don't know you or your system, but I'm guessing that if you care enough to even try, then you'll find the differences pretty startling and very worthwhile. I'm actually enjoying listening to music through the computer now. It's become more than just a lazy choice - but it took MAX uncompressed rips to get there.:smoking:

Filterlab
12-06-2008, 08:29
Also hadn't realised that COG will play FLAC files. Which opens the door for all sorts of download opportunities :)

It seems Cog will play anything vaguely related to audio - much more comprehensive than iTunes (which won't touch FLAC).

SteveW
12-06-2008, 16:25
I don't know you or your system, but I'm guessing that if you care enough to even try, then you'll find the differences pretty startling and very worthwhile. I'm actually enjoying listening to music through the computer now. It's become more than just a lazy choice - but it took MAX uncompressed rips to get there.:smoking:

I have ended up with a Linn active system (Exotic, Klouts into active Tukans), after amalgamating several systems from a 5 year period abroad. Also why I have a couple of 'second' systems.
Main system is a tad bass light, but I like it...musical.

Going to fire up max now, and rip a couple of CD's. :scratch:

SteveW
12-06-2008, 20:59
...very very good. Especially considering the dac that is being used is the one in the Airport Express.

Beechwoods
12-06-2008, 21:21
I've been away a few days but am really pleased that Cog and Max have come in useful for you all! I use Cog all the time. Since they fixed a problem with Shorten playback on multi-processor systems it's been my main player for 'serious' stuff, lossless live audio...

SteveW
13-06-2008, 06:03
I've been away a few days but am really pleased that Cog and Max have come in useful for you all! I use Cog all the time. Since they fixed a problem with Shorten playback on multi-processor systems it's been my main player for 'serious' stuff, lossless live audio...

Yes, many thanks for great recommendations.
Only bug with MAX that I have right now is that the DBfree (? if thats the right name) doesn't appear on mine, so I can't download album/track names etc. Curiously the album art-work part does work.
Maybe because I'm running Tiger?

tr@nz
16-06-2008, 00:54
This is great info! Thank you.

Will definitely try Max and Cog combination.

A couple of observations:

1. WAV does sound better than ALAC. After some blind testing both a friend and me picked out WAV 90% of the time when listening to acoustic guitar type music. Although this statement seems to be controversial on other forums.

2. Through iTunes and Benchmark DAC1 the non-upsampled 24/44.1 wav from iTunes ripped CD sounded better to me than setting Core Audio to 96Khz.

Anyone using I2S connection from PC?

Anyone using HagUsb USB-to-S/PDIF Converter instead of using the standard Toslink provided with Mac?


EDITED NOTE: I am now under the impression that it is the ripping within iTunes and the MacMini which caused imperfect rips that were the underlying cause to the differences in audio quality that I heard. I have since moved on to using EAC only for ripping. This is better than Max and much better than iTunes.

Beechwoods
16-06-2008, 05:37
I wonder if the difference you're getting with ALAC (Apple Lossless) is because you're decoding it in real time, as the track is playing? Processor performance and so on could affect the reliability of real time decoding. As with all lossless codecs you should find if you convert the ALAC back to WAV or AIFF you've restored a bit for bit equivalent file (with the exception of headers) vs your original.

tr@nz
18-06-2008, 03:49
One thing I am curious about with the findings of your listening comparison between e.g. iTunes and Cogs is whether you are carefully making sure the volume is exactly the same between the two programs. I noticed that Cogs starts out much louder than iTunes and thus might seem better than iTunes.

Have not had much time to listen yet, but will try some more this weekend.

barnz
18-06-2008, 04:03
I hadn't really thought about it, as I am using the digital output, so the (user) volume control is defeated. But it's certainly possible that something is affecting the output level, and that's a certainly a classic false improvement.

Filterlab
18-06-2008, 08:15
I always reduce the volume to zero before playing - the gain from my DAC would soon blow the speakers apart if I'm not careful.

Cog (in my opinion) is much better that iTunes. :)

SteveW
18-06-2008, 18:22
Think you are right Rob..Cog is way better than iTunes.
I always have my volume settings on max..controlling volume through the hi-fi. I had read that the volume control on iTunes adds all sorts of filtering unless its on full and thus degrades the sound. Don't know about Cog...possibly it doesn't operate the same way. However I'm using internal dacs on the Mac or the dac in the airport express. Interesting that going through an external dac would change that. I'll have to be careful.

Filterlab
19-06-2008, 09:06
Both Cog and iTunes use non-aliasing 24-bit volume controls, although iTunes 6 had a dreadful volume control that sapped the life from the music unless set to full.

Steve, you definitely need to get an external DAC to gain the full benefit of Cog - the internal Mac DAC is nothing to speak of.

tr@nz
20-06-2008, 21:01
For those interested, I did a test comparing the results of ripping one song using 3 different programs on PC and Mac with surprising (to me, others might say, doh!) results. This might explain the reason for the difference in what I am hearing when listening to ALAC versus WAV encoded using iTunes on the Mac.

Conclusion:

I will no longer use iTunes to rip anything for high end listening, but will use EAC instead.

Even iTunes rips from Mac and PC can differ for the same file format! iTunes ALAC and WAV files differ on my Mac but not on my PC. Probably optical drive related issues come into play now as well.

For those interested in the details please see below:

Testing Results of ripping using:

• iTunes on MacMini,
• iTunes on PC,
• Max on MacMini
• EAC on PC

Test media – 1 Song from an unscratched purchased CD

Aqualung – 01. Strange & Beautiful (I'll Put A Spell On You)

Comparison Test Software

Foobar bit comparison to find differences in rip.

Test Results:

Test 1: EAC WAV file versus iTunes on PC AIFF file on auto settings

• differences found: 20327754 sample(s), starting at 1.0012698 second(s), peak: 1.9772644 at 129.1615193 second(s), 1ch

Test 2: EAC WAV file versus iTunes on PC WAV file on auto settings

• differences found: 20327754 sample(s), starting at 1.0012698 second(s), peak: 1.9772644 at 129.1615193 second(s), 1ch

Test 3: EAC WAV file versus iTunes on PC WAV file on custom settings 48Khz, 16bit, stereo

• Comparing failed (sample rate mismatch).

Test 4: EAC WAV file versus iTunes on PC AIFF file on custom settings 48Khz, 16bit, stereo

• Comparing failed (sample rate mismatch).

Test 5: EAC wav file versus iTunes on Mac WAV file on auto settings

• differences found: 20324423 sample(s), starting at 1.0012698 second(s), peak: 1.9230347 at 119.3403855 second(s), 1ch

Test 6: EAC wav file versus Max on Mac AIFF file on 32bit Core Audio setting

• differences found: 20324423 sample(s), starting at 1.0012698 second(s), peak: 1.9230347 at 119.3403855 second(s), 1ch

Test 7: iTunes on PC WAV file 48Khz versus iTunes on PC AIFF 48Khz file

• No differences in decoded data found.

Test 8: iTunes on PC WAV file auto settings versus iTunes on PC AIFF auto settings

• No differences in decoded data found.

Test 9: iTunes on PC WAV file auto settings versus iTunes on Mac WAV auto settings

• differences found: 20322886 sample(s), starting at 1.0023583 second(s), peak: 1.9734802 at 58.8010204 second(s), 1ch

Test 10: iTunes on PC ALAC file auto settings versus iTunes on Mac ALAC auto settings

• differences found: 20323701 sample(s), starting at 1.0023583 second(s), peak: 1.9734802 at 58.8010204 second(s), 1ch

Test 11: EAC on PC WAV versus iTunes on PC ALAC auto settings

• differences found: 20327754 sample(s), starting at 1.0012698 second(s), peak: 1.9772644 at 129.1615193 second(s), 1ch

Test 12: EAC on PC WAV file versus iTunes on Mac ALAC auto settings

• differences found: 20324874 sample(s), starting at 1.0012698 second(s), peak: 1.9230347 at 119.3403855 second(s), 1ch

Test 13: iTunes on PC WAV file auto settings versus iTunes on PC ALAC auto settings

• No differences in decoded data found.

Test 14: iTunes on PC AIFF file auto settings versus iTunes on PC ALAC auto settings

• No differences in decoded data found.

Test 15: iTunes on Mac AIFF file auto settings versus iTunes on Mac WAV auto settings

• differences found: 104100 sample(s), starting at 3.3365986 second(s), peak: 0.1472473 at 4.2235374 second(s), 1ch

Test 16: iTunes on Mac AIFF file auto settings versus iTunes on Mac ALAC auto settings

• differences found: 44225 sample(s), starting at 3.3365986 second(s), peak: 0.7921753 at 4.5601134 second(s), 1ch

Test 17: iTunes on Mac WAV file auto settings versus iTunes on Mac ALAC auto settings

differences found: 90334 sample(s), starting at 3.5097959 second(s), peak: 0.7921753 at 4.5601134 second(s), 1ch

Test 18: Max on Mac AIFF file 32bit using Core Audio versus Max on Mac AIFF file 16bit using Core Audio

• No differences in decoded data found.

Test 19: Max on Mac AIFF file 32bit using Core Audio versus Max on Mac AIFF file 24bit using Core Audio

• No differences in decoded data found.

Test 20: Max on Mac AIFF file 16bit using Core Audio versus Max on Mac AIFF file 24bit using Core Audio

• No differences in decoded data found.

Test 21: EAC wav file versus Max on Mac AIFF file on 16bit Core Audio setting

• differences found: 20324423 sample(s), starting at 1.0012698 second(s), peak: 1.9230347 at 119.3403855 second(s), 1ch

Test 22: EAC wav file versus Max on Mac AIFF file on 24bit Core Audio setting

• differences found: 20324423 sample(s), starting at 1.0012698 second(s), peak: 1.9230347 at 119.3403855 second(s), 1ch

Filterlab
21-06-2008, 10:00
Fantastic test matey, and may I say you have more time on your hands than I, and also a great test track. :)

In the interest of subjectivity, which sounded the best?

SteveW
22-06-2008, 11:19
Both Cog and iTunes use non-filtering 24-bit volume controls, although iTunes 6 had a dreadful volume control that sapped the life from the music unless set to full.

Steve, you definitely need to get an external DAC to gain the full benefit of Cog - the internal Mac DAC is nothing to speak of.

I know..I know.
Here's a question though..and sorry if its been covered before, but does anyone have experience of running a dac after an airport express ??
I seem to recall opinions from AVI land was that as the airport was only recieving '0's and '1's it would be the same as direct out of a Mac. Maybe this wasn't the view..and its not one I can believe, but interested if anyone has experimented.

cheers

Steve

Beechwoods
22-06-2008, 12:46
does anyone have experience of running a dac after an airport express ??
I seem to recall opinions from AVI land was that as the airport was only recieving '0's and '1's it would be the same as direct out of a Mac.
Steve

Airport Express converts everything to Apple Lossless - theoretically, being lossless, this should not affect the sound at all but some of the folks here perceive a difference with ALAC versus uncompressed - could be something with the realtime encode / decode going on.

tr@nz
23-06-2008, 07:39
The subjective listening test is what I did not have enough time for, with all the running the USB harddrive back and forth from PC to Mac etc. :)

To keep things 'simple' from a listener standpoint, being able to use iTunes with a remote control (pda, iPhone, iPaq etc.) using Salling Clicker software (which also shows album art) on your remote is still desired.

After some more playing around, here is some more useful information for others searching for a similar solution.

Using EAC provides you the best audio quality in a rip, however, you will lose the tag information and album cover function if you rip to WAV. There is no need to go to WAV and then to FLAC in separate steps; EAC will do these steps for you. FLAC does maintain the ID3 tags.

If you want the album art and the ID3 tag/Album etc. information so you can easily use it within iTunes and maintain the exact audio file quality, I have found that the following will work for Mac users.

1. Rip to FLAC using EAC on a PC
2. Convert to AIFF using Max on a Mac

iTunes (non-weaked) does not accept FLAC but Max does. Since FLAC maintains the ID3 tag, Max will be able to find the album cover with a click of a button as it has this as an in-built function. It also provides the preference option of loading it into your iTunes library.

Using Foobar's bit comparison function I checked:

1. the EAC ripped FLAC with the EAC ripped WAV,
2. the Max converted AIFF file with both the EAC ripped FLAC and the EAC ripped WAV....

and they were all bit for bit exactly the same. Great news!

This is up until now the 'easiest' and free solution I have found to get CD quality on your music server. Any others with better ones, please share!

It would be soooooo much easier if Steve Jobs at Apple would just buy EAC and incorporate it into iTunes, as well as improve their inbuilt CD reader hardware .

Now I just hope that iTunes as a player is a good solution. Some say that Cog or VLC for Mac and Foobar for PC are better, but I have not come to this conclusion yet. More listening is needed!

Cheers

tr@nz
23-06-2008, 07:52
Curious about the settings within Max to use for the FLAC to AIFF (or any other format) conversion, and whether it has any impact on the sound.

16, 24 or 32 bit ( I am currently using 24bit as I do not believe iTunes handles 32bit)

Does AIFF or AIF matter?


One more thing I want to check with the listening test is what player to use on a Mac and what settings to use. Anyone already completed this with bit perfect EAC-ripped copies of a CD?

1. VLC
2. Cog
3. iTunes (I read that 7.5 had major issues)


One other random note to anyone doing taste testing. I read that unity gain for Cog is at the halfway bar, VLC at 1/3 of the bar and for iTunes it is at 100% of the slider. Very important when you are doing comparison testing as the human ear will be inclined to think louder is better. I will check this when I have some time.

Cheers.

tr@nz
23-06-2008, 08:01
Anyone had the pleasure of doing DAC comparison listening that included the McIntosh MDA1000?

Filterlab
25-06-2008, 09:57
Curious about the settings within Max to use for the FLAC to AIFF (or any other format) conversion, and whether it has any impact on the sound.

Both are lossless anyway so it should be a bit for bit conversion.


16, 24 or 32 bit ( I am currently using 24bit as I do not believe iTunes handles 32bit)

Does AIFF or AIF matter?

The results can vary, although I'd advise using Cog instead of iTunes (Cog's much better!). Some recordings sound good at 24-bit, but I now use 32-bit which is much more compatible with 16-bit source material i.e. CDs. Cog can happily play 32-bit files.

AIF / AIFF doesn't matter, it's the same thing (Audio Interchange File Format); AIF is simply the three letter file extension tag of AIFF.

tr@nz
27-06-2008, 06:59
Filterlab,

Thanks for the reply.

How have you setup the CoreAudio (Midi Settings) to handle 32 bit? I have read on the BenchmarkMedia.com website that the CoreAudio settings have a huge impact on your playback quality. Do you change back and forth when changing from 16bit/44.1Khz rips to 24/96Khz or 24/88.2Khz files?

The person who created Max also has Play for playback that uses 32 bit internal processing. Does anyone have experience with that program in comparison with Cog? The same question regarding the CoreAudio (Midi Settings) applies. What setting do you use?

Cheers!

tr@nz
29-06-2008, 08:51
A few more listening tests later...

I downloaded a test tone from Linn records to calibrate iTunes, Play and Cog volume settings to the exact same decibels using a Sound Level Meter.

1. iTunes and Play have the same setup, with the slider at max volume.

2. Cog is a little trickier and requires very fine tweaks to set the volume equal to iTunes and Play. It is around 3/4 from full, but small tweaks make a big difference.

3. CoreAudio is set to 24bit/96Khz

4. Cd was ripped using EAC without errors and transferred to AIFF using Max using the 24 bit CoreAudio setting

Result:

Before the volume callibration I thought that Cog had a slight edge. After the volume callibration; it is very hard to tell, but it is almost as if iTunes is a little better. On sounds with quite a bit of echo it sounded more spacious. If it is placebo, as I could not do a blind test today, then I would choose iTunes due to the extra functionality.

Will try the Play program later, as well as a few more comparisons with Cog.

The main conclusion drawn from this test, however, is that without exactly callibrating the Cog volume with a decibel meter, there is no way that you can do a proper listening comparison!!

Cheers

barnz
29-06-2008, 15:13
Actually, my subsequent experience is consistent with tr@nz -
I sat a friend down to show him how much better Cog would sound than iTunes, but we both came away thinking iTunes was better. I didn't calibrate my volume with a SPL meter, as I don't have a tripod to mount mine on at the moment. But the volume levels were at 100% for iTunes, and apparently 75% for Cog. Where were the vlume levels before? :confused: I think they were both at 100% - I have to admit I wasn't paying attention, because I thought with the digital output it didn't matter. (It does.) :doh:

DoubleA
30-06-2008, 16:42
Ok, it is this thread that has caused me to join here and enter the discussion.

First, I am currently looking for a replacement for my SqueezeBox. I have a mixture of both 16/44.1 FLACs (lossless is lossless) and 24 bit 96 khz vinyl rips, also as Flacs. Playing them on my mac is not an issue...sort of.

As has been shown in this thread, you set the output parameters of the output device in the 'Audio Mixer Setup'. The catch, as I understand it (and I'm not at home right now to try myself), is that whatever you set that to, is exactly what OS X will output. So, if it's set to 48Khz, OSX will upsample your 44.1 CD rips to 48. If you're playing 96Khz files, it'll downsample to 48 Khz (in this example). Benchmark (the makers of the DAC1 that I'm looking at), talk about this on their wiki here:

http://extra.benchmarkmedia.com/wiki/index.php/OS_X_Audio_Playback_-_Setup_Guide


And the re-sampling that OSX does is...poor at best. Again, I'm not at home to actually see for myself, but apparently it is quite obvious. All I want is a bit-for-bit transfer out the digital out or usb as appropriate.

Thoughts anyone? Am I waaay off base here?

I will say I'm a little skeptical of the comments that AIFF vs. ALAC were different; however, I had heard that ALAC was not true lossless. Suffice it to say, I use FLACs for all my lossless needs and rip with EAC within in VMware Fusion XP VM - works like a champ!

Aaron

tr@nz
01-07-2008, 04:16
Hi DoubleA,

The comments I made regarding hearing a difference between ALAC vs uncompressed were in retrospect most likely due to the imperfect rips made through iTunes. Although I still would not be surprised that the process of 'unzipping' the file could have some impact. Speculation at this point, but I am not taking a chance and leaving the file as uncompressed AIFF for iTunes to play.

The notes you mentioned are another reason why I will be sticking with iTunes for playback at this time. As I read it, Stereophile, Benchmark Media and Apple had a number of discussions regarding the Apple CoreAudio SRC. Older versions of iTunes, and most likely Cog and Play use the CoreAudio SRC which apparently is of terrible quality when it up- or down-samples.

That is why iTunes v7.x has its own SRC inbuilt that again, according to Benchmark, is of very good quality.

I also use the Benchmark DAC1 and like its clarity. Currently, I have set the CoreAudio to the 'set it and forget it' option of 24bit/96Khz. This way the iTunes SRC upsamples to 24/96 on the 16/44.1 songs, leaves my 24/96 songs alone, and the CoreAudio SRC is not doing any up- or downsampling.

Some more listening tests on both the 24/44.1 versus the 24/96 CoreAudio settings for ripped CDs are still planned.

The Benchmark will do further upsampling to ~110Khz, so logically it would seem the 16/44.1 CoreAudio setting would be better since you avoid one SRC step. Who knows....the ears will have to tell.

Cheers.

DoubleA
01-07-2008, 16:40
I did some testing last night and there is definately a difference - you can hear the up or down sampling. Setting the output to 96Khz seemed to sound the least 'bad' - i.e. upsampling 44.1 to 96. 96 down to 44.1 sounded not very good. This was all done in Play as ITunes doesn't natively support FLAC (I know there's a plugin called Fluke that apparently fixes this, but...) and I'm not a huge fan of ITunes in general.

My concern is if I'm going to pay $1000 for a DAC, it'll have waaaaay better sampling ability than my mac will, I'd rather have it do all the appropriate upsampling rather than the 44.1->96->~110 (or whatever one's DAC outputs at). I'd rather just have the 44.1->~110 or 96->110 (in the case of the Benchmark).

Although I've not tested it myself, I agree with your comments re: SRC in CoreAudio vs. ITunes. Clearly this is a software issue. More to the point, Windows doesn't have this issue (if you use Foobar2k for example).

Apparently things are better with Leopard (as intimated in the posts on Apple's dev site), but why have an SRC at all? Or, at the very least, give us an option for RAW - just send the bits as-is out the output.

barnz
01-07-2008, 16:55
... Or, at the very least, give us an option for RAW - just send the bits as-is out the output.

I think ultimately this is the direction they have to go - it should be the easiest way to appease us irritating fringe-types (and get us working to tell all our friends that a PC-based system sounds better than a traditional player).

Peter Stockwell
11-09-2008, 08:16
Currently I have to stream my music via an airport express to the main rig, so output is limited to 44.1/16. Is it possible to use cog with airtunes ?

Thanks

Peter Stockwell
03-10-2008, 11:19
Nobody's watching here it appears ;) , Will an airport express transmit 24bit word lengths ?

Filterlab
03-10-2008, 11:43
Currently I have to stream my music via an airport express to the main rig, so output is limited to 44.1/16. Is it possible to use cog with airtunes ?

No idea as I don't have a wireless network, try it and let us know!


Will an airport express transmit 24bit word lengths ?

Again try it, only thing is that iTunes itself is limited to 16bit (on importing), however as we know that Cog can playback 24bit, and in fact 32bit (my choice), I can see no reason why Airport Express can't handle 24bit if Cog will playback through it, remember that Cog can be set as a default audio player in the Core Audio setting (Audio Midi Set-Up) which is where I'd imagine Airtunes takes it's source from and Airport Express is simply a data streaming device, assuming the data rate of 24bit audio doesn't exceed Express's limit (which it shouldn't) there's no reason for it to not work. Let us know!

Filterlab
03-10-2008, 11:47
Yes, you can stream Cog through Airtunes, and losslessly apparently. :)

aka
23-11-2008, 17:06
Greetings All!

Happy to have found this forum as it seems to be both thoughtful and civil.

I trust this is an appropriate thread to join - and I hope this is not seen as a hijack!

I've recently become obsessed with grabbing Beresford's DAC and using the TOSlink out of the Airport Express to stream my collection.
I just discovered that despite Apple Core Audio/iTunes supporting 24/96 it seems the AE is a 16/44 bottleneck - at least when using iTunes.
(see: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t56027.html)
I have quite a growing collection of vinyl rips @24/96 FLAC. When converted to Apple Lossless they retain their 24/96 sample rates - I would like to stream them as such.

Any thoughts/counsel on this 16/44 limitation?
In the event the AE itself is not the bottleneck, I have contacted the AirFoil folks to see if that application is capable of sending 24/96 to the AE.

I also wonder, for any of you that push your music through an AE 802.11g, if there are any bandwidth issues with large files.

Thanks!

sastusbulbas
09-12-2008, 00:33
So has anyone played with 24/192 on a MAC yet?

Filterlab
10-12-2008, 13:29
Not yet, I'm more than happy with 32/176.4 although I did dally with some 24bit downloads a few weeks ago, but I got no further than dallying to be honest. I've kind of given up looking for new ways to playback music from my Mac, I'm happy with the output quality as it is so I'm just listening whenever I have time. I tend to use the cinema system more than the two channel these days.

Have you done anything 24/192 on any of your computers?

sastusbulbas
10-12-2008, 20:06
Hi,

Nothing going on with my computers apart from on paper and wishful thinking due to the usual financial constraints at this time of year (plus I only have a handfull of 24/192 ambient material), IE7 processors and such have been catching my eye, and I have been thinking of selling some stuff and continuing with over avenues.

Any updates on your own computer audio ventures, what are you doing and using with 32/176.4 and are you still using the Apogee?

Steve

Filterlab
10-12-2008, 21:23
Yep, the Apogee seems to be very happy receiving a 32bit signal, I thought it would reject it at first but it plays happily along. Importing is done through Max at 32bit linear, cog plays back 32bit linear too, the 44.1khz is upscaled by the DAC to 176.4khz (automatically it seems) and the result is pleasing enough for me not to bother with further upgrades for a while, at least until I move to a bigger house anyway. :)

What are you going to sell and what avenues have taken your fancy?

sastusbulbas
10-12-2008, 21:51
I am tempted to sell some cables and a couple of bikes, I really want to ............................

Davo
05-01-2009, 14:44
Rob

I must intervene. I represent dCS and with the introduction of our new USB products we have been doing a lot of research into OS handling of sample rates.

Firstly, about Sample Rates...

Digital audio is represented by a set of samples. In a single track, each sample is the same size resolution (number of bits), and the same distance apart in time (sample rate). Hence, if a track is encoded at 16/44.1, this means for each sample encoded 16 bits are used to represent the amplitude (-32,768 to +32,767), and there are exactly 44,100 of these every second.

Owing to the fact that a PC may contain many tracks in many different sample rates, and more than one can potentially be played at one time, the OS must have a scheme to deal with this, which can involve sample rate conversion.

Rather than set your system to always spit out 24/96 (which will then use the internal rate converter of your PC or Mac) the goal should be to output bit perfect, transparent audio to your hifi components. This means if all of your material is ripped CD's at 16/44.1 then set your optimum Output settings in OSX are 16/44.1 as default.

Where this is tricky in Apple OSX is that OSX uses a “fixed” output sample rate (set by the Audio Midi panel in “Utilities”). The user sets this, and OSX resamples everything to match this rate.

Pros The digital out never changes rate, and if the rate is set to the same rate as the file being played back, and all enhancements/volume controls are disabled, the output is bit perfect.
Cons If the user has multiple sample rates, he either has to change the output sample rate manually every time the source sample rate changes, or rely on the OSX rate converter.

Filterlab
05-01-2009, 15:50
Rather than set your system to always spit out 24/96 (which will then use the internal rate converter of your PC or Mac) the goal should be to output bit perfect, transparent audio to your hifi components. This means if all of your material is ripped CD's at 16/44.1 then set your optimum Output settings in OSX are 16/44.1 as default.

Hi Davo!

Thanks for your advice and you are quite right indeed, however this is what's known as pilot answering. If you read through every post on the thread you'll see that over the time period of the thread I've moved away from a 24bit output back to a 16bit output (for Redbook) as I found the effects of aliasing quite noticeable when I did more back-to-back listening comparisons. Now I use 16bit/44.1Khz output for anything ripped from Redbook (albeit ripped using 32bit Linear PCM and with my DAC auto-upsampling to 176.4Khz) and I use 24bit/96Khz output for playback of 96/24 master tracks downloaded from iTrax. The 96/24 masters are nothing short of breathtaking!

Ok, this means a lot of too-ing and fro-ing as far as Audio Midi set-up goes but the results are definitely worth it and as there's no alteration to the original word length or upsampling of a non-directly divisable frequency, there's no (discernable to my ears) aliasing.

webby
09-06-2009, 08:38
Filterlab, great post, but...

I don't see those options when I look at my Audio Midi Setup, I don't see anything for Built in output. Silly question time; Will I not see that until something didgital (DAC) is connected?

Thanks

Marco
09-06-2009, 08:48
Hi Webby,

Welcome to AOS :)

Unfortunately Rob (Fliterlab) has left us for the foreseeable future, so will unlikely reply to your question.

Beechy, perhaps you could answer this in Rob's absence, presuming of course that you understand the nature of the query?

Marco.

webby
09-06-2009, 09:08
Hi Marco,

Thanks for that info. My first post but I've read most of this thread and the one about the new 7520, which is on my shortlist.

Webby

Marco
09-06-2009, 09:19
Nice one :)

Where are you from, mate? Could you do me a favour and pop into the Welcome area and briefly introduce yourself, what system you use, and your musical tastes?

It's part of the procedure for new members to be asked to do this - cheers! :cool:

Marco.

webby
09-06-2009, 10:30
Sure, no problem!

lupo_yellow
13-06-2009, 06:45
Filterlab, great post, but...

I don't see those options when I look at my Audio Midi Setup, I don't see anything for Built in output. Silly question time; Will I not see that until something didgital (DAC) is connected?

Thanks

You are correct you will not see these extra options until you connect an external DAC

webby
13-06-2009, 13:45
Thanks lupo,

I'm now thinking about getting an Airport Express, however, I've read that it converts files to ALAC. Is there any point me ripping to AIFF if the express is going to do that?

lupo_yellow
13-06-2009, 15:45
Thanks lupo,

I'm now thinking about getting an Airport Express, however, I've read that it converts files to ALAC. Is there any point me ripping to AIFF if the express is going to do that?

I would agree with you there seems little point if Airport express does this.

As you can see by my signature I use a Squeezebox classic (which I think is excellent) to transfer music from my mac.

If you do get an Airport you could always rip a track in ALAC and AIFF and see if you notice a difference. :)

Beechwoods
13-06-2009, 15:54
Airport Express does convert to ALAC and only supports 16/44.1 (some folks have hacked it to handle other sample / bitrates but you need to be a whiz programmer to pull it off).

webby
13-06-2009, 15:59
It seem odd that it converts on the fly like this. Are you sure it doesn't just convert the files that are NOT 16/44.1 in order to handle them, and leave all 16/44.1 alone?

Beechwoods
13-06-2009, 16:25
I'm sure on the point of converting everything to ALAC. It is daft, but I guess it made the hardware side simpler. The AE itself only needs to handle one codec this way.

webby
13-06-2009, 16:58
What if I feed it with ALAC?

Beechwoods
14-06-2009, 05:07
As far as I know, Webby, it takes 16/44.1 ALAC without conversion...

Codifus
17-06-2009, 16:22
Hi Beechwood,

I think it would be better to say that iTunes, once it knows it is talking to an airport express, converts its audio data, be it MP3, AAC, AIFF or WAV, to ALAC. iTunes then sends the ALAC data to the airport express. The airport then expands the data back to PCM audio which it either sends to its internal DAC or S/PDIFs thru optical to an external DAC.

This is done in an effort not to saturate the limited wireless bandwidth available thru the G or N protocol.

tr@nz
21-08-2009, 21:30
Just a little update from things I have gleaned over the last few months that might interest those reading this thread.

1. A program, albeit pricy at $995, called Amarra (by Sonic Studio - pro audio) is supposed to make iTunes sound even better. Moreover, it is supposed to do the file resolution switching automatically for you. If you have 24/192, 24/96 and 16/44.1 files sitting on your server, you do not have to keep switching your Audio/Midi settings. Have not listened or purchased it.....yet.

http://www.sonicstudio.com/amarra/

2. There are many threads, magazine articles and tests out there that state firewire connection to your DAC beats USB and optical. Something to think about.

3. I have used 24/192 on iTunes without issue. Currently using Mac Mini firewire to AES/EBU to an external DAC.

4. There are some decent options out there for getting high-res audio purchased on the web, although mostly in the classical and jazz arena. Most of these sites have some free trial songs for you to play with.

- http://www.2l.no/
- http://www.highdeftapetransfers.com/
- http://www.itrax.com/
- http://www.linnrecords.com/
- http://referencerecordings.com/
- http://www.aixrecords.com/aix_news.html
- http://bluecoastrecords.com/blue-coast-collection-24bit/96khz-downloads

5. Another option is to rip your high res audio from BluRay. The 2l production company in Norway now also sells blu-ray audio only discs with 24/192 resolution files.

6. Airport Express is cool to use with iTunes, as you can use your iPhone remote application to even turn on which "speakers" to use. The airport express is just seen as another speaker. Slick. It is a pain in the @@s to setup the Airport on the network though, so don't lose patience as I almost did. But you are stuck with 16/44.1.

7. Using SSD drives apparently helps the sound quality too. Just learned about this, so I will be trying that soon.

This is an exciting time for the music server.

Hope this helps.

Cheers!

Peter H
22-08-2009, 20:01
I'm a Mac user and only just found this item. Very useful. Thanks.

ultraviolet
22-08-2009, 20:24
I've been reading this thread with great interest as I got hold of a mac mini to replace my old (450 MHz) windows music PC a few weeks ago.

On the subject of bit perfect playback the attached file is a comparison of an original wav file as played on the mini using itunes and a recording made via spdif on my macbook using soundstudio (demo version) and saved as a wav. Done all the usual tweaks suggested in this thread (thanks everyone); set output to 44.1, turn off sound enhancer/sound check, volume at full.

The files are very slightly different in a couple of places by one (probably inaudible) bit. Any suggestions? :scratch:

Beechwoods
22-08-2009, 20:50
Could be error correction within the SPDIF stream, or jitter. Optical connections are better in some respects in that they resist electromagnetic interference, unlike wired digital connections, but this comes at the price of the electronic signal to light conversion, which can introduce it's own subtle changes.

ultraviolet
22-08-2009, 21:06
Thanks for the suggestion. Just did a comparison with cog as the player and exactly the same result interestingly, so I think jitter and error correction are ruled out.

I'm beginning to suspect that a volume control somewhere isn't entirely transparent.

Beechwoods
22-08-2009, 21:29
If you got exactly the same result then you're right, not something temporal. I read somewhere that the Cog and iTunes volume controls were differently handled. You've got me stumped to be honest!

ultraviolet
22-08-2009, 21:56
What I've found with cog is that if you don't touch the volume control at all (ie leave it at the default of 3/4) you get exactly the same output as itunes on full volume (see previous attachments). This seems to tie in with earlier posts about cog being louder (if you increase the volume presumably).

I'll try different recording method tomorrow, maybe the recording software is having an effect.

I know the difference is only one least significant bit but it's not as good as using my CD player which doesn't alter the audio at all (I presume).

ultraviolet
22-08-2009, 22:12
In fact theres an idea. If I record my cd player spdif out I should be able to compare that against the mac. Probably tomorrow as I've probably overdosed on geekiness for one day.

(wifes away for a couple of days so got no limiter on max geekiness factor at the mo)

ultraviolet
23-08-2009, 09:05
I'm pleased to say that I think I can conclude all this waffling for the time being. Attached pic is recording of cd player output as compared to itunes output - identical. It seems that the recording software or core audio is adding a repeatable small gain correction to the incoming data.

So in conclusion Itunes is producing a bit perfect output (hooray:)) identical to my cd player output.


On the down side the mini is dual boot with windows and I've not been able to get foobar + asio4all to produce the same results. Output always defaults to 48 kHz and if I force it to 44.1 kHz in the sigmatel control panel then asio4all flags the soundcard as beyond logic. Looks like I'll have to stick with OSX for the time being. It's a pity I can't test my old PC to see if that was a bit perfect output but I've not got a coax to toslink adapter.

Beechwoods
23-08-2009, 16:25
Excellent, and very interesting - thanks for sharing your findings here!

ultraviolet
23-08-2009, 21:40
Thanks. Back to reality now and just listening to some music...

matblak
31-10-2009, 08:30
Hello Rob,

Have you ripped standard CD as WAV at 16bit 48khz and compared this with AIFF at 16bit 48khz?

Steve
There should be no difference in sound quality between FLAC, WAV, or AIFF since they are all lossless formats. I read up on this (can't remember where) when deciding which format to use for archiving. FLAC produces smaller files with no compression.

george_k
29-11-2009, 04:07
I prefer XLD over Max.

http://tmkk.hp.infoseek.co.jp/xld/index_e.html

dipalina
13-01-2010, 10:39
How to run Classic Mac OS on you computer? I have a PC and a Mac and I want to run the Classic Mac Operating System on one. I want to do it virtually, (running on a virtual machine). Can someone please help me 1. Download the OS, 2. Install it on the virtual PC and 3. Configure it. Thanks!

Beechwoods
13-01-2010, 19:43
Welcome dipalina... what's your name, mate? What Mac do you have? Depending on how old it is you could run OS9 natively. Why do you want to run Classic, by the way? Most everything you need is available on OSX now :)

mwheelerk
01-02-2010, 02:59
There should be no difference in sound quality between FLAC, WAV, or AIFF since they are all lossless formats. I read up on this (can't remember where) when deciding which format to use for archiving. FLAC produces smaller files with no compression.

WAV and AIFF are uncompressed file formats. FLAC, and ALAC (Apple Lossless) are lossless compressed files format but bit perfect. There should be, and I have found this to be true, no difference in sound quality between uncompressed file formats and compressed lossless file formats. Where you run into trouble is using compressed lossy file formats such as mp3.

tr@nz
22-02-2010, 08:48
It has been a while, but I thought this might help those looking for a Mac music server solution. I have changed from a MacMini to an early 2005 G5 PowerPC with Tiger OS and a Lynx PCI card, and found it to be a big improvement over the MacMini.

Using the optical out of the Mac Mini provided less digititus or listening fatigue than using the firewire connection to a DAC, but still not a happy listening experience. Also, the optical connection loses some clarity so is far from ideal.

I found a secondhand early 2005 G5 (non-liquid cooled) installed a fresh instance of Tiger OS with latest patches to v10.4.11, added the Lynx PCI card, the Amarra software which ties in with iTunes, a custom AES cable, the generation 2 Intel X25M SSD, with 4GB.

My Mac Mini is now a paperweight waiting to be sold, and I am listening happily again, browsing my complete collection of music from the comfort of my couch, through an iPhone remote application, but with audiophile quality sound.

Cheers.

simmac
29-10-2010, 08:30
I joined yesterday and as a new member i must say i am impressed what a cracking bit of advice in clear understandable easy to follow instructions i am grateful for your time and effort what a credit to the Audiophile world you are i can only apologise now for the stupid questions i will be no doubt asking you in the future
Fantastic Thanks
simmac

simmac
29-10-2010, 08:37
Hi I knew it wouldn't take long for my first stupid question I have already burned my cd collection onto a external hard drive and got rid of the cds i am not sure what bit-rate i burned them on at if i didn't burn them on at the best can i import them from my hard drive to itunes in a higher rate if i adjust the settings like the advice at the beginning of this post
Thanks
Simmac

The Grand Wazoo
30-10-2010, 00:07
Hi Simon,
Welcome to The Art of Sound!
It's great that you've found it so helpful already & we're all glad you've joined us, but would you mind nipping over to the Welcome area & posting a little 'introductory something' for us to get to know you by?
A few lines about yourself, your system, taste in music & anything else that you fancy would be great. We'd also like an excuse to see your gear, so some piccies in the Gallery would be just peachy!!

Cheers & welcome, once again!

Stratmangler
30-10-2010, 00:26
Hi I knew it wouldn't take long for my first stupid question I have already burned my cd collection onto a external hard drive and got rid of the cds i am not sure what bit-rate i burned them on at if i didn't burn them on at the best can i import them from my hard drive to itunes in a higher rate if i adjust the settings like the advice at the beginning of this post
Thanks
Simmac

I cannot understand why people rip to a lossy format - once the data is gone it's gone.
Anything you do to your music collection from here on is academic - no matter what you do to adjust things you cannot repair the files to original status.
You should have ripped to ALAC, and set up iTunes to do so securely.
Ripping to ALAC, unlike MP3 is completely reversible - the files will decompress to their original state.
Ideally you could do with ripping your former CD collection again:doh:

mwheelerk
02-11-2010, 06:01
Hi I knew it wouldn't take long for my first stupid question I have already burned my cd collection onto a external hard drive and got rid of the cds i am not sure what bit-rate i burned them on at if i didn't burn them on at the best can i import them from my hard drive to itunes in a higher rate if i adjust the settings like the advice at the beginning of this post
Thanks
Simmac

Two things you can do to tell what type of import you did. First go to ITunes>Preferences>General then select Import Settings. Hopefully what you see listed next to Import Settings is either AIFF, WAV or Apple Lossless. If it is one of those you are in great shape. If it is set to MP3 and you truly have gotten rid of your CDs your are pretty much screwed (IMHO) with regards to quality playback through a home system.

Another way you can check what rate they were imported as go to iTunes>View>View Options and check Bit Rate. Now in your iTunes library using the Album List view look to the far right and it will show the Bit Rate that the particular song was imported at. If you see variable bit rates that are typically from 500 Kbps to 1000 Kpbs you have Apple Lossless. If you see 1411 Kbps you have AIFF files. If you see 392 Kbps or less you have lossy files and I hope you still have your CDs.

Marco
03-11-2010, 10:34
Hi 'dipalina',

Welcome to AOS :)

Could you please pop into the Welcome area and introduce yourself to our community by supplying your first name, basic geographic location, system details and music tastes, as this is the requirement for all new members joining AOS.

Cheers! :cool:

Marco.

P.S We don't allow members to post links in signatures to other sites without permission being granted to them first.

gramofone
04-11-2010, 03:04
Guys

This is a long thread, so apologies if somebody has posted on this previously.

I use Plex to run FLAC 24/96 on my Mac.

Plex is a branch (similar to Boxee) from the XBMC media kernel. Unlike Boxee which can play on practically anything, Plex only plays on Mac.

It is still free to download.

It is quite slick to use, but there are a couple of issues with it:

1. It crashes/ hangs sometimes, particularly when you flick back between fullscreen and window mode (at least on my Mac it does - MAcBook Pro running Leopard)

2. It always sets the outputMIDI to 16/48 on start up. So you have to start Plex in a window, THEN start audioMIDI and set the output to 24/96 or whatever you want. (It will remain on this setting until you restart Plex when it will default again).:doh:


My question : Has anyone here used this and moved on to something else? ... I find the manual setting of output sampling rates tedious ... does anything that runs on Mac do this on the fly? ...:scratch:

lovejoy
22-11-2010, 11:40
I use Plex but only really for watching movies or TV shows that I've downloaded. As a result I never had to alter the sample frequency/bit depth as this is the standard for DVD and the majority of digital video anyway.

Over the weekend I was playing with an audio player called 'Audirvana'. This will do automatic switching of sample frequency so you don't even need to play with your Audio MIDI settings. It's a very simple interface with limited functionality, but if it's sound quality first and foremost for you then this is the best player I've heard on a Mac so far, even more so than Pure Music and Amarra - plus it's free. YMMV as ever.

gramofone
02-12-2010, 20:56
Over the weekend I was playing with an audio player called 'Audirvana'. This will do automatic switching of sample frequency so you don't even need to play with your Audio MIDI settings. It's a very simple interface with limited functionality, but if it's sound quality first and foremost for you then this is the best player I've heard on a Mac so far, even more so than Pure Music and Amarra - plus it's free. YMMV as ever.

I am shortly about to instal Snow Leopard on my machines so will definitely check this out. :interesting:

Beechwoods
02-12-2010, 21:13
Thank you Rich. Messing around with Audio Midi to amend samplerates has always been a faff. I think this might just be the ticket!

Edit: Ulp! Snow Leopard only -- I'll have to try it on my desktop... and it's only 23 hours old; how did you get to hear about it so soon?!

gramofone
04-12-2010, 20:24
Rich

Just upgraded my machines to Snow Leopard ... so am now about to download Audirvana ... will let you know how I get on with it.

gramofone
04-12-2010, 21:29
Rich

Firstly, let me say that this player sounds very good indeed.

But I was worried about what it said on the box (actually on the virtual facia) : "16/96 D/A converter". It actually sounded as good as a 24/96 player, so instead of believing people that it was automatically setting sampling rates/ bit depths, I pulled up Audio Midi into a window set it to 96/24 and launched a 24/96 Hi-Res track. :scratch:

What it did was quite interesting : It automatically changed the settings OK! : Not to 96/16 as one might expect, but To -> 44.1 / 24 ! So it downsampled the file but left the bit depth unchanged ...? ... This resulted in something similar to spreading strawberry jam over a silver disc and putting it in a top loader - a lot of crackles and pops interspersed with some music.

The other thing - which is annoying - is that you don't seem to be able to create playlists, or even save the list you populated for the next time. :steam:

But as I said it sounds good - best 16/44.1 player I've heard ... probably as good or better than any disc spinner out there.

Beechwoods
05-12-2010, 12:51
I found 24/96 glitched badly on my machine when I tried it but I didn't have the time to play with it to find out why. I'm sticking with Cog for now. Cog is utterly reliable and plays Shorten as well as the other formats… definitely the best for me at the moment. It's not Snow Leopard only either.

gramofone
06-12-2010, 20:31
I just discovered that the '16/96 D/A converter' engraved on the virtual facia actually changes.

I thought my mind was playing tricks on me again ( as it frequently does ) when I noticed '16/44.1 D/A converter' on the facia as I was playing a track.

Here's another interesting point: Instead of playing the track at 24/96, it played it at 16/44.1 (Hence my observation above). :doh:

So, trying to take matters into my own hands and knowing that the player only does 16 bits, I set the Audio Midi output to 16/96 (remember that's what it says on the box).

Instead of 16/96 the player again down-sampled the song to 16/44.1 - but this time it was glitching badly like someone was pressing the FF function. :doh:

When I set Audio Midi back to 16/44.1 it again played properly. So unless I am missing something (which is probably the case), the '16/96 D/A converter' claim by the designer seems more fantasy than reality.

And when I mean 'properly', I mean it plays with absolute crystal clarity and with great musicality. Slightly thinner sounding than you might expect from a 24 bit rendition - but seriously good sound nonetheless.

TBH I wouldn't want to be a CDP manufacturer (at any price-point) with this thing downloadable from the 'net for FREE !

lovejoy
16-12-2010, 13:28
Interesting findings Malcolm, I'll have to do some tests on this with my Macbook and see if it matches yours, although my Macbook is in for repair at the moment as the graphics chipset has died :-(.

I had clicking and 'CPU over' issues with an earlier version of Audirvana, but it's been playing pretty flawlessly for me since version 0.1.c, even on 24/96 material (even if it's not playing it in its native format). One thing I have noticed though is that it's best to not have anything else running whilst you play hi-res and if you've had any other apps running before starting to play tunes then it's best to do a reboot and ensure you've got maximum memory free.

gramofone
17-12-2010, 20:03
UPDATE 17/12

My love affair Audirvana is now officially on the rocks.

I have started playing around with my ex - Plex - again. The reason for this change in fortunes is an iPhone App called Remote HD.

I downloaded this app last week, since it seemed to be one of the better Apple remotes currently around and because it promised Plex/ Boxee support (and many more besides).

Well - unlike Audirvana - this does everything it says on the box. No bugs - this thing has been properly tested, and it is a professional product. In fact a couple of times when it didn't do what I expected, I manually tried to control Plex from the keyboard, and it did the same thing .. the bug was actually in Plex.

So Plex works with this app, but it also has a virtual desktop feature so you can see your desktop from your iPhone. (This last feature would probably better with an iPad). However since it supports touch gestures so you can zoom in on an area of your desktop. This means you are able to manipulate programs using the virtual desktop feature - including, for example, selecting vids from YouTube.

Controlling YouTube (on your computer) from an iPhone takes some ingenuity - but is possible, and I am sure after some practice it will become second nature.

So now I am able to listen to Studio Master quality playback, from my couch, wirelessly controlled from an iPhone ... :)

lovejoy
20-12-2010, 11:06
Hi Malcolm,
Good to hear. I love Plex, but I've only ever used it with my home cinema setup. It is easily the best piece of software I've ever used for storing and navigating a collection of movies and TV content. I've never actually used it in the hi-fi system for serious music listening though. How do you find it sounds in comparison with Audirvana? My current setup is such that all of my storage, organisation and background listening is fulfilled perfectly by iTunes, but if I'm sat with a glass of wine of an evening and I really want to enjoy an album, I'll use Audirvana. If it ever comes to a point where either a. iTunes sounds as good as Audirvana or b. Audirvana can be used as a backend for iTunes then that'll be all boxes ticked.

gramofone
23-12-2010, 20:18
Rich,

I agree with you, Audirvana is a better computer-side player than iTunes or even Plex. In fact, 24/96 files sound better down-sampled to 16/ 44.1 resolution in Audirvana than in original format in Plex !

However because I have the GF USB converter attached this not relevant. What is an important is having a fully functioned media player that can handle FLAC files and can be manipulated without a keyboard.

I don't like keyboards in the listening space.

FLAC rules out Front Row - but Plex (and I think you will agree ) is miles better anyway ... add Remote HD and "bingo!". This is a truly great remote, it is fully functioned and it just works

If you have an iPhone you gotta have it.

sburrell
07-09-2011, 09:41
Just a word of warning, courtesy of Computer Audiophile.com:

Note: Apple has apparently removed integer mode support from its built-in USB driver of Mac OS/X Lion. Until Apple changes that or some third party developers come up with an integer mode capable USB driver, none of these device will work in integer mode under Lion.
(Source (http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Updated-integer-mode-capable-device-list))

webby
07-09-2011, 21:15
Just a word of warning, courtesy of Computer Audiophile.com:

(Source (http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Updated-integer-mode-capable-device-list))

Hmmm....

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/OSX-Lion-Now-Incudes-Integer-Mode-Pure-Music-Obsolete

Maybe it does...?

Edit: it doesn't.

macca63
23-09-2011, 11:09
Useful stuff indeed - never occurred to me to change any of this on my Macbook!

Just wanted to check what was worth me changing without a DAC (although I will have soon) - I can see the advantage of changing to AIFF and upping the sample rate but am guessing I should leave the output side alone until I have a DAC to run a signal through?

I have a Sony TA-FB940R amp (analogue phono inputs only) and connect my Macbook via the headphone out to the AUX in.

<thought> Do I need an amp with digital in's for a DAC to be of benefit?

TIA

Tony

twelvebears
03-10-2011, 16:58
I've been getting excellent results running Audirvana with the output going direct to my Nad M2 via optical. So much so that I've decided to retire my Audiocom modded Squeezebox Classic and Teddy Pardo PSU.

I'll miss the ease of use of the browser interface of Slimserver but I just use iTunes as my navigation/playlist tool and then drag an drop to Audirvana.

The only thought I have is whether I'd benefit from going asynchronous by getting a MF V-Link

sondale
09-10-2011, 17:54
However because I have the GF USB converter attached this not relevant. What is an important is having a fully functioned media player that can handle FLAC files and can be manipulated without a keyboard.



Malcolm - what is a GF USB converter? A google search reveals USB to Bluetooth devices and something used as a piece of test gear.

I ask as I am trying to get music out of an old Power Mac G4 - pre Intel chips. Most hardware (as with software such as Plex etc) only work with Intel chip version Macs.

Thanks

Alan

sondale
09-10-2011, 19:28
I have today loaded Max & Cog onto the Power Mac G4 - over headphones they do seem to be better than ITunes - so thanks for the various posts on these two bits of software.

Settings are 16-bit/44.1khz ripping to AIFF.

Once I can convert to using the USB output I will be able to compare with my cMP2 setup.

Volante
03-11-2011, 20:05
Not sure if this is the right place but a very useful list of internet radio stations with transmission bit rates is:

http://www.listenlive.eu

check out the Avro stations in Netherlands!

allsorts
17-01-2012, 21:55
I just got around to downloading Audirvana Plus after using Audirvana donation ware for a year or so. I was immediately taken with an obvious improvement in sound quality. Everything just seemed tighter and more involved, for want of a better descriptor.
Also love the way it can control Itunes so i can now use my ipod touch to control everything using the Remote app. For AUD $48 Aud Plus its a great buy :)

AlfaGTV
05-03-2012, 12:21
I strongly disagree with the notion that you should upsample your rippings to 48Khz when using iTunes.

It is definently better to use a suitable ripping application to create a bit-perfect rip of your CD's! Upsampling to a non even multiple requires the data to be interpolated! Yikes! :rolleyes:

If you come to the conclusion that you like your digital files resampled/upsampled this is easily done using your preferred software, without "destroying" the original rips.

iTunes is said to deliver bit perfect output as long as your audio settings doesnt screw this up! I still believe that Amarra and for that matter BitPerfect, provides the better output. YMMV of course!

And if you would like to rip using something more competent i would like to recommend XLD, which is very similar to EAC on the PC. All your rips are done with checksum verifying against a database, and a logfile is created afterwards in your folder. Works great!

BR Mike

Rambaud
09-03-2012, 09:36
I no longer upsample to 48kHz in itTunes - just 16-bit 44.1kHz - when ripping CDs.

But I do often upsample to 96kHz in Audirvana Plus (the max for my current DAC), depending on the music.

roob
29-03-2012, 23:18
When ripping a cd you should do it in its native format ie 16/44 anything else will not be bit perfect.

jdpanoptic
08-09-2012, 20:12
There's not much point in ripping audio from a 16/44.1 CD to a higher sample rate, I can't see how it would improve the quality.

I'm yet to try the various bits of software suggested in this thread, but I'm intrigued and will do soon.

AlfaGTV
03-11-2012, 12:01
Why would you want you want to interpolate/pad bit depth? It's not like you are adding anything to the original files, i surely hope?
And in my opinion you are leading people astray by recommending them to NOT store bit perfect copies of their precious music files.

Please note! I'm not saying it doesn't sound better in your current config, but that would be IN YOUR CURRENT CONFIG!
Why do i even bother commenting them? Well, i'm on a mission to rescue people from having to rip their CD's over again!

No, please rip your CD's as bit perfect as you possibly can! If you feel like experimenting, please convert your files using whatever software, but KEEP THE ORIGINAL COPIES AS BACKUP!

OF course this is as always my personal opinion, and your milage may vary...
:cool: /Mike

Filterlab
03-11-2012, 12:59
It's why I open with "in my opinion". At no point do I suggest that it's the only way to import discs or that everyone should import their entire collection again. It's simply a thread on discussion with the post updated to reflect my most recent findings.

I have personally found that importing and maintaining the music files through the chain at 32 bits is of superior quality, and I have re-imported CDs previously imported in 16 bit to draw comparison. I thought I'd share that for someone wishing to learn more about Mac OS X's audio abilities.

Sigh. :(

Anyway, I've removed the title post so this thread is now completely open discussion. :)


...if you would like to rip using something more competent i would like to recommend XLD...

I used XLD for years and it's good, I find MAX to be a lot better though.


There's not much point in ripping audio from a 16/44.1 CD to a higher sample rate, I can't see how it would improve the quality.

Have you tried it or are you making an assumption that it won't be better?

:)

AlfaGTV
03-11-2012, 17:32
Anyway, I've removed the title post so this thread is now completely open discussion. :)

Ahhh, that was not my intention! :(
I will gladly discuss this way of storing music as i also stated earlier! However, the reason for my jumping at you like that is the fact that this thread is a 'sticky' and therefore have sort of 'How-To'-status? :scratch:
I may be very wrong here but imo sticky's reflect facts, rather than subjective discussion.

Have you tried increasing bit depth/resampling your files by software rather than re-ripping the records? There are quite a few options i believe...
And that is my main point; If you still have your 'bit perfect' file in lossless Red Book resolution on your hard drive, you can pretty much try anything with them without having to resort to the tedious task of ripping 'em again! :cool:



I used XLD for years and it's good, I find MAX to be a lot better

Please explain? I was unable to get Max working on my OS X Lion and therefore started with XLD instead, and it sort of stuck.. ;)

Regards /Mike

Sandro
03-12-2012, 17:00
Hi guys,
I read all this thread, and I'm now confused.
I just started using my old MacMini G4 as a music server.
I bought a 1TB USB HD (now storage is no more an issue :) ) and I was thinking about storing there the best part of my CD collection.
I thought that copying the wav files from the CDs to the HD was the most simple and effective way to be sure I was not losing any information. Isn't this true ? :scratch:

AlfaGTV
21-12-2012, 10:10
Hi Sandro!

Getting started with file based audio can be tedious task as it takes some time, effort and engagement.
There are, in my opinion, a couple of good advice to adhere to:
1. Use a good ripping software, XLD/Max in Mac OS or EAC in Windows and configure for best quality!
2. Rip to a lossless format, AIFF/WAV or their compressed cousins Apple Lossless/FLAC.
3. Store these files safely, using regular BACKUP's to a second storage which is stored at your mother in law or similar.

To me it goes without saying that the rips should be stored in Bit Perfect resolution, which for RedBook CD's should be 16bit 44.1kHz.

Once you've come this far, you have the option of converting your files to other formats easily or resampling if thats your 'cuppa tea'.
But, never mess with the original rips!

Regards //Mike

johnB
20-01-2013, 15:01
Hi, I'm trying to feed my MacBook digital output via Toslink through DAC to amp...whilst this works for my Squeezebox I can't get it to work on the Mac.....

I'm using a mini-jack to Toslink converter, then a Toslink cable, and there's a red light at the end of the cable when it's connected to the Mac.

My suspicion is that digital-output is not properly set up in "audio midi set up" utility as I can't change the volume sliders which are all set to Value zero and dB zero.

Any advice....I'm using 10.6.8 on the mac.

Apologies if this is a bit basic, but I'm not digitally competent:)

Cheers all

John

AlfaGTV
21-01-2013, 17:13
S'pose you've made sure the correct output is chosen in System Settings-Audio?
I've seen Mac's default to other outputs at times.

Is the correct output shown in Midi-settings?

If you unplug the Toslink Cable, does the music start playing in the internal speaker?

Lets hear the results, please!

Regards /Mike

sq225917
21-01-2013, 19:34
When using the digital out there is no volume setting.

johnB
21-01-2013, 21:41
Thanks Mike and Simon.

Mike, the MacBook changes to "digital out" both in System preferences and Audio Midi set up when I plug the Toslink into the headphone output but no sound comes through to the amp. When i unplug the Toslink from the Mac it plays music through the internal speakers...I've tried the Toslink cable and the digital input onto my amp with my Squeezebox and both work fine.....

Simon, on System Preferences when it auto selects Digital out, it states "the selected device has no output controls"...is this your point?

I've tried the Mac through another DAC and it doesn't work...so that leads meto believe the issue is with the Mac.

I'm now lost....

Cheers
John

AlfaGTV
22-01-2013, 06:14
It behaves just as expected regarding the switching and so...
And, correctly no volume control should be available using optical out. What puzzled me was your saying that the volume was set to Zero? Perhaps it displays like that?

Are you absolutely positive the MiniToslink adapter is OK? These are really not the best items in the world. Do you have the option to try another cable without the adapter?

Or another Mac using the same cabling?

I'll look into this during the day, i will get my TosLink cable out and try.

Regards /Mike

AlfaGTV
22-01-2013, 06:56
Well, it seems the behaviour is what i remember.
When using iTunes, the audio switches automatically between digital output (MiniTosLink/Headphone jack) and if i unplug the cable the audio the sound comes from the internal speaker in the Mac.

When looking at Midi Settings, is the output set to 44.1kHz and 24bits bit depth?

Have you perhaps tried some third party software for Audio purposes that might have fecked up your settings somehow? (unlikely though, as you get audio when unplugging the digital cable)

But my best bet so far is to try a proper Mini Toslink to Toslink cable!

Regards /Mike

johnB
22-01-2013, 21:08
Thanks Mike.....I'm sure it's the adaptor that converts the mini-jack to Toslink that's the problem .so as you say next option is to get a cable that avoids the need for the adaptor. I'll report back.
Cheers
John

SteveTheShadow
26-03-2013, 20:28
I've read all this thread with interest as I heve been a Mac user since 1992.

I currently run a Mac Mini bought in May 2012 running Mountain Lion.

This upsampling business has me intrigued. I've always been of the opinion that the outputs should be left at their native sample rates and bit depths, but lately am not so sure.

Having tried everything upsampled to 24/96 and found that there was no difference or even a slight degradation with 16bit/44.1, I came to believe the mantra of the bit-perfect brigade. That is until I decided, on a whim just to try upping the output to 24bit/88.2 via the audio midi setup.

The result is simply wonderful, both with CD rips and with iTunes store downloads, which a 24 bit/44.1 to start with.

Presentation is natural and more lifelike than I have ever heard digital to be before, and all via the much maligned iTunes.

The digital experts can feel free to disagree but
I'm just saying that power of two upsampling really does work wonders for the sound of Mac OSX audio output via the optical out at any rate.

AlfaGTV
26-03-2013, 20:55
Good to hear Steve! I do agree that "symmetrical" upsampling is the best option, when upsampling is used at all. You may have hit a sweet spot there, when playing through the Mac.
I have a DAC, the ASUS Essence One, which has got a nice asyncronous USB interface and the option to upsample "symmetrically" to 352.8Khz for 44.1/88.2/176.4Khz material and to 384Khz for 48/96/192Khz stuff... This works really well to my ears! :)

Have you tried BitPerfect? Its a small application which lets you upsample, symmetrically or asymmetrically. It makes all the settings foryouwihout hassle, by passes sound degrading software and stll lets you use iTunes as player nd library?
Only costs a few quid, well worth it!!!

Regards Mike

SteveTheShadow
26-03-2013, 21:19
Hi Mike,
I used to use BitPerfect a while ago, but have negelected it of late.
I've just downloaded the most recent update and after a hairy moment when it told me it could not find my iTunes library, I realised you have to now point it to your library manually, something to do with a change of rules for third party apps.

I set it to upsample to 88.2KHz and after playing a few tunes, I have to agree that it makes a useful improvement to vanilla iTunes playback, rendering it much more solid and full sounding, without losing detail; more like good vinyl playback.

Stratmangler
26-03-2013, 22:24
Hi Mike,
I used to use BitPerfect a while ago, but have negelected it of late.
I've just downloaded the most recent update and after a hairy moment when it told me it could not find my iTunes library, I realised you have to now point it to your library manually, something to do with a change of rules for third party apps.

I set it to upsample to 88.2KHz and after playing a few tunes, I have to agree that it makes a useful improvement to vanilla iTunes playback, rendering it much more solid and full sounding, without losing detail; more like good vinyl playback.

Are you running through an external DAC?

SteveTheShadow
27-03-2013, 18:28
Are you running through an external DAC?

Hi Chris,
I'm running through an SPDIF toslink connection to my old Musical Fidelity M1 DAC.
Now this upsamples everything it gets to 24/192 regardless, so adding another stage of digital processing at the PC end, flies in the face of accepted wisdom.
Yet the improvement is there and it is not subtle.
Whole swathes of fog are lifted by the simple expedient of symmetrical upsampling at the Mac end of the chain. The sound relaxes and fills out yet has tremendous presence.

I've given up giving a monkey's fsck whether I'm adding some kind of euphonic distortion. You can't apply analogue logic to digital processing.
It is the nearest thing to good vinyl I have heard yet.:)

mwheelerk
26-05-2013, 02:05
I have used a Mac for the basis of an audio system for the past 6 years. My current configuration is a 2010 Mac Mini with 8GB RAM running the latest version of Mac OSX. I use iTunes as my library manager. My library resides on a 2TB external HDD with a second daisy chained via FireWire 800 as the back up. The majority of my library (1700+ albums) were imported from my CDs with less than 10% (but growing) being purchased high resolution downloads. I use XLD with AcuurateRIP to extract AIFF files from the CDs to my library. I have used several playback softwares which I find exceed the performance of iTunes and provide additional beneficial features such as auto sample rate switching. These include Pure Music, Audivrana +, Amarra and now JRiver for Mac. Audivrana is my preferred player of choice for now. Long term, as it continues to develope JRiver For Mac may be my choice because it is not only a player but a complete media management system that replaces iTunes. I output this via USB to a T+A DAC8 and then to Dynaudio Focus 110A powered monitors.

I don't thing I have ever been happier listening to my music based on the quality of output, accessibility and functionality.

AlfaGTV
26-05-2013, 07:39
You have almost exactly the same setup as i do! :)
Only difference is that i store my music on a NAS and use Amarra for the output.

We're in agreement on the acessibility and sound quality side of this i full. My computer does act as as a secondary source today as i mostly play files from a USB drive or via DLNA to my Bladelius Embla, when nor spinning vinyl.

Best regards / Mike

Tim
26-05-2013, 11:37
I don't thing I have ever been happier listening to my music based on the quality of output, accessibility and functionality.
Nice one and I'm not personally an Apple user, but I have heard some mighty sweet music coming from a MacBook Pro once iTunes was binned and it was configured for audio only. And your above statement matches my experience too, since I committed 100% to file based audio. In fact I have never, ever been happier since I first started listening to music and I play so much more than I ever did now too - in fact I don't even own a CD player any-more. For me its a marriage made in heaven.

:thumbsup:

Hypnoboogie
07-06-2013, 15:43
Long term, as it continues to develope JRiver For Mac may be my choice because it is not only a player but a complete media management system that replaces iTunes.

I'm new to Audirvana, but it already feels as though it'll continue to be my main player. The idea of something in addition to this to replace iTunes for library management is heavenly, though.

bpcairns
02-10-2013, 21:47
Why would you want you want to interpolate/pad bit depth? It's not like you are adding anything to the original files, i surely hope?
And in my opinion you are leading people astray by recommending them to NOT store bit perfect copies of their precious music files.

Please note! I'm not saying it doesn't sound better in your current config, but that would be IN YOUR CURRENT CONFIG!
Why do i even bother commenting them? Well, i'm on a mission to rescue people from having to rip their CD's over again!

SNIP!


I think I may be able to shed light on this. In a nutshell - Digital Volume.

I'm sure the Linn Akurate DS rips CDs to 24 or 32 bit. All the extra bits are used for volume only. i.e. there is no distorting of the PCM waveform. The graph just moves wholesale up the Y axis.

This allows a huge range of volume change in the digital domain without distorting the original signal. Which is how the Akurate DS does it's volume AFAIK.

If something in Rob's chain is doing digital volume it would make a big difference to his sound quality.

It is worth noting that 16/44.1 rips could easily be converted to 24/32/44.1/88.2 and back again without any loss.

I know this is a MAC thread but I'd like to add a very short comparison with my Windows experiences in case anyone might find it interesting.

In XP there is the same issue with a fixed output sample rate that needs switched manually for different source material.
In Win 7 a digital out can be set to just spew out the digital file as-is. Which is nice. Vista and 8 are presumably the same as 7 but I have no interest in either.

I have an ubuntu samba server with all my FLACs on it. This is then accessed by all the PC in the house, which are legion. There is a load of other stuff on the server also.

There is a dedicated silent AMD fusion based thingy running Win7 with MediaMonkey WASAPI output > Beresford Bushmaster >Linn Kairn > Homemade Tunebox > 2 x Linn LK280 (1 with SPARK) > Linn Keilidhs with Ninka tweeters.
This is controllable from an Android tablet or phone. So similar functionality as the MAC. In fact as MACs also use DNLA I could even use an ithingy to control it.
The kids and wife also run MediaMonkey on various laptops and small PCs connected to Televisions in various parts of the house so everyone has access to all the music from everywhere. This. for me, is the most compelling advantage of computer based audio.

I agree that you should ideally rip everything bit perfectly UNLESS you intend to do volume control in the digital domain. In that case you may want to up the bit depth.

All my FLACs are 16/44.1 if I ripped them and there is a small selection of higher res stuff. When I compare SACD rips to CD versions it often sounds re-mastered in some way so I find it difficult to decide if there really is any difference due solely to sample rates.
Logic tells me SACD COULD sound "better" or "more analogue due to less aliasing" but my knowledge of physics and psychoacoustics tells me I'm probably imagining most of the difference. It all sounds pretty damn nice anyway so I try not to worry about the often tiny subtle differences I can or can't hear and just enjoy the great sound.

Anyway, I hope I haven't offended anyone, I basically think you are both right.

Brian

sq225917
03-10-2013, 07:34
Its pointless ripping 16 bit data in 24 bit any 24 bit volume control will include zero stuffing of the lower bit vdepth source material anyway. Do any of the Linn DS units have a CD slot, i didnt think they did.

bpcairns
03-10-2013, 12:26
Its pointless ripping 16 bit data in 24 bit any 24 bit volume control will include zero stuffing of the lower bit vdepth source material anyway. Do any of the Linn DS units have a CD slot, i didnt think they did.

I'm sure that is true of anything purporting to be hifi. Probably is how the Linn stuff works. Don't know for sure as it is way out of my budget. There are however many low end systems that do not bit stuff and just mangle the data to reduce volume. Windows certainly does this if you use the volume control when using a digital out (sounds really terrible). From all the advice to set volume controls to a particular level on the Mac for best results then it seems likely that MacOS also doesn't bit stuff if you use the volume control on the Mac with a digital out. I'm not saying I know for certain what is happenning, I'm just offering a possible explanation of why filterlabs system sounds better to him when ripped to higher bits. It may equally be all in his head. Ultimately since he prefers it that way, I don't think it matters if the difference is real or not. Also as I said above, he should be able to convert his 32/44.1 to 16/44.1 without losing anything from the original CD. So unlike ripping to a lossless format, he isn't losing anything by doing what he is doing. The only debate is whether he is gaining anything. I think he "might" be, but I'm not claiming I know for certain either way. My mind is open on the matter. Until someone can confirm how every piece of equipment in his digital chain actually works, I can only speculate.

Brian

richluvsound
03-10-2013, 13:21
Sperts !

I just imported my iTunes library to COG and ended up with duplicate tracks ..... I just dropped my iTunes folder into COG . What did I do wrong . By the way , to my ear COG sounds better than Bit perfect ....

MBP via USB to M2Tech Young to Pass Labs B1 , ALEPH 30 , to K2 clone !

TIA

dave2010
15-03-2014, 06:47
So unlike ripping to a lossless format, he isn't losing anything by doing what he is doing. The only debate is whether he is gaining anything. Ripping to a lossless format shouldn't lose anything - by definition. Lossless formats allow the original data to be reconstructed, though we have had discussions round here about playback of different lossless formats - for example whether players for WAVs do better than players for FLAC etc. If there are any benefits in using different lossless formats for playback then these can only be due to side effects. I'm not denying that side effects may exist, or that they may be significant.

I assume you really meant "lossy formats" -

AlfaGTV
15-03-2014, 09:32
I think I may be able to shed light on this. In a nutshell - Digital Volume.
...

It is worth noting that 16/44.1 rips could easily be converted to 24/32/44.1/88.2 and back again without any loss.
...
I agree that you should ideally rip everything bit perfectly UNLESS you intend to do volume control in the digital domain. In that case you may want to up the bit depth.
...

Sorry Brian, have completely missed your input on the subject!

I would be very surprised, if you could change samplerate on a file, from say 44.1 into a 88.2khz sampling, and then back again without changing the content?
Have you tried this?
IMO an identical file MUST have the same CRC as the original file.

I do agree that in most cases adjusting bitdepth only "pads" the file with zeroes, which should mean that content is not changed. If you actually re-sample the file the content will not be bit perfect....

My first rule when ripping has not changed; Keep the original file state and sampling, store in a lossless format.
Any changes can be performed on copies of these rips, while keeping strict backups of the original rips.

ATB Mike

rallye666
19-01-2015, 10:19
Hi all, my current setup is 2014 iMac - 10m toslink - Bushmaster mk2 DAC.

But I'm wondering if I'd get better results with a USB - S/PDIF coaxial converter?

General consensus seems to be that digital coaxial is more natural sounding, but I'm worried about signal degradation and interference over a 10m length.

On a budget of £100, would you buy a half decent coax cable and converter? Or the best quality toslink cable I can find?! (Although glass cables don't seem to exist at that length)

Cheers, James

Stratmangler
19-01-2015, 10:23
Hi all, my current setup is 2014 iMac - 10m toslink - Bushmaster mk2 DAC.

But I'm wondering if I'd get better results with a USB - S/PDIF coaxial converter?

General consensus seems to be that digital coaxial is more natural sounding, but I'm worried about signal degradation and interference over a 10m length.

On a budget of £100, would you buy a half decent coax cable and converter? Or the best quality toslink cable I can find?! (Although glass cables don't seem to exist at that length)

Cheers, James

Methinks you're thinking too much about things.
Keep what you have and spend the money on CDs or "mood enhancer" ;)

rallye666
19-01-2015, 10:56
Methinks you're thinking too much about things.
Keep what you have and spend the money on CDs or "mood enhancer" ;)

Ha, I think your definitely right!

My system is a work in progress so Im probably better off saving for my Leema Pulse than worrying about another cable for now!

r100
19-01-2015, 12:13
If the DAC is 10 meters from the MAC then why not get a second hand Airport Express or even a Raspberry Pi running Volumio which can either output to USB or carry its own DAC ?

cheers
:)

PS. Thank's to you, I have just realised that my 2014 MBP has an optical audio out !! Just tried it and it is also limited to 44.1kHz which is the same as the Airport Express. To better that you would probably have to use the USB out of your MAC, into a Coax/SPDIF converter (TeraDak ?) and into the Beresford if it doesn't have a direct USB input.

PS2 the above is my exact setup in my office. I have a Beresford hooked up to a newer square Airport Express. Quality is great but I do hear some clicks now and then. The older Airport Express (the one that has the plug on it) I have in my main system doesn't click with the Beresford.

rallye666
19-01-2015, 12:34
If the DAC is 10 meters from the MAC then why not get a second hand Airport Express or even a Raspberry Pi running Volumio which can either output to USB or carry its own DAC ?

cheers
:)

PS. Thank's to you, I have just realised that my 2014 MBP has an optical audio out !! Just tried it and it is also limited to 44.1kHz which is the same as the Airport Express. To better that you would probably have to use the USB out of your MAC, into a Coax/SPDIF converter (TeraDak ?) and into the Beresford if it doesn't have a direct USB input.

PS2 the above is my exact setup in my office. I have a Beresford hooked up to a newer square Airport Express. Quality is great but I do hear some clicks now and then. The older Airport Express (the one that has the plug on it) I have in my main system doesn't click with the Beresford.

I already have an apple TV connected to the 2nd optical input of my Bushmaster, I think I'm correct in saying this is limited to 48KHZ, If I'm using Tidal on the iPad from my sofa then this is what I use.

However my optical output on my iMac outputs at 96khz. My growing collection from HDtracks sound great played from there :)

My arcam rPac that I use as a headphone amp when working at the iMac is connected via USB and goes up to 192khz!

So if you want the 'on paper' highest quality, USB is the way to go.

r100
19-01-2015, 16:42
.... However my optical output on my iMac outputs at 96khz ...

Hmm, that's strange. My DAC tells me the stream is 41kHz from the MBP1024 :scratch: maybe I'm doing something wrong ??

I couldn't tell the difference between 41, 46 or 96 as long as the data sent was at least 256kbs btw.

Stratmangler
19-01-2015, 18:54
My arcam rPac that I use as a headphone amp when working at the iMac is connected via USB and goes up to 192khz!

That's not what it says in the manual!
If it's playing 24/192 then there's some downsampling going on ;)

rallye666
19-01-2015, 21:40
That's not what it says in the manual!
If it's playing 24/192 then there's some downsampling going on ;)

I think its been discovered that holding down the 2 volume controls whilst plugging in the rPac puts into class 2 usb mode and unlocks 192khz potential :)

Thebiglebowski
01-02-2015, 09:36
Hmm, that's strange. My DAC tells me the stream is 41kHz from the MBP1024 :scratch: maybe I'm doing something wrong ??

I couldn't tell the difference between 41, 46 or 96 as long as the data sent was at least 256kbs btw.

You can change the default output in applications\utility\audio midi but I though the default setting after install was 48k for Apple.

r100
01-02-2015, 10:01
A lot of information here (http://www.kenrockwell.com/apple/airport-express-audio-quality-2014.htm) on the specifications of the latest Apple Express device... and a mod here (https://hifiduino.wordpress.com/2013/06/15/apple-airport-express-usb-audio-output-mod/). Sorry, if this has already been posted.

Greets

andrasszamek
10-03-2015, 15:42
hi guys,

the built in toslink outputs 96/24, the airport tops out at 44/16. mine did at least. (2nd gen). in me previous system (creek, totem, musical fidelity) i did not hear much of a difference between the AE and and the direct toslink connection, in my current one the wired connection is quite a bit better, and USB is better then toslink (usb is 1m, toslink 3m) that being said, 10 meters is quite a long run, you should try it out, i wouldnt be surprised if the AE would be better then running a cable that long. experts usually recommend a max lenght of 1.5m for coax, 1.5m or less for usb and i guess 5m optical. i have read people say that the old AEs sound better then the apple TV, i cant confirm from own experience however. good luck!

rallye666
10-03-2015, 16:18
hi guys,

the built in toslink outputs 96/24, the airport tops out at 44/16. mine did at least. (2nd gen). in me previous system (creek, totem, musical fidelity) i did not hear much of a difference between the AE and and the direct toslink connection, in my current one the wired connection is quite a bit better, and USB is better then toslink (usb is 1m, toslink 3m) that being said, 10 meters is quite a long run, you should try it out, i wouldnt be surprised if the AE would be better then running a cable that long. experts usually recommend a max lenght of 1.5m for coax, 1.5m or less for usb and i guess 5m optical. i have read people say that the old AEs sound better then the apple TV, i cant confirm from own experience however. good luck!

Thanks for this, I'm going to go squeezebox touch rather than airport express, as I listen to quite a bit of 24/96 material. Just waiting for a realistically priced one to appear on eBay!

webby
19-01-2016, 23:44
What happened to the guide at the start of this thread?

The Night Watchman
04-03-2016, 14:56
Posting mistake.

AJSki2fly
28-10-2018, 13:32
If the DAC is 10 meters from the MAC then why not get a second hand Airport Express or even a Raspberry Pi running Volumio which can either output to USB or carry its own DAC ?

cheers
:)

PS. Thank's to you, I have just realised that my 2014 MBP has an optical audio out !! Just tried it and it is also limited to 44.1kHz which is the same as the Airport Express. To better that you would probably have to use the USB out of your MAC, into a Coax/SPDIF converter (TeraDak ?) and into the Beresford if it doesn't have a direct USB input.

PS2 the above is my exact setup in my office. I have a Beresford hooked up to a newer square Airport Express. Quality is great but I do hear some clicks now and then. The older Airport Express (the one that has the plug on it) I have in my main system doesn't click with the Beresford.

If your MacBook Pro is a 2014 model then it should fall into the spec below. My 15” MBP 2013 model is running at 192kHz from optical out. I have t ied the USB and this is limited to 44.1kHz. I am running Audirvana on autodetect and it detects the 192kHz. I am tech. support idiot at Apple the quote below is from Apple KBase.

I would check software/hardware settings maybe trial Audvirana and see what you get.

Hope this helps.


“Play high sample rate digital audio on Mac computers
The audio hardware in some MacBook Pro, Mac Pro, and iMac computers supports 176.4 kHz and 192 kHz digital audio when connected using optical output.

These computers support up to 192 kHz sample rate for audio playback:
MacBook Pro (Retina, 13-inch, Late 2013) through MacBook Pro (Retina, 13-inch, Early 2015)
MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Late 2013) through MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2015)
iMac (21.5-inch, Mid 2014) through iMac (21.5-inch, Late 2014)
iMac (Retina 4K, 21.5-inch, Late 2015)
iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014) through iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2015)
Mac Pro (Late 2013)
Mac mini (Late 2014)
To set your Mac to play high sample rate audio:
Connect one end of a TOSLINK optical cable to the headphone port on your Mac, and connect the other end to your audio device, such as an AV receiver.
Open Audio MIDI Setup, which is in the Utilities folder of your Applications folder.
Select your audio device from the list on the left side of the Audio Devices window.
If necessary, choose “Use this device for sound output” from the Action pop-up menu .
Select a sample rate, such as 176400.0 Hz or 192000.0 Hz, from the Format pop-up menu.
If the audio hardware in your Mac doesn't support high sample rate audio, you can use a third-party digital audio interface.”

Filterlab
15-06-2020, 21:27
What happened to the guide at the start of this thread?

I removed it as it was ruined by moaners.

guy
16-06-2020, 07:23
That's a bloody shame :(

Just looked at this thread, looking for some basic ideas/intro

pcourtney
12-12-2020, 16:35
since 2008 when this thread started, they have been many twists n turns along the road to getting better SQ "Audiophile" output on Mac OSX computers

the first thing, is that on any Mac, there is an application called Audio Midi Setup, this controls how your mac records audio and plays audio files

The choices are 44.1kHz, 48kHz, 88.2kHz and 96kHz. Interestingly, the default for playing through speakers is 44.1kHz, but the default for playing through headphones is 48kHz

You can ask the mac to play higher rez files at 96kHz, but you will need to use a mini toslink cable inserted in the headphone port of your mac as shown below
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcQEd7ss6lQ&ab_channel=ShowMeCables

at the other end (using a normal standard size toslink plug) connect to an external DAC that supports playback at 96kHz (or more)

The Second thing is the term "Audiophile" and what it's supposed to mean, the dictionary definition I like best says - "a hi-fi enthusiast" - but that does not really define much, but it then adds "it puts professional studio sound within the reach of the audiophile" which sums it up nicely :)

Now if PSS ( Pro Studio Sound) is the goal, then most end users are in for a huge shock, because neutrality (not letting any sound signature of any equipment in the chain be observed if at all possible, including speakers) is NOT something the majority of the HiFi press or the HiFi industry would like you to hear or even know about !

I cannot stress enough how this goal is very important for the majority of top sound engineers, and a lot of them do use mac computers and software like Logic Pro X https://www.apple.com/uk/logic-pro/

They want to hear what is being recorded in the studio, and play it back on studio monitors (speakers designed and built for studios) with as little sound signature of the equipment being used in the chain - they want neutrality, transparency, they do not want the sound to be coloured, that is the last thing sound engineers need !

The above was uttered 50 years ago by Ivor Tiefenbrun ( Linn record player fame) famously he said "It all starts with the source, get that right and your 1/3rd the way there, if not, it's a never ending battle to get the truth"

I would go further, and say it's 90% of the way there, there is another saying/quote, that is more closely aligned to PSS, said by George Fuechsel, an early sixties IBM programmer and instructor, Fuechsel said "garbage in, garbage out" as a concise way of reminding his students that a computer just processes what it is given.

And that is where we are at today, whether they be HiRez downloads or 16/44 wav rips of CD's, the quality of the underlying data, the 0's and 1's and how a DAC takes that feed and pushes it out into the analog domain is where more attention should be focused IMHO

However, the mac can be upgraded in a number of ways to give the end user more of that PSS neutrality ( if that is what you want )
try instead of iTunes, and buying BitPerfect - which was the usual advice from a few years ago along the lines of what is said below

https://www.pooraudiophile.com/2016/02/how-to-play-high-resolution-audio-with-apple-itunes.html

and use Phonix instead, it's a free high quality software program written by an amazing Dutchman, it is both well liked by the audiophile and sound engineer community, it plays all my ripped SACD's perfectly 24/96, and many other file formats used over the last few decades, including FLAC ( which iTunes sadly does not) and SHN

https://phonix.nl.eu.org/

NB if HiRez downloads is your thing, find one of your favourite CD's, rip the album to wav files, and play it from your mac a few times to get familiar with the SQ, then search for a HiRez version of the same album, and compare the two using Phonix, if you feel that the HiRez versions give you 20% more quality, continue, if not, then take it with a pinch of salt that most of these so called remastered hirez versions are not much better than really good carefully done CD rips, or wav 16/44 files !

but read this very illuminating article first, don't simply take my word for it - MQ aka "Master Quality"
https://andreweverard.com/2014/06/20/so-as-if-we-werent-confused-enough-by-dsd-flac-pcm-and-hra/

I ripped all my CD collection over ten years ago using a Dell windows laptop ( over 1000 CD's) , all ripped as WAV files, using CueRipper ( but EAC is also excellent )

http://cue.tools/wiki/CUERipper

my home audio chain is about as basic as you can get, but that makes me happy because it's probably about as close to PSS as I could possibly afford, it's also probably way too neutral for 99% of audiophiles :-)

macbook A1278 macos 10.13 High Sierra and Phonix audio player software
mini toslink out of headphone port into AVI Nines active speakers (which uses the Wolfson WM8471 DAC)

NB Phonix uses less than 1.7% cpu when playing wav files ! The program is less than 20mb in size, and can be completely uninstalled ( unlike iTunes)

pcourtney
12-12-2020, 17:30
if you listen to a lot of live concert venue files that have been uploaded to etree, using SHN compression - then Phonix will now also play those SHN files ( not exactly Audiophile but I wanted to share this really useful bit of of info with AoS readers )

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shorten_(file_format)

you will need a macos Bit Torrent client like Tomato https://sarwat.net/bittorrent/

and the macrumors forum to post on if you have any problems or feedback/ideas for Phonix going forward into 2021 :D

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/phonix-free-macos-music-player.1985426/page-13

Landloper
12-12-2020, 17:41
Thanks for a most engaging post, Peter.

I run i-Tunes usually through the optical out into a DAC, but I also have some files that are only avaialble in FLAC so have to run a second app, VLC. I tried Audirvana but I didn't much care for the interface and I also had some difficulty integrating it with i-Tunes, so once the trial expired I left things as they were. Personally I'm not overwhelmed with HiRez as it doesn't seem to me to justify the price charged for the (often minimal) improvement over a red book CD. Others clearly get a good deal of pleasure out of HiRez music. Perhaps having 58 year-old hearing minimizes the impact of HiRez tracks too.

I like the idea of a computer into a pair of active speakers as music centre, with an HPA handy for nightime.

Shovel_Knight
12-12-2020, 17:58
I run i-Tunes usually through the optical out into a DAC, but I also have some files that are only avaialble in FLAC so have to run a second app, VLC. I tried Audirvana but I didn't much care for the interface and I also had some difficulty integrating it with i-Tunes, so once the trial expired I left things as they were. Personally I'm not overwhelmed with HiRez as it doesn't seem to me to justify the price charged for the (often minimal) improvement over a red book CD. Others clearly get a good deal of pleasure out of HiRez music. Perhaps having 58 year-old hearing minimizes the impact of HiRez tracks too.

I like the idea of a computer into a pair of active speakers as music centre, with an HPA handy for nightime.

There is a free app called XLD (X Lossless Decoder) that can transcode FLAC files into ALAC (Apple Lossless). There's no loss of quality and ALAC files are fully supported by iTunes.

pcourtney
12-12-2020, 18:02
Hi Joanna, thank you, much appreciated - what DAC do you have ?

Landloper
12-12-2020, 18:16
Hi Joanna, thank you, much appreciated - what DAC do you have ?

A few standalones: Roksan K3, Audiolab M-DAC, Myryad Z20, Beresford SEG, Starting Point Systems DAC 3, and an Audioquest Dragonfly Black for peripatetic duties.

Landloper
12-12-2020, 18:16
thanks, Peter. I'll give the XLD a go.

pcourtney
12-12-2020, 18:23
A few standalones: Roksan K3, Audiolab M-DAC, Myryad Z20, Beresford SEG, Starting Point Systems DAC 3, and an Audioquest Dragonfly Black for peripatetic duties.

just a few then !

what is your favourite DAC connected to the mac ?

Filterlab
12-12-2020, 19:08
I still use XLD on the rare occasions I rip CDs, it uses the Paranoia engine to give a bit perfect rip, and a sodding good job it does too.

Fidelia is my playback app of choice. Massively flexible and superb quality; I’ve found nothing to beat it. It also supports audio plugins so one can play about if it tickles one’s fancy.

Landloper
14-12-2020, 18:41
just a few then !

what is your favourite DAC connected to the mac ?

I like them all so it is hard to elect a primus inter pares, there are but small variations in the width of the soundstage and the 'nearness' of the sound within the audio depth of field. I find that the differences in sound between DACs, unlike the price tags, are not so great.

For functionality the Roksan is best, I use this with better recordings feeding my best HP set up, a Lehmann Linear with Sennheiser HD700s. The others I rotate using each for a few weeks at a time. I like them all and would find it hard to sell any off.

The Starting Point SP3 is a NOS DAC using a TDA1543 chip. I use that for older recordings, circ 1920-1949. It is also well suited for long listening sessions and has a small footprint and can switch over to battery power as it has two 9v batteries inside.

The Beresford SEG I use along with a Beresford Capella HPA and Sennheiser HD650s. A super pairing IMO, and the two boxes can run off a single power supply as the Capella has a DC out that the SEG can run off.

The Myryad has a laid-back sound and matches a Myryad Z40 HPA I have, another pairing that i can use for long hours without fatigue.

The Dragonfly I use when away from home and it feeds a pair of Grado SR80s.

I do most of my listening over headphones and find swapping out DACs less of a changer than using other headphone amps or headphones.

pcourtney
14-12-2020, 19:04
that sounds like you have most everything under control there !
love my K-1000's :-)