Keeping my options open as I take my first steps in DA

Well I've nothing more to add to the discussion on whether different software can sound different except to reiterate that it's about timing and the computer being available for audio on the exact 44100th second ticks.

Personally I don't here much difference in sound (I tried Amarra but it didn't work with my DAC/interface), but others report there are huge differences. Equally though I've never noticed the huge differences in sound produced by varying cables. But a large proportion of audiophiles say there is differences - even when the cables measure exactly the same to very high precision. So why shouldn't the computer system being used as a transport have similar "voodoo" influences?

The best thing to do is to try various software, most can be tried for free or minimal costs. IF you hear a difference, then use the one which sounds best, if YOU don't hear a difference, be happy.

Eloise

Eloise ,which dac/inteface do you use?

Eloise, if someone tried to sell me some Photo Album software and a printer, and they told me I needed to turn the spellchecker off to get better colours, or they told me that the pictures would print grainier if I stored them on a NAS, I just wouldn't be interested in the software/printer combination. In the analogue domain many things can be expected to legitimately affect the end result but not in the digital domain. If changing the mains cable on your printer caused your pictures to print differently, wouldn't you take the printer back rather than try an endless succession of mains cables?

Yes, cable dressing, power leads with wobbly pins, two power supplies for a cd player, what nonsense!

quote:

Originally posted by likesmusic:
Eloise, if someone tried to sell me some Photo Album software and a printer, and they told me I needed to turn the spellchecker off to get better colours, or they told me that the pictures would print grainier if I stored them on a NAS, I just wouldn't be interested in the software/printer combination. In the analogue domain many things can be expected to legitimately affect the end result but not in the digital domain. If changing the mains cable on your printer caused your pictures to print differently, wouldn't you take the printer back rather than try an endless succession of mains cables?

But printing a photo is not a time critical task.

Passing data via SPDIF IS time critical.

As I say ... it just seams strange that people will take without (much) questioning, the fact that their Naim system works best when cables are dressed properly, etc. but suggest that a process on their computer which interrupts the main task (i.e. playing the music) can cause a loss of quality (NOT drop outs, etc) then you get a big backlash!

I'm not saying I agree with everything Amarra says without questioning it, or that everyone will notice differences between SSD and HDD, NAS, having spellcheck running, etc ... but it's not as simple a task as you are making out.

Eloise

Passing data via SPDIF isn't time critical if it is buffered adequately and the clocking at the other end is decoupled from the clock in the SPDIF stream, as the new NAIM DAC claims to do. Or you can drive both ends from the same master clock. There are other ways of sending data that are only time critical at a gross level; streaming for example. My point is that if I accept the things that Amarra say are true about their product - that it benefits from an SSD and is degraded by a NAS for example - then I am just not interested in that kind of a solution - it creates problems rather than solves them. Give me a better way of doing it entirely. Such as streaming for example.

quote:

Originally posted by likesmusic:
I don't really fancy a system in which a spellchecker can affect the sound, for whatever reason!

Perhaps the spellchecker or battery monitor, wireless ethernet etc. isn't a problem in some players because they aren't informative enough in conjunction with a particular setup. Bit's may be bits but these processes are probably capable of introducing noise at a buffer output so even a good buffer may not be a solution here. Even a dedicated computer has an OS with background processes always running. How much they and their supplies effect things probably varies by unit, interface and system.

There's more to this than meets the eye. For instance, if DHT changes his DAC2's control panel main buffer setting from 512 to 1024 he'll probably notice a difference in his setup. Both are bit correct(probably including 256 with standard 44.1k throughput). The 512 setting is the one I usually prefer.

Er, no, actually. Can't think of a better way to put it. How do you produce a noisy bit? The buffers store bits, thats all. Doesn't matter whether you run the office suite, Dreamweaver or Photoshop, they're not going to introduce noise in any shape or form.

This is easily demonstrable, by the way. Currently my mac is running Vmware with office, outlook and photoshop, plus, on the mac side Safari, itunes and mail. Guess what? Sounds just as good as it did when running itunes alone.

quote:

Originally posted by js:
.. these processes are probably capable of introducing noise at a buffer output so even a good buffer may not be a solution here.

A buffer could not conceivably be described as a "good buffer" if it's contents were affected by a spellchecker running on the same machine. Broken or useless maybe; "good" never.

quote:

I don't really fancy a system in which a spellchecker can affect the sound, for whatever reason!

Sonic recommend turning off Spotlight which seems to be active all the time. No harm in trying it.

The Naim HDX for example, just uses a mini ITX board running streamlined code as its main task is audio. I'm sure if you loaded its processor with unnecessary tasks you could make it sound a lot worse. A Mac or PC as a music source works very well. The same, optomised for audio playback and nothing more is even better.

I don't know why the NAS is supposed to affect sound. The only thing i can think of (and i'm sure Linn DS owners notice this too) is the different RFI conditions the unit sees when tied into a home network via Ethernet.

James.

quote:

Originally posted by avole:
Er, no, actually. Can't think of a better way to put it. How do you produce a noisy bit? The buffers store bits, thats all. Doesn't matter whether you run the office suite, Dreamweaver or Photoshop, they're not going to introduce noise in any shape or form.

This is easily demonstrable, by the way. Currently my mac is running Vmware with office, outlook and photoshop, plus, on the mac side Safari, itunes and mail. Guess what? Sounds just as good as it did when running itunes alone.

I run from a dedicated Mini now, but when I did use my Macbook for everything, I never noticed any difference in sound quality no matter what the computer was doing whilst paying music.

There is a lot of Voodoo in this game. The debates over what is and what isn't Voodoo are always entertaining. One of the reasons I keep coming back.

quote:

Originally posted by likesmusic:

quote:

Originally posted by js:
.. these processes are probably capable of introducing noise at a buffer output so even a good buffer may not be a solution here.

A buffer could not conceivably be described as a "good buffer" if it's contents were affected by a spellchecker running on the same machine. Broken or useless maybe; "good" never.

You sure like your absolutes.

A bank could be described as a buffer for money. You put some in, and sometime later you take it out. Would you call it a good bank if you lost money every time they ran a spell checker?! Absolutely not!

quote:

Originally posted by likesmusic:
A bank could be described as a buffer for money. You put some in, and sometime later you take it out. Would you call it a good bank if you lost money every time they ran a spell checker?! Absolutely not!

Actually I think that does happen ... every time they send me a letter which is spellchecked I loose money!!

And it might be preferable to lose money to the banks that way rather than give management huge bonuses after having bailed them out in the first place.

Maybe spellcheckers are to blame for the recession! It was really caused by an outbreak of pedantry! How many 'n's in Lehman?

So as i read more and more responses in the DA forum i can't help but wonder if reburning my library at Apple lossless is the best option.

Should i be considering WAV??

You should probably also be considering how you rip. If you use dbpoweramp your rips are verified against an online database of checksums, so you can be pretty confident that you have got a perfect rip. dbpoweramp can also convert between formats, again verifiably, so you don't have to commit to a particular one. Other rippers don't give you this level of confidence - you have to take what you get.
You might want to let your requirement for tagging and playback influence your choice too.

I didn't even consider those factors. I'm using iTunes and lossless.

is there better software for a Mac?

quote:

Originally posted by novelty:
is there better software for a Mac?

I suppose that you can try Amarra, but it is expensive.

For me, I just wait for the Naim DAC. Have already put down a deposit.

Yes, I'm waiting to demo the DAC, too.
I use Apple lossless and it seems fine to me, but I'm not really interested in the different ripping programmes, since I think you'd be hard pressed to pick one from another.

Mind you, software that didn't bung most of my classical music into the various artists category would be a godsend. Itunes biggest weakness, that.

quote:

Originally posted by avole:
Yes, I'm waiting to demo the DAC, too.
I use Apple lossless and it seems fine to me, but I'm not really interested in the different ripping programmes, since I think you'd be hard pressed to pick one from another.

Mind you, software that didn't bung most of my classical music into the various artists category would be a godsend. Itunes biggest weakness, that.

I abhor Apple's sorting algorithm used in iTunes. i recently copied a library from PC to Mac and in doing so I can no longer sort my CDs in the order in which they were burned. iTunes changes the order on most of the tracks of my CDs, this is an epic failure imo.

That said, i assumed burning at lossless would be an ideal format for HiFi applications. I never expected so many variables to contribute to how a file stores a 1 or O.

Why does it matter when they were imported?

What do you mean the track order changes? Is the "track number" not part of the tags?

What format are you files stored in itunes?

There was a problem sorting multiple-disc albums in iTunes 9 but 9.0.1 corrected the problem.

Eloise

quote:

Originally posted by garyi:
Why does it matter when they were imported?

b/c i'm one of those crazy people who likes his albums to stay in the order intended by the artist. prior to moving my library i could easily sort on "date added" or "modified date" and i would have all my CDs as they were burned.

now, the only way i have found to accomplish this is sorting by "album" which is fine if you like your collection sorted alphabetic by album name.