Better Sound for Mac Users- Pure Music Player

[mijbil]

My experience with PM (started with versioni 1.7 - I undertand there was some problems with earlier versions / significant improvements and added features along the way) has been pretty remarkable, and for anyone who can spare the coin I recommend it heartily. The immediately improvement in sound quality - clarity and definition, above all, as wel as "liveliness" -- really surprised me. Fortunately you can get the full-featured demo version for 15 days so you know exactly what you're getting. The other big big thing, at least for me, is the dithered volume control - if you use the volume on your preamp or amp it's not a concern, but that offers a genuine improvement over itunes native. Oh and the memory play is very cool - so that the music never skips. (And it is also FAR less resource-intensive than itunes - I haven't done the measurements myself, but I do notice that I have less problems with itunes taking over the system. I think I read somewhere (maybe on the PM web site?) that it is on the order of 1/10th the processing requirements of itunes for music playback....
 
There are a few flaws though - it is annoying that you have to restart PM to change the source (sound device) - itunes native has no problem with hot-switching, something essential for comparing components/cables/etc. It "clips" on to itunes but can become "separated". And it doesnt work with certain sorts of itunes files (e.g. video) - in fact you cant play video with PM running, so you have to close it. You should just be able to disable it. (in fact, there is a feature for that, which tye call "less is more mode", but stupidly THAT window behaves differently, staying always int he foreground - i.e., you can't watch a video with that because the little PM window in the foreground blocks part of it.
 
Improvements I would like in addition to those already mentioned: equalization/tone controls, a more "mature" GUI (probably one that "integrates" with itunes better, but of course not necessarily), work with other audio (video, web browser, flash, DVDs, etc) - I'm sure tha twould require a completely different kind of implementation (perhaps/probably acting as system-wide sound driver or sound card, rather than just a single application with audio output, but that would make it a TRULY killer app. 
 
Hope these thoughts are helpful for prospective buyers. 
 
Cheers.

 

[bixby]

Quote:

Alright,  I am using a MAC.  with VMware fusion to run windows and foobar at the same time.  I have the Mac Connected to PS adudio DAC---> Kenwood 600 amp----> DTQW speakers or Akg K701 headphones.  I like purevinyl because it was useful for ripping Vinyl etc...  Pure music player, I don't get.  I got it playing well.  and yes i got it to run in memory mode, and some crazy upsampling.  It seems to be "fat" like itunes as opposed to foobar.  With foobar i can create UPNP servers, play Flac, and well as Apple lossless.  Hell I can play files located on the MAc to my ipod touch, and then stream it back to Airport express if i want.  So now my ipod touch basically have access to all the files on my computer.  everything is good.  I was hoping pure music was a slimdown Purevinyl.  I was hoping it has really really good Volume controls and attenuation so we don't loose any "bits" or information when the volume is not set at max level.  I was hoping it display the bitrate that it actually send out to the DAc, like foobar.  I was hoping it has better volume controls.  I was disappointed.  puremusic uses too much of my computer's resourches.  The sounds playing through puremusic, well seems like the tremble just got cranked up.  Sound space, seems the same to me.  So really, I can't hear the difference between itunes and puremusic players that much.  That's just my observation.  

Curious, which PS Audio dac are you using?  How are you connecting your mac, Toslink? and what brand are you using, plastic or glass?  Are you running other software like VM ware while playing PM?  
 
The reason for all the quesitons is that if you have lots of things going on in a mac you may not hear what it is capable of.  And while it certainly does sound better than itunes on my setup you may not hear as big a difference than itunes when you have things not quite as tweaked for serious music listening.  For example, bluetooth and wifi should be off if you really want to hear the depth that Pm is capable of.  Using a very high quality usb to spdif converter will also allow PM to take you beyond even the best Toslink setup.  No longer will you have that 2 dimensional wall of sound, even if it sounds pretty darn good.
 
Not sure what you mean by fat, since my computer shows about 1-2% cpu utilization.  PM is not a jack of all trades software as it concentrates more on quality and not flexibility and I can understand how that may be a factor in your decision to use PM or not.   Also not sure about your comments about bit perfect and the volume control.  I sue no dithering and still use the volume control on PM and cannot hear any loss of resolution nor can I with itunes volume control.  People get so wrapped up in bit perfect and think that is the only thing that matters to SQ.  Believe me there is a lot more going on in a computer based system  that affects SQ than moving bits around without loss.
 
If you are running any other processes while listening, turn them off or quit the programs.  For example, even an idling Squeezebox server program can make the sound very high fi and two dimensional vs truly audiophile.  And you need to hear hog mode to truly hear what your system can sound like, and of course to do that you need to have another external sound device for output,
 
As for the trebly sound of PM vs itunes a few answers to my initial quesitons could help explain it.  Upsampling for example works great if you let PM do it with the PS DL3 and it sounds best at 96khz vs native 44k, for example.  Or you may just prefer the sound of itunes vs PM, you would not be the first one
 
Also if you are no using memory play and also using your internal drive for your music files you will find the sound to be more jittery, or bright.  You will also hear that with itunes, but the difference may not be so apparent.
 
In the end it is what you prefer, though, so enjoy whatever you like!
 
Now, a lot of folks cannot use their macs solely for music, or don't want to fool with tweaking to get the best sound and that is okay, but you will not hear how good PM can sound that way. It still beat the tar out of itunes in my system, even before I knew about and tried the tuning I mention.   So in the end you may need to choose, SQ over flexibility and/ or maybe itunes or foobar is all you need.  At least you tried PM.

 

[mrspeakers]

Anyone interested in buying the Pure-Music software, two cool things:
 
1) HDTracks is selling it on their site, and you get a 20% discount on your next HDT order.  Order more than $120 and it's getting back down closer to the intro price for PM
 
2) I had a problem with not being able to play 88.2 via USB on my Burson, but found the very cool little M2Tech HiFace, which other sites report as being transparently compatible and quite nice with PM (USB to S/PDIF adaptor up to 24/192)
 

 

[mrspeakers]

Someone on another thread asked me why I cared about upsampling and why it's good/bad.  Upsampling and oversampling both have some benefits which I'll try to succinctly summarize.  It's been a long time since I studied digital sampling theory, inverse cosine functions, etc., so a) I'll probably garble the terminology a bit and b) I welcome anyone smarter or with deeper knowledge to please correct me. 
 
1) There are multiple approaches to upsampling data.  One is simple "multiples" smoothing where you resample at 2x and stick a new data point in between the existing samples.  A smarter approach is to generate the mathematical curve represented by the wavepoint and essentially using splines to approximate the slope of the curve between points.  Using this you can actually come closer to synthesizing what "might" have been there, in all probability, as most changes between points, even for transients, don't represent extreme discontinuities.
 
2) If the curve-creating and resampling algorithm is really good you can resample to arbitrary sample rates and have a very high probability that you are still at least maintaining, if not improving, the waveform integrity.  Much depends on the curve-fitting algorithm, and how many points forward, and backwards, in time are considered in generating the curve.  Another critical aspect to this is having very high bit-depth (like 64 bit resampling, such as Pure Music uses) vs. 24 or 32-bit integer/fixed point calculations done in most hardware-based upsampling.  Floating point allows for a much greater calculation accuracy when scaling volume, oversampling, etc. As a result, the sonic benefit of the software based approach on modern GPUs should be greater.  
 
Why go to all this trouble to oversample?  Because 44.1K audio is too close to our hearing range, and the digital and analog filters needed to clean up the signal fall into the audible band, with what is called anti-aliasing noise.  By increasing the sample rate to a much higher level, any potential noise and distortion are moved much further from our auditory range.  
 
The math of how the curve fitting is done is relatively complex, so any hardcore digital engineers can either correct this or explain the math further, if they have a few hours to spend (or know some good current citations).  I refreshed my knowledge here:
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oversampling
 
http://www.audioholics.com/education/audio-formats-technology/upsampling-vs-oversampling-for-digital-audio
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upsampling
 
Since Pure Music uses 64-bit floating point oversampling, as long as they've done a decent job (and you're using their high quality settings and "noise" creation functions) you will actually end up with potentially a better waveform, with fewer audible digital artifacts.

 

[amcananey]

Thanks, that's very helpful. [I'm going to get my terminology wrong here, so bear with me...] I had just assumed that one of the following would be true when listening to 44.1 (non-upsampled data): (a) any two adjacent data points would be connected linearly, which in most cases should provide a pretty good estimation of what "should" be there, or (b) a wave would be generated using the 44.1 data - while not perfect, I would assume the difference between a wave generated with 44.1 data and 96 data would be pretty similar. But from what you're saying, 44.1 is too close to the threshold where errors are audible, so not good, whereas 96 = better.
 
Thanks!
Adam

 

[mrspeakers]

The real value is in avoiding in-band aliasing artifacts. In a simple sense, all filters have to "fill in the gaps" for higher frequency data, that's crudely what happens when the digital and analog filters smooth the DAC output. Like jitter, this is hard to measure, or to explain. It's much more complex than THD...

 

[Pale Rider]

Quote:

My experience with PM (started with versioni 1.7 - I undertand there was some problems with earlier versions / significant improvements and added features along the way) has been pretty remarkable, and for anyone who can spare the coin I recommend it heartily. The immediately improvement in sound quality - clarity and definition, above all, as wel as "liveliness" -- really surprised me. Fortunately you can get the full-featured demo version for 15 days so you know exactly what you're getting. The other big big thing, at least for me, is the dithered volume control - if you use the volume on your preamp or amp it's not a concern, but that offers a genuine improvement over itunes native. Oh and the memory play is very cool - so that the music never skips. (And it is also FAR less resource-intensive than itunes - I haven't done the measurements myself, but I do notice that I have less problems with itunes taking over the system. I think I read somewhere (maybe on the PM web site?) that it is on the order of 1/10th the processing requirements of itunes for music playback....
 
There are a few flaws though - it is annoying that you have to restart PM to change the source (sound device) - itunes native has no problem with hot-switching, something essential for comparing components/cables/etc. It "clips" on to itunes but can become "separated". And it doesnt work with certain sorts of itunes files (e.g. video) - in fact you cant play video with PM running, so you have to close it. You should just be able to disable it. (in fact, there is a feature for that, which tye call "less is more mode", but stupidly THAT window behaves differently, staying always int he foreground - i.e., you can't watch a video with that because the little PM window in the foreground blocks part of it.
 
Improvements I would like in addition to those already mentioned: equalization/tone controls, a more "mature" GUI (probably one that "integrates" with itunes better, but of course not necessarily), work with other audio (video, web browser, flash, DVDs, etc) - I'm sure tha twould require a completely different kind of implementation (perhaps/probably acting as system-wide sound driver or sound card, rather than just a single application with audio output, but that would make it a TRULY killer app. 
 
Hope these thoughts are helpful for prospective buyers. 
 
Cheers.

I would concur in these assessments.
 
I just made the switch from running my audio out of an AppleTV, feeding my PS Audio Digital Link III with the Cullen IV Mods. The connection between the ATV and the DAC was a Blue Jeans Toslink. I moved everything over to a spare Mac mini [1.66 Intel Core Duo; 2gb RAM], with an external Firewire 400 hard drive for media storage. The DAC is now fed from the USB on the mini; the PS Audio DAC does not run USB in asynchronous mode [I have a Halide Designs Bridge on order, but it's not in yet]. The mini only plays music. That's its only function, so while it is no heavyweight, it seems to have plenty of horsepower. Much as I love playback on the ATV, I made the switch precisely to have more options like Pure Music for playback and to facilitate the move to async USB.
 
Last year, I spent a fair bit of time testing Amarra, but was not very satisfied with the results. Actually, it would be more accurate to say that I could not perceive enough differences to make me want to buy the software. Nothing sounded bad at all. Today, I believe I am going to plunk down the coin for Pure Music. I have not finished testing with PM on and off—as mijbil notes, A/B testing is not easy with PM—and may not until this weekend, but so far, I have been very pleased with the results. Here is what I have been listening to for these tests [all files Apple lossless]:
 
Chris Rea's Road to Hell Pt. I & II
Robert Shaw's Telarc of Verdi's Requiem, mostly the Dies Irae
Mickey Hart's Dafos
Amuseum & Jim Keltner from Sheffield Drum & Track Disc
Dire Straits Brothers in Arms
Beatles White Album [Mono & Stereo Remasters]
Neil Young's Like A Hurricane [Weld Live Disc]
Peter Gabriel's I Have the Touch
Muddy Waters' Folk Singer
Pink Floyd Dark Side of Moon [MFSL]
Don Henley Boys of Summer [MFSL]
Elton John Goodbye Yellow Brick Road [MFSL]
Propellerheads History Repeating
Beethoven Piano Sonatas [Rubinstein & O'Conor]
Art Tatum Piano Starts Here [Zenph Re-Performance]
 
All listening has been through the Apache and my HD800s with Moon Audio Blue Dragon balanced cable. So far, I have written in my notes, and I am mindful that I have a lot of different unaccounted variables going on [e.g., going from Toslink to USB]:
 
1. Soundstage seems deeper, possibly wider
2. Tighter bass
3. Better air sounds on horns
4. Possibly smoother? [Have to check this. I expected the shift to USB possibly to introduce some harshness, but the exceptional transients on Amuseum truly seem to hang in the air and decay like the real thing, while piano seems rock solid, without edginess, and note tone is very steady.]
 
Perhaps more to come. So far, very satisfying. Looking forward to hearing the LCD-2/Lyr combo with this setup. And I concur in the request for better iTunes GUI integration, though the other requests don't matter to me.
 

 

 

[mrspeakers]

I found this little jewel of test data on the Pure-Music site.  http://www.channld.com/pure-vinyl_src.html
 
It shows the digital artifacts of sample conversion.  Note that the PM conversion is quite clean, but I also dove into the links on the page and found some references that the Mac Core Audio does almost as well.  It would be very interesting indeed to see the inverse UPSAMPLE test vs. downsampling.

 

[crumpler]

Just downloaded and purchased this little gem of a music player. Am loving it so far. Definitely hear a difference on this music player vs itunes native! 
 
Thanks for the smashing recommendation guys!

 

[KingStyles]

There is a new kid on the block to consider.  http://www.audiofile-engineering.com/fidelia/
There is a thread just started at CA discussing it http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Anybody-tried-Fidelia

 

[mrspeakers]

Interesting.  Very snazzy looking.  
 
Fidelia licenses their resampling software from iZotope, like Amarra does.  I like the fact it synchs with the iTunes library.  Hopefully Channel D rises to the challenge and upgrades the UI (it is really bad, 1985 Windows quality) and adds it's own basic library display functions.  I'm rooting for the scrappy startup that builds it's own technology from the ground up.
 
Personally I would never use the effects features, so essentially this is going to sound exactly like Amarra, which also uses the iZotope engine.  Never heard Amarra but it's obviously well regarded, and this certainly looks nicer, and is not ridiculously overpriced.
 
EDIT: I was looking at the computeraudiophile link and got a chuckle and saying it sounds closer to Pure Music than Amarra.  Unless Channel D is lying, they are the only ones with their own engine.  For straight playback with upsampling, Amarra and Fidelia will sound identical. 

 

[mrspeakers]

OK, played with it for a couple of minutes and:
 
1) It initially wouldn't load it's own music filters and made me click "OK" about 20 times (with no option to Quit or Cancel)
2) It crashed
3) Relaunching allowed the music filters to load but it didn't load iTunes
4) I got into the settings right away and couldn't sort out the resampling.  While Pure Music's UI is horrid, at lest I understand their settings and I can avoid Audio Midi.  Working on device configuration in Fidelia immediately pushed me over to Audio Midi Setup.  
 
Never got to listen to anything, as it didn't load my library, it's late and I didn't want to manually load files, and the device and upsampling settings felt like they might be there but it appears it will require reading documentation to figure out how to set it up correctly, and yet again I'm up past my bedtime.  If anyone gets it working, I'd be curious to hear results, but for now I'll stick with what I have...

 

[Pale Rider]

Quote:

Quote:

Alright,  I am using a MAC.  with VMware fusion to run windows and foobar at the same time.  I have the Mac Connected to PS adudio DAC---> Kenwood 600 amp----> DTQW speakers or Akg K701 headphones.  I like purevinyl because it was useful for ripping Vinyl etc...  Pure music player, I don't get.  I got it playing well.  and yes i got it to run in memory mode, and some crazy upsampling.  It seems to be "fat" like itunes as opposed to foobar.  With foobar i can create UPNP servers, play Flac, and well as Apple lossless.  Hell I can play files located on the MAc to my ipod touch, and then stream it back to Airport express if i want.  So now my ipod touch basically have access to all the files on my computer.  everything is good.  I was hoping pure music was a slimdown Purevinyl.  I was hoping it has really really good Volume controls and attenuation so we don't loose any "bits" or information when the volume is not set at max level.  I was hoping it display the bitrate that it actually send out to the DAc, like foobar.  I was hoping it has better volume controls.  I was disappointed.  puremusic uses too much of my computer's resourches.  The sounds playing through puremusic, well seems like the tremble just got cranked up.  Sound space, seems the same to me.  So really, I can't hear the difference between itunes and puremusic players that much.  That's just my observation.  

Curious, which PS Audio dac are you using?  How are you connecting your mac, Toslink? and what brand are you using, plastic or glass?  Are you running other software like VM ware while playing PM?  
 
The reason for all the quesitons is that if you have lots of things going on in a mac you may not hear what it is capable of.  And while it certainly does sound better than itunes on my setup you may not hear as big a difference than itunes when you have things not quite as tweaked for serious music listening.  For example, bluetooth and wifi should be off if you really want to hear the depth that Pm is capable of.  Using a very high quality usb to spdif converter will also allow PM to take you beyond even the best Toslink setup.  No longer will you have that 2 dimensional wall of sound, even if it sounds pretty darn good.
 

I am curious about your statement [highlighted in blue] that BT and WiFi should be turned off. I did a little rummaging/Googling, but saw no such recommendation from Channel D—though I confess I have not asked them directly—and I am not groking why you think this should be the case. if you turned off WiFi, then you could not use the iPad/iPhone to control playback. If you turned off BT, then forget about a wireless keyboard [I use the Apple wireless keyboard and trackpad]. Granted, you could hook up Ethernet and USB devices [less pragmatic in my current installation], but help me understand why you think this recommendations make a difference. FWIW, I am running my Mac mini out to my PS Audio III [w/ Cullen IV mods], through both Blue Jeans Toslink and through USB. I am settling on the USB, and am looking forward to trying the Halide Designs Bridge.
 
I tried wired/wireless setups over the weekend, and I could detect zero difference in sound, or in CPU load with the wireless capabilities switched in and out. 
 
Just asking out of curiosity. And I am still curious why vuntruong is going to all that trouble through VMWare Fusion. Don't get me wrong; I love Fusion when I need it, but would not want to have to run my music that way.
 
Cheers!
 

 

[bixby]

RE:
 
 For example, bluetooth and wifi should be off if you really want to hear the depth that Pm is capable of. 
 
 
I use a Macbook so for me monitor and keyboard are built in.  Obviously in many setups folks use the remote app and of course BT keyboards.  
 
I recommended turning these things off because they made a noticeable improvement in depth in my system.  I  know not all will be able to turn them off, but you may want to try it.  I also found that turning off or stopping the squeezeserver software for my Logitech touch in my office system also had a beneficial impact on the sound.
 
Just an FYI, there are even more things that my collegues have tried with success like using a solid state drive for the OS.  I just have not gotten that far yet.
 
cheers

 

[mrspeakers]

I have a MBP and hear no difference at all with Wifi and Bluetooth off, and frankly have no idea why this would make any difference unless you have an RFI problem.  

 
On the other hand, going to the M2Tech coax made a noticeable though not profound difference vs. USB.