[warp08]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

 You won't hear a difference if your system addresses galvanic isolation and jitter adequately. MHO. YMMV.
 
P

Speaking of galvanic isolation--and let me say that I have no financial or other interest to promote Locus cables except as a customer--I think quality ICs go a long way to enhance that.  The way the Cynosure cable is designed and being constructed, for example (and what's disclosed here is only part of the story) certainly make an interesting reading, at least for me:  http://locus-design.com/index.php/cynosure-usb-cable

Galvanic isolation and shielding are not the same thing. Shielding keeps interference out of a specific cable. Isolation, as were talking about it here, endeavors to remove the electronic noise of the digital signal chain by breaking the chain completely before it enters the analog stage. The simplest examples would be an optical or wifi connection between computer and DAC. A well-shielded usb cable is not a bad thing, but the noise we're talking about is already in there.
 
P

Your point is well taken, but I would point out that it isn't just shielding, but the combination of multi-layer shielding and dampening, something that's equally as important in both analog and digital cables.  I was skeptical a first about the digital cables, but after some critical listening sessions, not any more.
 
Speaking of pure galvanic isolation, I would also believe--based on its design and build quality--that the Sonic Diverter does a better job at it than the HiFace, although at a significant price premium.

Not sure I get what you mean by "damping" in a digital cable.
 
P

Both aspects are explained in the product page located at the above link.  Obviously not everything, but the just of it.  I really can't give you more information, because it's a proprietary process as the author explains. But I do own the Polestar, did own the Nucleus and now own the Cynosure.  The SQ increased as I climbed the ladder and so did the thickness of each cable in the lineup.  Maybe the actual wires inside are different too--I have no way of telling--but for sure the better shielding and dampening layers have played a role there.

 

[macrog]

I have been using Pure Music Player since yesterday and have found the sound quality to be pretty much on a par with Decibel . Decibel is however a beta and crashes whenever I try to get it to load my whole library and sometimes Decibel just seems to crash for no obvious reason.
 
I am pretty sure I will buy the Pure Music Player at the end of 15 day demo.  Amarra is simply too expensive. I would consider Amarra Mini if if supported memory playback. I also hate USB Dongles.
 
Macrog

 

[bixby]

@Pale rider:
 
Well I just spent the last two hours using my headphone amp and headphones to see if the differences I heard with the radios off on my computer could be heard with headphones.  Man was that tough.  On many songs with different bridges and toslink I could not tell any difference.  Toslink seems to be immune to me hearing a difference with any song.  With the USB bridges it was still hard as in many songs I could not definitively say I heard a difference.  BUT there were some songs that did show a difference although it was much more subtle than with speakers.  Why?   I am guessing that my headphones are not as open and revealing as my speakers and because the whole depth perception illusion is much better with speakers than with any headphone I have heard.
 
So for many folks that listen to headphones, then it may not be a difference worth investigating.  Although a 24 bit 192 khz recording of Neil Young live easily showed the difference with the guitar overtones and the overall dynamics and space affected by having both radios on.  Also recordings with good high frequency information also were a bit more crunchy as if noise was being added.  So it seems plausible to me that some noise may be added to the signal from the computer even though the Macbooks are pretty quiet.

 

[Pale Rider]

Quote:

@Pale rider:
 
Well I just spent the last two hours using my headphone amp and headphones to see if the differences I heard with the radios off on my computer could be heard with headphones.  Man was that tough.  On many songs with different bridges and toslink I could not tell any difference.  Toslink seems to be immune to me hearing a difference with any song.  With the USB bridges it was still hard as in many songs I could not definitively say I heard a difference.  BUT there were some songs that did show a difference although it was much more subtle than with speakers.  Why?   I am guessing that my headphones are not as open and revealing as my speakers and because the whole depth perception illusion is much better with speakers than with any headphone I have heard.
 
So for many folks that listen to headphones, then it may not be a difference worth investigating.  Although a 24 bit 192 khz recording of Neil Young live easily showed the difference with the guitar overtones and the overall dynamics and space affected by having both radios on.  Also recordings with good high frequency information also were a bit more crunchy as if noise was being added.  So it seems plausible to me that some noise may be added to the signal from the computer even though the Macbooks are pretty quiet.

bixby, thanks for doing that experiment. Very interesting.
 

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Quote:

@Pale rider:
 
Well I just spent the last two hours using my headphone amp and headphones to see if the differences I heard with the radios off on my computer could be heard with headphones.  Man was that tough.  On many songs with different bridges and toslink I could not tell any difference.  Toslink seems to be immune to me hearing a difference with any song.  With the USB bridges it was still hard as in many songs I could not definitively say I heard a difference.  BUT there were some songs that did show a difference although it was much more subtle than with speakers.  Why?   I am guessing that my headphones are not as open and revealing as my speakers and because the whole depth perception illusion is much better with speakers than with any headphone I have heard.
 
So for many folks that listen to headphones, then it may not be a difference worth investigating.  Although a 24 bit 192 khz recording of Neil Young live easily showed the difference with the guitar overtones and the overall dynamics and space affected by having both radios on.  Also recordings with good high frequency information also were a bit more crunchy as if noise was being added.  So it seems plausible to me that some noise may be added to the signal from the computer even though the Macbooks are pretty quiet.

Bixby, unless you either have very unusual speakers (actives or top-notch full range single drivers) in a very carefully measured and treated room, or a pretty bad headphone system, it is very unlikely that your speaker system is more revealing than your headphones. It's true that your speakers can create a sound stage that can't happen in cans, but headphones completely eliminate the formidable distortions of passive crossovers and room acoustics, and place the transducers just millimeters from your eardrums, allowing a tremendous amount of detail to come through. Resolution is the forte of a good headphone system.
 
Regarding the 24/192 Neil Young recording -- did you re-set the sample rate and word length in audio midi setup when you switched back to iTunes? If not, then while PM was playing 24/192, iTunes was downsampling to 16/44.1. Even that can be very difficult to hear, but it's not apples to apples.
 
P

 

[mrspeakers]

I design speakers, high-end stuff, and I can attest to the fact that headphones are "faster" and definitely more revealing,  I aspire to design a speaker like the LCD-2 or even the HD650 in that regard.  However, a good speaker can definitely project a "you are there" sensation with more depth and air around the instruments.  I created one system for Platinum Audio years back that just disappeared...  
 
I can say this, and I did earlier, it may be simply that your DAC and Amp are radio sensitive, rather than pegging the source with the Mac.  knowing that, you probably want to also move any wireless phones, WAPs, or mobile phones at least 6' away.  Some gear IS sensitive to RFI, it can cause in-band distortions audio through IM and other means...

 

[bixby]

Quote:

Quote:

@Pale rider:
 
Well I just spent the last two hours using my headphone amp and headphones to see if the differences I heard with the radios off on my computer could be heard with headphones.  Man was that tough.  On many songs with different bridges and toslink I could not tell any difference.  Toslink seems to be immune to me hearing a difference with any song.  With the USB bridges it was still hard as in many songs I could not definitively say I heard a difference.  BUT there were some songs that did show a difference although it was much more subtle than with speakers.  Why?   I am guessing that my headphones are not as open and revealing as my speakers and because the whole depth perception illusion is much better with speakers than with any headphone I have heard.
 
So for many folks that listen to headphones, then it may not be a difference worth investigating.  Although a 24 bit 192 khz recording of Neil Young live easily showed the difference with the guitar overtones and the overall dynamics and space affected by having both radios on.  Also recordings with good high frequency information also were a bit more crunchy as if noise was being added.  So it seems plausible to me that some noise may be added to the signal from the computer even though the Macbooks are pretty quiet.

Bixby, unless you either have very unusual speakers (actives or top-notch full range single drivers) in a very carefully measured and treated room, or a pretty bad headphone system, it is very unlikely that your speaker system is more revealing than your headphones. It's true that your speakers can create a sound stage that can't happen in cans, but headphones completely eliminate the formidable distortions of passive crossovers and room acoustics, and place the transducers just millimeters from your eardrums, allowing a tremendous amount of detail to come through. Resolution is the forte of a good headphone system.
 
Regarding the 24/192 Neil Young recording -- did you re-set the sample rate and word length in audio midi setup when you switched back to iTunes? If not, then while PM was playing 24/192, iTunes was downsampling to 16/44.1. Even that can be very difficult to hear, but it's not apples to apples.
 
P

 
 
@ P:
 
thanks for weighing in.  Yes, headphones make it very easy to hear detail and take the room out of the equation.  And that is exactly the point.  Without a room to help with the illusion we are left with drivers going directly to the ears.  And unless recorded with a binaural setup they miss the phase and reflected info that a room and speakers  provides.   You just do not get the illusion of depth with cans and at least the ones I have heard and I go to a few meets and nationals here inthe us.
 
As for active speakers, yes I like them but and this is a big but, a well designed passve crossed speaker setup can sound really good with the right amp and power as compared with some not so great active setups.  I have heard lots of active systems that I would never trade my passive for.  Then again, I have heard some that I only hope to afford some day.
 
Re:
 
Neil Young, remember this is a pure music thread, I never listen to itunes and PM sets the rate without having to go back into midi if you set it up to right and unlike amarra, itunes is never ever playing anything.
 

 

[bixby]

Quote:

I design speakers, high-end stuff, and I can attest to the fact that headphones are "faster" and definitely more revealing,  I aspire to design a speaker like the LCD-2 or even the HD650 in that regard.  However, a good speaker can definitely project a "you are there" sensation with more depth and air around the instruments.  I created one system for Platinum Audio years back that just disappeared...  
 
I can say this, and I did earlier, it may be simply that your DAC and Amp are radio sensitive, rather than pegging the source with the Mac.  knowing that, you probably want to also move any wireless phones, WAPs, or mobile phones at least 6' away.  Some gear IS sensitive to RFI, it can cause in-band distortions audio through IM and other means...

thanks for the suggestions, but I do not think the amp and dac are radio sensitive.  If so I would have heard a difference with Toslink.  I did not.  I got concerned about RFI years ago and even did a test that shut down all wireless in my house.  No phones are within 20 feet etc.  Guess what....no impact on the sound.  I am betting that there is a chance some noise is getting through the usb port.  I don't really care if it is power supply or some other unknown source, the nice thing is........... I can turn it off!

 

[mrspeakers]

Well, you believe what you hear, and it's always possible you are right, but only a really well run double-blind test would validate that.  It's not my experience, but after many years in high-end audio, I'm a big cynic about unexplained audio differences (especially when cables are involved, but that's a whole other rant).  I'm glad it works for you, for whatever reason.
 
That said, back to the subject of the thread, the Pure Music software works great, and with my new rig setup with a Mac Mini in my home theatre, I'm enjoying upsampling to 192K through the Integra via HDMI.  I definitely am hearing the difference there.  The upsampling is consistently providing a greater sense of air and more depth and localization for anything I run through the system.  With Pure Music, it's a snap to flip between the theatre and the Burson, while optimizing the playback quality.  
 
I'm really happy with the rig.  I used Belkin 75 ohm cabling for the 18' run to the Burson, fed by the HiFace.  

 

[svertel]

I've been using Amarra Mini but I just downloaded the demo of Pure Music and the improvement was immediately apparent.  It isn't even close.  Pure Music really opens up the mix and creates separation and depth without harshness.  They really nailed it.  I'm going to buy the full version asap.  I'm disappointed in Amarra because it's expensive!

 

[warp08]

I have finally bit the bullet and bought a full version of Amarra.  The dongle is annoying, but necessary because this is pro software.  I needed something that plays up to 384kHz because that's how high my Zodiac Gold goes up.  The full version does support a configurable memory cache playback.  Pretty slick how they integrate into iTunes.  Overall performance is amazing, partly because of the software and partly because of the Gold.  And the Voltikus PSU isn't even here yet.  

 

[talk2me]

Thanks everyone for a great thread. I just bought a used and in good shape Macbook Pro from a friend, that came with over 2,000 iTune songs on it. Now I am completely new to computer audio, but not audio. My home system is a Burmester 911 MK3/Burmester 089 CDP/DAC-192/24/Preamp-analog volume and Venture CR-8 Signature speakers with Transparent Reference cables. I clean up my power with Sound Application Reference Line Stage. Now, I am on a quest to learn all about comuter hi-rez audio. because of you all, I just tried out Pure Music and all I can say is, "WOW!". It makes a huge difference to someone who is in tune to the subtle nuances that something like PM brings to the tabe. And this is just with $25 Phillips ear buds my bother gave me last week. Now i am researching M2tech/Audiophilleo etc. Also I have just starting to use my Macbook with tosclink mini to my DAC in my 089. Now I just read about USB and also headphone amps and headphones. I am more interested in integrating my Macbook into my stereo to it's finest first. But anyways, I know I have a ton to learn, but thanks to you, not only am I more motivated,but have learned a little also.

 

[mrspeakers]

Welcome to computer audio!
 
I use an M2Tech and have no problems. It drives a 18' cable just phone.  The M2Tech has been very stable, but I wonder how it will support the next OS, etc.  It's also small and elegant.  LeePerry pointed out a device that looks interesting as it does not seem to require a custom driver, though it is limited to 96K instead of 192.  My understanding is any USB device running 192 needs a custom driver, but having said that, someone will doubtless prove me wrong.  
 
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Musical-Fidelity-M1DAC-M1HPA-and-V-Link-Async-USB-Converter-Review
 

 

[grokit]

>

 

[grokit]

 
I've got a Mac Mini with the original generation Intel core solo processor and a current model Mac Pro both running Snow Leopard, as well as an older 12" Powerbook G4 running Leopard maxed out with 1.25GB RAM and they all run sizable lossless libraries flawlessly with PureMusic via iTunes, I just bought the license.

 

I don't think there's another player out there that will work with all three of these computers as well as both of these operating systems, much less integrate with iTunes. The only issue it's ever had is waking up in a slightly temperamental state from system sleep, but it advises to disable the sleep feature anyways.

 

I'm very happy with the improvements that I hear from PureMusic in default mode, plus there are many other features to explore when I get around to it lol.