Improve Macbook Pro to Headphones output
Dec 6, 2017 at 11:44 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 6

fauxpossum

New Head-Fier
Joined
May 3, 2013
Posts
7
Likes
10
I have:

• macbook pro (early 2015)
• westone 4r headphones (IEMs?)

I have a bunch of 24 bit / 96 kHz music files,
and I wondered if there was anything I could do
to improve output sound quality on my simple setup.

I understand that the OS utility "Audio MIDI Setup"
can be set to 24 bit / 96 kHz output,
but I wasn't sure if that was enough,
or additional hardware in the loop was necessary.

Current:
laptop (itunes) --> headphones

Do I need?:
laptop (itunes) --> DAC --> amp --> headphones
 
Dec 6, 2017 at 11:59 AM Post #2 of 6
Dec 6, 2017 at 12:15 PM Post #3 of 6
Set the output in the setting to whatever your file bit depth and sampling rate is.

I try to keep it at 24 / 96, although it like to revert itself from time to time.
And then there's the issue that the song library can vary widely.

I'm surprised iTunes doesn't give the user the option
to let iTunes interact with the OS utility
and automate the selection as needed,
(set it to whatever the song is),
being a first party media player and all.

Do you need, no. Will it improve significantly, well it really depends.

Haha, could you be a little more explicit with that?
I guess, the question becomes:

Is the included internal DAC generally regarded as relatively acceptable, or
is it a complete joke and they should be ashamed of themselves for even including it?

Is hooking external hardware between headphones and a laptop
something which is common (relative to people on this site...)?
 
Dec 6, 2017 at 12:47 PM Post #4 of 6
The best way to improve the audio from your MacBook Pro is to get high-quality headphones that are efficient (designed for this power output) - and play well recorded/produced music. I joke, but honestly that truly is the best way.

You will see a number of arguments on this forum and throughout the web as to whether 24bit /96khz and anything higher than 16bit44.1/48kHz provides any discernible benefit (I'm of the no camp, I use high-quality MP3, mp4 and FLAC).

The DAC is pretty good on the MacBook Pro but a little bit of money you'll get a desktop DAC / Amp that has enough power for 150ohm, 300ohm + headphones. It will help when requiring a bit more volume from planars like the HE400 / LCD2 or 300ohm dynamic headphones like the HD650.

Personally, I enjoy having a 150ohm HD700 which works well enough off a mobile but also works well with amplification. It's versatile. Sennheiser's revision of the venerable HD650 - the new HD660S is now 150ohm down from 300ohm. Worth checking out though they are bit expensive at their full MSRP you can also rationalize that you don't have to spend as much $ on external dac / amp
 
Last edited:
Dec 6, 2017 at 12:48 PM Post #5 of 6
Is the included internal DAC generally regarded as relatively acceptable, or
is it a complete joke and they should be ashamed of themselves for even including it?

I honestly cannot answer that as I don’t have a MacBook.

Is hooking external hardware between headphones and a laptop
something which is common (relative to people on this site...)?

Yep it’s pretty common, though I would say that it is also unnecessary sometimes. If you personally ask me, unless you have a big budget or already have a end game headphone/IEM, or have issues like you need more power, or your DAC has a high noise floor, etc, you don’t need an external DAC/Amp. Sure it benefits to have one, but that money would be better spent on better headphones/IEM half the time.
 
Last edited:
Dec 6, 2017 at 12:50 PM Post #6 of 6
You will see a number of arguments on this forum and throughout the web as to whether 24bit /96khz and anything higher than 16bit44.1/48kHz provides any discernible benefit. You could get an external audio card, or you can spend money on the transducers first. It all depends on what you are trying to set up

My personal opinion on this is do as you please, as long as you’re not spending extra on getting those files, I don’t think it really matters.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top