[jsaliga]

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yup. iTunes for Mac is a different animal than for PC. When everyone starts using Unix-based operating systems like OSX and Linux, these problems will cease to exist. Everything Microsoft is garbage (and has always been).

Rather than spreading pure bullsh*t and FUD on this forum why don't you enlighten us all? I really would like to know how running iTunes on the Mac is better than on Windows. I have both on the same system (24" Intel iMac) so any tidbits of wisdom you might care to offer is easy enough for me to test.

--Jerome

 

[kpeezy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yup. iTunes for Mac is a different animal than for PC. When everyone starts using Unix-based operating systems like OSX and Linux, these problems will cease to exist. Everything Microsoft is garbage (and has always been). FYI, do you know Microsoft purposely inflates their software size to take up more hard drive space? They do this so that inexperienced people will keep having to upgrade their hardware, which usually means a new computer, which also means another sale for Microsoft. Several open source teams analyzed the code for Microsoft Office and found that it was 40 times larger than it needed to be.

Where did you get that super leet info?

 

[brotherlen]

Sometimes if I rip via iTunes and rip the identical CD in either dbpoweramp or EAC, it will rate some tracks inaccurate, or won't due to error (damaged CD/DRM?). iTunes rips it anyway. Could that be the case?

 

[milkpowder]

I think we're at the point where we need to have IPodPJ's ripped files for comparisons. It is obvious that there must be something systematically different about how iTunes and EAC ripped the same tracks since the whole file is different.

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkpowder /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think we're at the point where we need to have IPodPJ's ripped files for comparisons. It is obvious that there must be something systematically different about how iTunes and EAC ripped the same tracks since the whole file is different.

I'll be happy to put them up if you can tell me of a free hosting site to use.

 

[number1sixerfan]

I also notice a distinct volume difference between my flac and alac. I suspect it is the poor ripper that itunes uses. However, even when using "MAX"(which is a music converting prog for mac) the same problem existed.

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsaliga /img/forum/go_quote.gif Rather than spreading pure bullsh*t and FUD on this forum why don't you enlighten us all? I really would like to know how running iTunes on the Mac is better than on Windows. I have both on the same system (24" Intel iMac) so any tidbits of wisdom you might care to offer is easy enough for me to test. --Jerome

First of all, go visit the thread in the member's lounge about the swearing.

If you want to know why iTunes works better on a Mac then you should do some research on how operating systems work. Audio is processed differently. That is why so many people here use ASIO, so that the audio isn't routed through all of Windows' subroutines (or whatever they are called). There have been many threads on this in the past, and diagrams of how the audio signal is routed in Windows with DirectSound. DirectSound - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't understand all of the technical aspects of it, but I've owned Macs since the Quadra 840AV and been using them even longer. I use a Mac everyday (I also have a 24" Intel iMac) and I can clearly tell you that iTunes sounds much better on a Mac than PC (but still not as good as Foobar/ASIO on PC). I have no idea how the audio will sound running boot camp since I've never tried it, but I can only assume it will sound worse since it sounds worse on a PC. If your ears or equipment can't discern the difference, that's good... you will save a lot of money.

 

[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif I use a Mac everyday (I also have a 24" Intel iMac) and I can clearly tell you that iTunes sounds much better on a Mac than PC (but still not as good as Foobar/ASIO on PC). I have no idea how the audio will sound running boot camp since I've never tried it, but I can only assume it will sound worse since it sounds worse on a PC. If your ears or equipment can't discern the difference, that's good... you will save a lot of money.

Sorry, this is not at all accurate.

There is no difference. If you are using ASIO on a PC (Foobar or iTunes or whatever) or native Mac output (with iTunes, Cog, whatever), so long as you don't use software volume/EQ/normalization, the exact same bits will be fed to the DAC. The quality is entirely dependent on the internal sound card or the external DAC you are feeding it to.

I prefer Macs to PCs, but done properly, both are equally capable of bit perfect output.

--Chris

 

[number1sixerfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hempcamp /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sorry, this is not at all accurate. There is no difference. If you are using ASIO on a PC (Foobar or iTunes or whatever) or native Mac output (with iTunes, Cog, whatever), so long as you don't use software volume/EQ/normalization, the exact same bits will be fed to the DAC. The quality is entirely dependent on the internal quality of the sound card or the external DAC you are feeding it to. I prefer Macs to PCs, but done properly, both are equally capable of bit perfect output. --Chris

Do you have any idea of why the volume of ALAC would be lower than FLAC? I am very puzzled and frustrated. Most of my collection is in ALAC and it sounds noticeably lower than FLAC. This is only a problem because I am using k1000's which are already hard to power to the right volume. So with ALAC, I get a lot of floor noise with my amp because I have to turn the volume knob way up.

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hempcamp /img/forum/go_quote.gif I prefer Macs to PCs, but done properly, both are equally capable of bit perfect output. --Chris

Yes, I prefer Macs to PCs too. And yes, both are capable of bit-perfect output. The question is whether iTunes on Mac is outputting bit-perfect audio. I am going to extract a WAV file using iTunes on the Mac when I get a chance and see how it compares to a WAV file extracted with EAC.

Just because audio is being output as bit-perfect doesn't mean all bit-perfect soundcards/transports will sound the same. Noise levels, jitter, coax vs. optical and voltage output all have a bearing on how the audio will sound.

A Mac Pro using a Juli@ soundcard as a transport will certainly sound better than an iMac with it's built-in audio hardware. I know this because I have listened to both. But like anything, sound quality is subjective so there will never be a correct answer, only an opinion. Both are capable of bit-perfect but the above listed variables all contribute to the end result.

 

[Ingo]

This thread is truly dizzying.

 

[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by number1sixerfan /img/forum/go_quote.gif Do you have any idea of why the volume of ALAC would be lower than FLAC? I am very puzzled and frustrated.

Hmmm... definitely something awry. Can you elaborate a bit how you are going about playing the FLAC versus the ALAC? Different players, the same players?

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif A Mac Pro using a Juli@ soundcard as a transport will certainly sound better than an iMac with it's built-in audio hardware. I know this because I have listened to both. But like anything, sound quality is subjective so there will never be a correct answer, only an opinion.

Well, that depends. Assuming you believe you can hear picoseconds worth of jitter, if you feed the iMac's optical out to an external DAC that re-clocks or otherwise reduces jitter, there can be no difference between that and the digital output of a Juli@ fed to the same DAC.

I'll get flamed as usual for this by the usual suspects, but subjectivity only begins at the ear canal. There can be no subjective difference between two identical bit streams because there is no subject.

--Chris

 

[number1sixerfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hempcamp /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hmmm... definitely something awry. Can you elaborate a bit how you are going about playing the FLAC versus the ALAC? Different players, the same players?

I'm using itunes with both. The only difference is that itunes does not natively support flac so I have to use a xiph quicktime component to "set" the flac files.

I switched to alac for the ease of use and compatibility with my ipod but it's hard to enjoy the k1000's when I know it can sound better with flac(I say better because with alac, I have to turn up the amp to a point where there is distortion and high floor noise).

 

[rmh1]

You may want to read this to set your itunes to playback accurately from over in the Benchmark thread:

Benchmark Media: Feedback Newsletter December 2007

You may inadvertantly be SRC'ing your file twice, resulting in serious distortion. Remember you need to restart itunes AFTER you set it in CoreAudio.

 

[number1sixerfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmh1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif You may want to read this to set your itunes to playback accurately from over in the Benchmark thread: Benchmark Media: Feedback Newsletter December 2007 You may inadvertantly be SRC'ing your file twice, resulting in serious distortion. Remember you need to restart itunes AFTER you set it in CoreAudio.

I read the article and I'm not sure I follow. How do I access core audio?