[AppleheadMay]

 
Quote:

I have stayed with Snow Leopard and Amarra.   Amarra is working on the issues with Lion and has sent out a notice that it is working to resolve them and did not want to put out an update until it was fully ready.

I am waiting for Lion support to try Amarra out, hopefully it doesn't take too soon. The idea about a blind test I read here is something I would love to try myself. 
 
 
@ WarriorAnt
 
Have you by any chance tried out both Amarra Mini and the full Amarra? If so, was there any difference sonically?
 
 
Edit:
 
Also, what is their DSD conversion? Does it mean I can put an SACD in my Mac and rip the SACD audio on it rather than the normal CD audio on the disk? 

 

[mtkversion]

Quote:

Sound isn't always as subjective as so many people like to say it is.   In 24 years  of professionally mixing and editing I found that there is truth to be had and for the most part the people who came and went through the editing/mixing suites I worked in pretty much heard the same thing.  Personally I think the whole subjective hearing line of logic is a cop out and I say this from 2.5 decades of mixing experience.   

One thing I have noticed is that people with very high resolution rigs particularly high quality DACs tend to report that Amarra floats their boat more than the other players out there and with my own rig I can attest to that.  Amarra beats them all hands down AND it definitely and woefully over priced but if ones rig isn't up to it then Amarra is not going to be cost effective.

No one is going to spend $700 on something and NOT say it sounds better. No one.
 
The only real way to test it with an impartial blind test. Just my opinion though.
 

 

[Rdr. Seraphim]

Hi WarriorAnt,
 
I tend to agree. Sadly, when I tried Amarra, when it required the dongle (not the demo), it was Ok, but exhibited shoddy programming and was full of bugs.
 
What caught my eye more than the e-zine reviews was a quote that Rob uses on his site (amongst all the others), from Bob Katz, formerly with Chesky. It's surprising to me that someone of his calibre would be so verbose about the player even though it's literally hundreds of $ less than the equivalent Amarra product. It could be that I'm just looking for support for my own decision 

, but having heard PM in a reference six figure system, I sure like what I'm hearing!
 
To qualify his quote, he DOES NOT say that his masters sound as good through PM as what he hears in his mastering facility, but that it certainly beats any CD source!  
 
"When playing 16/44 sources, Pure Music sounds as good to me as the best CD transport anyone can dig up - as long as I'm using a high-quality jitter-immune D/A converter. But I can play my 88.2 kHz, 96 kHz and 192 kHz/24 bit masters and then Pure Music beats any CD source. I love being able to play a collection of my masters using the friendly Itunes interface, but with Pure Music bypassing any sound processing that iTunes performs. Throw in a calibrated, dithered volume control marked in decibels, and I'm in heaven. Mechanically, the Mac Mini is quieter than some CD players!" 
- Bob Katz, Mastering Engineer, Digital Domain, Orlando, FL; Formerly Recording Engineer and Technical Director of audiophile label Chesky Records 
 
Quote:

Sound isn't always as subjective as so many people like to say it is.   In 24 years  of professionally mixing and editing I found that there is truth to be had and for the most part the people who came and went through the editing/mixing suites I worked in pretty much heard the same thing.  Personally I think the whole subjective hearing line of logic is a cop out and I say this from 2.5 decades of mixing experience.   

One thing I have noticed is that people with very high resolution rigs particularly high quality DACs tend to report that Amarra floats their boat more than the other players out there and with my own rig I can attest to that.  Amarra beats them all hands down AND it definitely and woefully over priced but if ones rig isn't up to it then Amarra is not going to be cost effective.

 
 

 

[DarknightDK]

Is there any differences in SQ with the Amarra Full and Amarra Mini (besides the 384 kHz support)? Amarra Mini is on promo now at $195. Seems like a much better deal compared with the $700 Amarra Full.
 
Should I go for the Amarra Mini instead of the Full? Would I be missing out on any important features or SQ which the Full might offer?

 

[WarriorAnt]

Quote:

No one is going to spend $700 on something and NOT say it sounds better. No one.
 
The only real way to test it with an impartial blind test. Just my opinion though.
 

 Speak for yourself.  I've spent 7 time that amount on a set of tube mono block power amps which I realized were pretty bad afterwards.  What did I do?  I admitted it, took the loss, got something else and moved on.  As far as blind test go that's for people who either don't trust what their ears are telling them.  I can't imagine if I had to do a blind test every time I had to mix something and then present it to a client.   Get all the clients into the room and then blind test them all asking which mix sounded better.  At some point you have to learn to trust your ears. 
 
 

 

[WarriorAnt]

 
Quote:

Hi WarriorAnt,
 
I tend to agree. Sadly, when I tried Amarra, when it required the dongle (not the demo), it was Ok, but exhibited shoddy programming and was full of bugs.
 
What caught my eye more than the e-zine reviews was a quote that Rob uses on his site (amongst all the others), from Bob Katz, formerly with Chesky. It's surprising to me that someone of his calibre would be so verbose about the player even though it's literally hundreds of $ less than the equivalent Amarra product. It could be that I'm just looking for support for my own decision 

, but having heard PM in a reference six figure system, I sure like what I'm hearing!
 
To qualify his quote, he DOES NOT say that his masters sound as good through PM as what he hears in his mastering facility, but that it certainly beats any CD source!  
 
"When playing 16/44 sources, Pure Music sounds as good to me as the best CD transport anyone can dig up - as long as I'm using a high-quality jitter-immune D/A converter. But I can play my 88.2 kHz, 96 kHz and 192 kHz/24 bit masters and then Pure Music beats any CD source. I love being able to play a collection of my masters using the friendly Itunes interface, but with Pure Music bypassing any sound processing that iTunes performs. Throw in a calibrated, dithered volume control marked in decibels, and I'm in heaven. Mechanically, the Mac Mini is quieter than some CD players!" 
- Bob Katz, Mastering Engineer, Digital Domain, Orlando, FL; Formerly Recording Engineer and Technical Director of audiophile label Chesky Records 
 

Pure Music is the only player I've never tried.   I did not know Amarra once used a dongle.  I have encountered very little problems with Amarra myself but I think it is because I use the "iCleanMemory" app.      I think Audirvana Plus is a good bargain and if I didn't already have Amarra I'd go with Audirvana Plus, I think it's going to get better and better.  Amarra is good but it isn't worth the price of the full version, but perhaps the Mini is.  
 
 

 

[WarriorAnt]

Quote:

Is there any differences in SQ with the Amarra Full and Amarra Mini (besides the 384 kHz support)? Amarra Mini is on promo now at $195. Seems like a much better deal compared with the $700 Amarra Full.
 
Should I go for the Amarra Mini instead of the Full? Would I be missing out on any important features or SQ which the Full might offer?

I think the Mini is the same SQ as the full but without all the other features but I'm not sure.   I like the function in Amarra where I can load tracks into its own list and play tracks without using itunes.  don't know if the Mini has that option.

 

[essex853]

I installed Bitperfect following a recommendation from someone on this forum, personally I can't hear any difference in sound quality and if I skip a track it starts to stutter and sometimes just gets stuck. I've disabled it now. No real complaints for £3 but I thought I'd share that.

 

[vrln]

+1 for the blind testing suggestion. I´m pretty sure I could pick apart Amarra in a test. That said, the AB tests I´ve done didn´t end up with Amarra winning. To me it is artificially coloring the midrange. The effect is pleasant, but I think PureMusic and Audirvana Plus are better at imaging and neutrality. The Amarra pricing is still a complete joke to me, especially considering how buggy the software is. In my experience the audiophile players sound so similar that the user interface, stability and pricing are the main concerns.
 
There I felt Audirvana Plus won (Pure Music is good too, but over twice as expensive - bonus points for classic dollars to euro conversion rates), and I went that way in the end. In my opinion If Amarra costed 50 dollars (fair price, but I still wouldn´t buy it right now because it´s too buggy) I doubt there would be as much hype for it. Classic marketing social psychology if you ask me.

 

[mtkversion]

Quote:

 Speak for yourself.  I've spent 7 time that amount on a set of tube mono block power amps which I realized were pretty bad afterwards.  What did I do?  I admitted it, took the loss, got something else and moved on.  As far as blind test go that's for people who either don't trust what their ears are telling them.  I can't imagine if I had to do a blind test every time I had to mix something and then present it to a client.   Get all the clients into the room and then blind test them all asking which mix sounded better.  At some point you have to learn to trust your ears. 
 
 

 
I understand the point you're making but you were also able to recoup most of the cost on those amps, can you recoup any of the money on Amarra?
 
Ultimately if anyone enjoys Amarra over the other players that's all that matters but I still believe that until a controlled blind test is done most people are influenced by cost/marketing over any actual sound differences.  Trusting your ears is fine but would most people trust them enough to put them through a blind test?

 

[nesf]

Hey, I'm experiencing clicking and skipping Audirvana and Fidelia with an E10 DAC, I've disabled the Max I/O buffer size option and Integer Mode and it's still an intermittent problem. It's a 2010 i5 Macbook Pro so CPU power really shouldn't be a problem and with Fidelia anyway being multithreaded there should be plenty of spare CPU clock cycles for on-the-fly conversion of bitrate etc. 
 
Any thoughts? Oh and hi, long time lurker, first time poster etc.  
 
Edit: And oh, not a defective headphone jack on the E10, I can move the plug around as much as I want without anything negative happening to sound quality. Thankfully. 

 

[KevinWolff]

Quote:

I think the Mini is the same SQ as the full but without all the other features but I'm not sure.   I like the function in Amarra where I can load tracks into its own list and play tracks without using itunes.  don't know if the Mini has that option.

 
I think they are all the same sound quality. The sonic difference is that junior tops out at 96khz sample rate (which is fine for most of us), Mini tops out at 192khz, and the full version 384khz. Then there are feature differences between the 3, which although substantial, don't contribute to the sonics discussion. So one could get Amarra quality for as little as $99. Then if you acquire a significant amount of 192 or 384 recordings, you could always upgrade. Memory cache, a really good feature especially if you don't have a dedicated music computer, starts with mini. Junior does not have it if I remember correctly. 
 
Mini has playlist, but full has independent playlists, no itunes required. Not sure what that means

 

[uelover]

Mini has playlist, but full has independent playlists, no itunes required. Not sure what that means

It means that you can use Amarra mini as an standalone audio playback software.

 

[KevinWolff]

Quote:

It means that you can use Amarra mini as an standalone audio playback software.

Full version I think you mean, since that's the one with independent playlist. Mini just says playlist probably meaning itunes playlists. Standalone is a nice feature, but not enough to warrant the cost for most. And how many of us have 384khz recordings. Looks like Mini is the sweet spot. 

 

[WarriorAnt]

Quote:

 
I understand the point you're making but you were also able to recoup most of the cost on those amps, can you recoup any of the money on Amarra?
 
Ultimately if anyone enjoys Amarra over the other players that's all that matters but I still believe that until a controlled blind test is done most people are influenced by cost/marketing over any actual sound differences.  Trusting your ears is fine but would most people trust them enough to put them through a blind test?

No I did not recoup most of the cash on my amps I lost $1500 on the resale.  I think when you make blanket statements like "No one is going to spend $700 on something and NOT say it sounds better. No one." you are really make a definitive statement about yourself and your own integrity and also making a false assumption that your nature is the same as every one else.