[bigshot]

88.9% of all percentages cited in Internet forums are made up on the spot.

iTunes isn't the same as it was a long time ago. It isn't even iTunes any more. Apple Music has Dolby Atmos and lossless files now. And the AAC files in the regular streaming are audibly transparent, so they sound as good as any HD Audio or CD to human ears. You need to keep up with the times. What was true ten years ago isn't necessary true any more (even if what you say was true ten years ago, which it wasn't).

Has Audirvana fixed its user interface? I tried it about four years ago, but it was extremely frustrating to use. It doesn't sound any different than Apple Music, but it plays file formats Apple Music can't... like multichannel MKVs. I gave up on it because I couldn't control the UI, and switched to Plex.

 

[T 1000]

88.9% of all percentages cited in Internet forums are made up on the spot.

iTunes isn't the same as it was a long time ago. It isn't even iTunes any more. Apple Music has Dolby Atmos and lossless files now. And the AAC files in the regular streaming are audibly transparent, so they sound as good as any HD Audio or CD to human ears. You need to keep up with the times. What was true ten years ago isn't necessary true any more (even if what you say was true ten years ago, which it wasn't).

Has Audirvana fixed its user interface? I tried it about four years ago, but it was extremely frustrating to use. It doesn't sound any different than Apple Music, but it plays file formats Apple Music can't... like multichannel MKVs. I gave up on it because I couldn't control the UI, and switched to Plex.

I find it satisfactory. Through Audirvana I access stored music as well as Tidal. I get more detailed sound from Tidal through Audirvana than through Roon
Audirvana Studio uses 12 GB of RAM when it's running

 

[71 dB]

The loudness wars aren't as much of an issue as they were a few years ago. Streaming channels like Apple have been pushing back and setting quality standards.

Yes, but these companies have to almost force these things on us, so in that sense it is not the consumers controlling productions, but big companies.

 

[bigshot]

I've never detected any difference in the quality of playback between apps.

 

[T 1000]

I've never detected any difference in the quality of playback between apps.

The most important thing is the love for music, the rest are nuances

 

[bigshot]

Well, I do controlled listening tests to detect differences. I really don’t want coloration, and I do the due diligence to avoid it. If it’s just a nuance that you’re reporting, and that’s based on a purely subjective impression where you made no attempt to eliminate bias or perceptual error, I’m just going to assume it probably isn’t real. Because if it was, I would have detected a difference when I compared Audirvana to my reference source.

I love music. And I make sure my equipment is as transparent and balanced as possible, so I can focus on listening to the music, not the equipment.

 

[T 1000]

In this hobby, when big money is invested in equipment, the primary tool is hearing, and unbiased and absolute belief in what you hear.
Of course there are a lot of snobs in this hobby, but that's their fault.

 

[T 1000]

I apologize for actively participating in the scientific forum, because I am not a fan of measurements.

 

[bigshot]

A controlled listening test isn’t measurements. If you don’t believe that bias and perceptual error can affect what you hear, then you don’t believe you’re human.

I understand that a lot of audiophiles believe they have achieved superhuman hearing by extreme concentration and sheer force of will. I assume that what they hear isn’t real too.

 

[T 1000]

I enjoy music works that I have listened to many times and recognize the acoustics of the stage, the breath of air, the trembling of the strings..., it is always the same, until I change something in the system, When you know something well...
I avoid lying to myself

 

[bigshot]

I get the same results from having a nice lunch. They should sell audiophile lunches.

 

[T 1000]

I get the same results from having a nice lunch. They should sell audiophile lunches.

Thanks for the chat, it's late

 

[moriez]

@OrangeStar257

Unless there is a reason for posting specifically in the Sound Science your question also fits Introductions, Help and Recommendations. Different people, different views.

 

[Elegiac]

^ Ehhh, let him ask his question here. It's fun.

Anyway, OP must have a nice laptop. When I first started I couldn't tell the difference between my $500 laptop and my Sony NW-E394 mp3 player, using a pair of Sennheiser HD 569's. And that seemed fair enough. When I eventually got a better player to use with FLAC, I heard a difference in sound quality, and I checked whether I could hear a difference between MP3 320 and FLAC on it. I found I could, but only on certain albums. It mostly just sounded like I was hearing more, not necessarily better, but it was better because there was more, if that makes sense.

There are so many variables the OP hasn't specified.

 

[bigshot]

I heard the newest Mac laptops have a more powerful headphone amp built in than before. Perhaps other companies are doing the same.

If you encoded 320 AAC or MP3 LAME you wouldn't be able to hear a difference. Fraunhofer MP3 is almost thirty years old now. Codecs have gotten much better since then.