Jump to content
IGNORED

Upgrading to mountain lion?


Vpitnt

Recommended Posts

I just noticed that in the FAQ section on Amarra that they say hold off updating to Mountain Lion --anyone know of that is an oversight that it has not been removed ? Anyone had problems with Amarra on ml?

mac mini 2011, Transparent audio usb cable, bryston bda-2, hegel h300 integrated amp, audio physic virgo 25 speakers, transparent audio speaker cables interconnects and digital cables.

Link to comment
I agree with your findings under ML.

 

But if you want to "harden" or "sweeten" your SQ under Audirvana Plus: Playing on Integer Mode 1, iZotope at 2X: Moving the Pre-Ringing slider to "Linear" I get more hardness, but to "Min. Phase" the SQ goes to sweeten. In my case the 0.6 setting is OK, but it's DAC dependent (and music also).

 

Cheers!

 

Roch

 

Thanks for your suggestions.

 

I had mine set on Integer Mode 1 and iZotope 64-bit SRC but Forced Upsampling at none. You were suggesting to set Forced Upsampling at Oversampling at 2x only? I tried that but much prefer to None at this point. I had the Pre-Ringing at Linear or 1 that is because lowering seems to be overly sweet for me since I am using a tube stage. I have also checked on all SysOptimizer and that makes a huge difference!

 

I spent the whole day today doing more Killing in OSX Terminal shutting down any background process I do not need e.g. Notification, Spotlight, etc. All goes well and have kept the memory level at less the a quarter running consistently. The big difference on is how ML assign memory on Free and Inactive Memory. Where on SL you tends to see a large portion of Green or Free memory but on ML there is very little Free memory while the Inactive Memory is a huge Blue chunk! Not sure why but there are no lag or drop out or any performance issues...will find out why ML is doing this.

Link to comment
I just noticed that in the FAQ section on Amarra that they say hold off updating to Mountain Lion --anyone know of that is an oversight that it has not been removed ? Anyone had problems with Amarra on ml?

 

I think it's an oversight. No problems here whatsoever.

Link to comment

Hi all.

 

I'm very intrigued about the SQ differences between SL and ML. I currently have a very early 2006 Mac Mini, which has a MOBO limitation of 2GB max RAM. In any case ML will definitely not work on this machine due to the CPU.

 

I have been tempted to upgrade for a number of months now, due to the fact that Audirvana would like more than 2GB ideally.

 

At the moment I'm very happy with my setup and it does exactly what I want of it, but I realise its quite old and upgrading would be a good future proofing exercise.

 

I have read that if your system is slightly warm then ML SQ may not be to your liking. I have an all Rega system and I think it could be described as on the warm side. So maybe ML may not be for me??

 

I could possibly get a 2nd hand later Mac Mini for about £200+, chuck in £40 worth of RAM to get it up to 8GB. Sell my old Mini for £100-150 = a possible outlay of about £100.

 

But if the SQ doesn't suit my system it may be a futile exercise.

Mac Min : Audirvana : Audiophilleo 2 : Rega DAC : Brio-R : RS3 speakers.

Link to comment
Hi all.

 

I'm very intrigued about the SQ differences between SL and ML. I currently have a very early 2006 Mac Mini, which has a MOBO limitation of 2GB max RAM. In any case ML will definitely not work on this machine due to the CPU.

 

I have been tempted to upgrade for a number of months now, due to the fact that Audirvana would like more than 2GB ideally.

 

At the moment I'm very happy with my setup and it does exactly what I want of it, but I realise its quite old and upgrading would be a good future proofing exercise.

 

I have read that if your system is slightly warm then ML SQ may not be to your liking. I have an all Rega system and I think it could be described as on the warm side. So maybe ML may not be for me??

 

I could possibly get a 2nd hand later Mac Mini for about £200+, chuck in £40 worth of RAM to get it up to 8GB. Sell my old Mini for £100-150 = a possible outlay of about £100.

 

But if the SQ doesn't suit my system it may be a futile exercise.

 

are you using extra software like PM or Audirvana?

 

besides this I think you are overestimated the influence of the difference of ML vs SL, the DAC has much more influence.

Link to comment
Thanks for your suggestions.

 

I had mine set on Integer Mode 1 and iZotope 64-bit SRC but Forced Upsampling at none. You were suggesting to set Forced Upsampling at Oversampling at 2x only? I tried that but much prefer to None at this point. I had the Pre-Ringing at Linear or 1 that is because lowering seems to be overly sweet for me since I am using a tube stage. I have also checked on all SysOptimizer and that makes a huge difference!

 

I spent the whole day today doing more Killing in OSX Terminal shutting down any background process I do not need e.g. Notification, Spotlight, etc. All goes well and have kept the memory level at less the a quarter running consistently. The big difference on is how ML assign memory on Free and Inactive Memory. Where on SL you tends to see a large portion of Green or Free memory but on ML there is very little Free memory while the Inactive Memory is a huge Blue chunk! Not sure why but there are no lag or drop out or any performance issues...will find out why ML is doing this.

 

Under iZotope settings, if you don't down sample or up sample changing his settings do nothing to the SQ. iZotope 64-bit SRC is designed for this.

 

And yes, I up sample to 2X only, Direct Mode 1 and Pre-Ringing set is 0.6. The other sliders are at default settings from A+.

 

I'm on tubes also, on Preamp and Amp.

 

 

Memory shows like this:

 

Sys_Mem.jpg

 

 

 

 

CPU usage shows like this:

 

CPU_use.jpg

 

Roch

Link to comment

larevoj,

thanks for your analysis:

 

"Indeed ML is a hungry beast. On SL the 8GB was simply idling in there and occasionally a quarter of it would be utilised but on ML as much as half would be eaten up! I had to turn off several background functions using Terminal and remove any frills that is unnecessary to operate as a music server. After some tweaks I got it down to a little more then a quarter or memory were used during playback.

 

I have tested ML on PM / Amarra / A+ and had no issues with exception with PM where I had to say bye bye to native integer playback. All three sounds good and in fact they seems to sound more alike in ML versus SL. I will need more in depth listening but interestingly ML does sound different and for the better. Running on 64 Bit does makes a different and my immediate notes were:

 

1) Less glare and musical

2) Able to push volume higher

3) A touch warmer and smooth midrange

4) A wider and deeper soundstage

5) Not as sparkly as SL

6) Better separation"

 

I have just upgraded to the latest version of A+ and now playing with the advanced SRC settings.

(btw - this version up is a great improvement !)

 

Like Roch (elcorso) indicated trimming the SQ with the pre-ringing and phase sliders has some noticeable effect which needs examination first.

 

But as SL is much less memory hungry I will stay away from ML at this moment.

Maybe next OSX version will improve on this issue ...

Link to comment

Maybe this is what I need to do. Running 10.7.5 and the interface between iTunes 11.0.2 and PM 1.89B is not very smooth. Do I need to upgrade to get this going better?

 

2012 Mac Mini, i5 - 2.5 GHz, 16 GB RAM. SSD,  PM/PV software, Focusrite Clarett 4Pre 4 channel interface. Daysequerra M4.0X Broadcast monitor., My_Ref Evolution rev a , Klipsch La Scala II, Blue Sky Sub 12

Clarett used as ADC for vinyl rips.

Corning Optical Thunderbolt cable used to connect computer to 4Pre. Dac fed by iFi iPower and Noise Trapper isolation transformer. 

Link to comment
Under iZotope settings, if you don't down sample or up sample changing his settings do nothing to the SQ. iZotope 64-bit SRC is designed for this.

 

And yes, I up sample to 2X only, Direct Mode 1 and Pre-Ringing set is 0.6. The other sliders are at default settings from A+.

 

I'm on tubes also, on Preamp and Amp.

 

Memory shows like this:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4632[/ATTACH]

 

CPU usage shows like this:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4633[/ATTACH]

 

Roch

 

Hi Elcorso, I fiddle with the upsample and Pre-Ringing value today and I quite like what I heard but I had it alittle higher then 0.6. Perhaps because I am not running entirely tube but just the linestage or preamplifier. I have very similar Memory and CPU usage with an average 700MB in both Active and Wired while playing.

 

I tried playing continuously for 24 hours and was surprised to see both Active and Wired memory remain pretty much the same levels. The Inactive memory seems to adds up overtime and it can take up almost all remaining memory. The MM continues to run with no drop out whatsoever and hardly slows down.

 

I like to see what difference it makes over a Clean install versus Upgrade over current OSX. So I reformatted the entire drive and reinstalled with ML from scratch and turn off or kill all unnecessary processes. It does make a difference in the amount of memory used while running and idle. However, the Inactive memory continues to accumulate.

 

Like Roch (elcorso) indicated trimming the SQ with the pre-ringing and phase sliders has some noticeable effect which needs examination first.

 

But as SL is much less memory hungry I will stay away from ML at this moment.

Maybe next OSX version will improve on this issue ...

 

Hi JTM, you have similar amount of RAM as I do and I won't be overly concern about Inactive memory consumption at this point.

 

Using Activity Monitor to read System Memory and determine how much RAM is being used

 

But if you are using your mac for a number of purpose and not just playback only then I won't suggest ML unless you have 16GB to feed this hungry beast. If you do consider I suggest to have a Clean install whenever possible.

Link to comment
Hi Elcorso, I fiddle with the upsample and Pre-Ringing value today and I quite like what I heard but I had it alittle higher then 0.6. Perhaps because I am not running entirely tube but just the linestage or preamplifier. I have very similar Memory and CPU usage with an average 700MB in both Active and Wired while playing.

 

I tried playing continuously for 24 hours and was surprised to see both Active and Wired memory remain pretty much the same levels. The Inactive memory seems to adds up overtime and it can take up almost all remaining memory. The MM continues to run with no drop out whatsoever and hardly slows down.

 

I like to see what difference it makes over a Clean install versus Upgrade over current OSX. So I reformatted the entire drive and reinstalled with ML from scratch and turn off or kill all unnecessary processes. It does make a difference in the amount of memory used while running and idle. However, the Inactive memory continues to accumulate.

 

 

 

Hi JTM, you have similar amount of RAM as I do and I won't be overly concern about Inactive memory consumption at this point.

 

Using Activity Monitor to read System Memory and determine how much RAM is being used

 

But if you are using your mac for a number of purpose and not just playback only then I won't suggest ML unless you have 16GB to feed this hungry beast. If you do consider I suggest to have a Clean install whenever possible.

 

Hi larevoj, I was recently under 8 Gb RAM under ML with no trouble at all, but my Mac Mini is dedicated music server. I'm on 16 Gb now, because I bought a new Mini and the price difference wasn't too much. As you see (from the Apple article) Inactive memory is not a problem, since it's waiting to be used to get faster response if used by the same program it was used before.

 

iZotope settings are user taste, DAC, music play gear and listening room dependent.

 

As you, I did ML clean installation, this way you trash away a lot of unused and unnecessary OS X and programs created files .

 

Roch

Link to comment
I like to see what difference it makes over a Clean install versus Upgrade over current OSX. So I reformatted the entire drive and reinstalled with ML from scratch and turn off or kill all unnecessary processes. It does make a difference in the amount of memory used while running and idle. However, the Inactive memory continues to accumulate. .

 

My iMac is of the elderly variety and only has a max of 4GB of memory. Just what proceses did you disable?

I have found you an argument; I am not obliged to find you any understanding – Samuel Johnson

Link to comment
My iMac is of the elderly variety and only has a max of 4GB of memory. Just what proceses did you disable?

 

Hi James, to start with 4GB RAM I will not recommend the upgrade.

 

If you google about Mountain Lion Optimizations you will find many leads to what processes you can kill. One good place to start from is here:

 

How to Optimize OS X Mountain Lion for Audio and Video | Audiofiles

 

Cheers!

 

PS: an update after running Amarra for 12 hours it does the same as A+ on Inactive memory. This is just to be sure its not the playback software but the OSX codes.

Link to comment

Folks...you maybe aware that entering 'Purge' in Terminal will free up all Inactive memory. Its instant and you can do so on the fly even while you are playing your tunes. With 8GB generally you have no issue whatsoever and ML will start swapping out Inactive memory for active use as and when require.

 

Now, after spending hours and days clearing up the ML with minimal install, no partition, absolutely stripped to the minimal (at least to the level I know how), and listen for it for a number of days. I got a feel of what ML sound signature is about and did a backup copy of the entire setup. So the next question is if SL can sound as good? I did a completely clean install on the same machine back down all the way to SL with bear minimal software installed, stripped down all unnecessary processes, made updates to OSX to the most current SL version and retain only what is really require.

 

The immediate difference is SPEED and RELIABILITY of the machine. It sounds contradictory as ML should be faster and better then SL and it maybe so on the current machine but it just doesn't boot as fast and run as fast on my machine (MacMini3,1 + 8GB + 120GBSSD). I do have a current MM with 16GB running on current ML with OWC 6G Pro 256GB but its on switch mode PSU but I much prefer the MacMini3,1 running on linear PSU as a dedicated music server. On SL everything just run as it should and much less hiccups as compared to ML. There are much less background activities on SL and total memory used after boot up is much less over ML - approx. 20-30% less. You will never need to make a Purge on SL too and Shared connectivity between OSX is flawless.

 

The bottom line is always the SOUND. I can understand why some folks have both OSX in the same machine. Amarra, A+, and PM installed in both OSX sound different. However, on ML you lose Integer on PM while Amarra and A+ is fine. I have tested both platforms in all kinds of genre of music electronic dance to classical and whatever in between for days. Generally ML is a much smoother sounding platform, darker overall, very liquid in its mids, slightly deeper/wider soundstage, and its like sitting a few rolls back in a theater. SL has a lively ambiance, a little closer to the performer, its never fatigue or harsh, overall more neutral and transparent - the word is Engaging.

 

In the end its not a difficult decision for me. I can easily revery back to ML or even install both into my machine but I decided to stick with SL. These comments have to be taken in context of many parameters in play here and it would be foolish of me to dictate/suggest one is better over the other. I would highly recommend to try out both in your system and hear for yourself which will work out better for you in the given system, environment and personal preferences.

 

Enjoy...

 

Cheers~

Link to comment

Thanks, larevoj, for the detailed comparison.

 

I haven't gone for sure that deep into tweaking my machine with SL as you might have done with yours, but I can follow your description on behaviour (speed) and sound character (my english isn't good enough to express all the nuances, sorry).

 

A friend of mine is running ML on a later MacBookPro than mine, and he has a more revealing kit with TAD-C2000, 2x TAD-M600 and TAD-R1's. We compared his ML mac and my SL mac some time ago on his kit and found my machine sounding more neutral, better pace and rhythm.

He got the better kit, but made a mistake upgrading to ML before creating a second partition, so he cannot go back anymore (afaik)...

 

This is why I stated some time ago in this thread why I do not consider to upgrade, even though my machines have enough "horsepower" for ML.

Link to comment
I just noticed that in the FAQ section on Amarra that they say hold off updating to Mountain Lion --anyone know of that is an oversight that it has not been removed ? Anyone had problems with Amarra on ml?

 

I just upgraded from Lion to ML with great results so far. I use Amarra at least 95% of the time. The system is more stable and bit a faster now.

*ANTIPODES CX--- Ethernet--->

*CARY DMS-600 STREAMER/DAC---> XLR ICs--->

*CARY SLP-05 preamp (Ultimate Upgrade ed.)---> XLR ICs--->

*CLAYTON M-300 amps--->

*MARTIN LOGAN Spire speakers.

Link to comment
Folks...you maybe aware that entering 'Purge' in Terminal will free up all Inactive memory. Its instant and you can do so on the fly even while you are playing your tunes. With 8GB generally you have no issue whatsoever and ML will start swapping out Inactive memory for active use as and when require.

 

Now, after spending hours and days clearing up the ML with minimal install, no partition, absolutely stripped to the minimal (at least to the level I know how), and listen for it for a number of days. I got a feel of what ML sound signature is about and did a backup copy of the entire setup. So the next question is if SL can sound as good? I did a completely clean install on the same machine back down all the way to SL with bear minimal software installed, stripped down all unnecessary processes, made updates to OSX to the most current SL version and retain only what is really require.

 

The immediate difference is SPEED and RELIABILITY of the machine. It sounds contradictory as ML should be faster and better then SL and it maybe so on the current machine but it just doesn't boot as fast and run as fast on my machine (MacMini3,1 + 8GB + 120GBSSD). I do have a current MM with 16GB running on current ML with OWC 6G Pro 256GB but its on switch mode PSU but I much prefer the MacMini3,1 running on linear PSU as a dedicated music server. On SL everything just run as it should and much less hiccups as compared to ML. There are much less background activities on SL and total memory used after boot up is much less over ML - approx. 20-30% less. You will never need to make a Purge on SL too and Shared connectivity between OSX is flawless.

 

The bottom line is always the SOUND. I can understand why some folks have both OSX in the same machine. Amarra, A+, and PM installed in both OSX sound different. However, on ML you lose Integer on PM while Amarra and A+ is fine. I have tested both platforms in all kinds of genre of music electronic dance to classical and whatever in between for days. Generally ML is a much smoother sounding platform, darker overall, very liquid in its mids, slightly deeper/wider soundstage, and its like sitting a few rolls back in a theater. SL has a lively ambiance, a little closer to the performer, its never fatigue or harsh, overall more neutral and transparent - the word is Engaging.

 

In the end its not a difficult decision for me. I can easily revery back to ML or even install both into my machine but I decided to stick with SL. These comments have to be taken in context of many parameters in play here and it would be foolish of me to dictate/suggest one is better over the other. I would highly recommend to try out both in your system and hear for yourself which will work out better for you in the given system, environment and personal preferences.

 

Enjoy...

 

Cheers~

 

Excellent little review there. I feel better for sticking with SL now.

Mac Min : Audirvana : Audiophilleo 2 : Rega DAC : Brio-R : RS3 speakers.

Link to comment
Thanks, larevoj, for the detailed comparison.

 

I haven't gone for sure that deep into tweaking my machine with SL as you might have done with yours, but I can follow your description on behaviour (speed) and sound character (my english isn't good enough to express all the nuances, sorry).

 

A friend of mine is running ML on a later MacBookPro than mine, and he has a more revealing kit with TAD-C2000, 2x TAD-M600 and TAD-R1's. We compared his ML mac and my SL mac some time ago on his kit and found my machine sounding more neutral, better pace and rhythm.

He got the better kit, but made a mistake upgrading to ML before creating a second partition, so he cannot go back anymore (afaik)...

 

This is why I stated some time ago in this thread why I do not consider to upgrade, even though my machines have enough "horsepower" for ML.

 

Hi JTM, its not that difficult to tweak SL and majority of the answers are all available on line for free to download. :)

 

Yes, I think SL definitely scores high on PRAT and its more revealing in that sense. In fact I believe your friend CAN roll back to SL from ML and there are lots of good instruction on line showing you how - even in youtube videos. I did mine the same way and its a pretty painless process just time consuming.

 

ML is still fairly new and I am certain it will only get better down the road with more updates along the way. I will wait for a couple more updates and may give it another go in the future.

 

Cheers!

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...