Do you hear a difference...?

[wkhanna]

........The right one is totally dedicated to my wife screaming (I only can see his moving lips).

 

Roch

I should be so lucky......something to look forward to, maybe.....

[DigiPete]

No

Pegasus R6 RAID -> Thunderbolt -> MBP i7 quad 16GB SSD -> Firewire -> Weiss AFI-1 DDC -> AES/EBU -> Genelec 8260 pro DSP monitor

 

Given that player buffers song in memory.

[Daren F]

This review from Audioholics hears a difference.

[esldude]

This review from Audioholics hears a difference.

 

Looking at the concept of bit-perfect, it's arguably impossible to have bit perfect playback in a real-time system because there are no bits.

 

This quote from the article should tell you all you want to know depending on which camp you belong to.

 

Plus the article is garbage because other than saying different software has features different from iTunes, and sounds better, he doesn't even tell you what he thinks he hears with the various playback software mentioned.

[One and a half]

Looking at the concept of bit-perfect, it's arguably impossible to have bit perfect playback in a real-time system because there are no bits.

 

This quote from the article should tell you all you want to know depending on which camp you belong to.

 

Plus the article is garbage because other than saying different software has features different from iTunes, and sounds better, he doesn't even tell you what he thinks he hears with the various playback software mentioned.

 

What he is saying about bit perfect is correct, it's not possible. If you read the "my camp" two paragraphs, how can you have bits, when the waveform is a pulsed entity of voltages, time and bits on top of that voltage, plus common mode noise?????? Bits reside on the hard disk as a series of magnetic oriented particles. 'Assemblers' make the voltage waveform based on the data on the hard drive.

 

Bit perfect is a nonsense term for audio, ain't gonna happen, unless :

 

- The waveform contains check bits that keep the pulses in sync with the system's clock all the way out of the computer

- The voltages on the power supplies are so stiff and low impedance, noise is trapped there and can't escape

- The CPU is lobotomised

- The OS is aware of real time

- Jitter is controlled (see first line)

 

Then maybe you can have "pulse or chunck perfect".

 

I didn't read the rest of the article, so won't comment. You may not like Ryan, but what he writes about audio playback is correct.

[serendipitydawg]

Just to put my YES vote into context.I don't (and probably will never) listen to an Apple device.I listen only to free audio software. Foobar, Stealth Audioplayer, SoX resampler & Fidelizer,I was deeply underwhelmed by an early incarnation of JPlay

[beetlemania]

JRMC18, Foobar2000, HQPlayer, Cplay (cics), etc (I think I've tried every PC player except XXHighend which was too frustrating to install) all sound the same to me.

 

JPlay sounds slightly better than these but not enough that I'm willing to pay for it.

 

Also, Fidelizer makes a small difference, to my ears.

[BNC]

That's not what I understand the term "bit perfect" to mean. I assume it to be a purely 'mathematical' term that says that the numbers that go to the DAC should be the same numbers stored in the file. It makes no claims for quality beyond that (jitter, noise etc.). But given a particular setup with certain levels of noise and jitter, it is preferable to feed the DAC with the numbers in the file at the intended sample rate, rather than to re-sample to a different sample rate, or change the resolution, or add dither.

 

A truly "bit perfect" system could still have worse sonic specs (noise, jitter) than a non-bit perfect system with great noise performance and a near-transparent re-sampling algorithm.

[The Computer Audiophile]

I don't (and probably will never) listen to an Apple device. I listen only to free audio software.

Wow, that's a bit extreme but certainly your choice. I would never limit my enjoyment in this hobby because the device is designed by a specific company or the software costs money.

[elcorso]

Just to put my YES vote into context.I don't (and probably will never) listen to an Apple device.I listen only to free audio software. Foobar, Stealth Audioplayer, SoX resampler & Fidelizer,I was deeply underwhelmed by an early incarnation of JPlay

 

Plain (Apple) old iTunes is free, Audirvana (free) is still free. Both are great music players.

 

Thanks to Apple iDevices and Apple Store digital music distribution increased (legally) a lot over the world.

 

Thanks to (Apple) Mac Mini computer audiophiles increased also over the world.

 

Free doesn't guaranty you always quality, but you can claim it when you pay.

 

Regarding you probably will never listen to an Apple device, this depends in your masochistic tendencies...

 

Roch

[beetlemania]

This review from Audioholics hears a difference.

 

Interesting article. I mostly agreed with the descriptions but was puzzled by this sentence:

"When it comes to sound quality on the PC, it’s a system-dependent toss-up between XXHE and JPLAY, with JRMC close behind."

 

Yet in the SQ ratings, they gave JPlay and Foobar 10s, XXHighend a 9, and JRMC an 8. Doesn't square . . .

[4est]

Actually, they gave Foobar an 8 by saying that it matched JRMC.

 

Interesting article. I mostly agreed with the descriptions but was puzzled by this sentence:

"When it comes to sound quality on the PC, it’s a system-dependent toss-up between XXHE and JPLAY, with JRMC close behind."

 

Yet in the SQ ratings, they gave JPlay and Foobar 10s, XXHighend a 9, and JRMC an 8. Doesn't square . . .

[beetlemania]

Actually, they gave Foobar an 8 by saying that it matched JRMC.

Should I believe you or my lying eyes?

 

Hi-Res Music Playback Software Comparison: Page 2 | Audioholics

[ampsarus]

This is a primo post, should be made sticky for some of the 'computerphiles' on this site to read. And ignore.

 

What he is saying about bit perfect is correct, it's not possible. If you read the "my camp" two paragraphs, how can you have bits, when the waveform is a pulsed entity of voltages, time and bits on top of that voltage, plus common mode noise?????? Bits reside on the hard disk as a series of magnetic oriented particles. 'Assemblers' make the voltage waveform based on the data on the hard drive.

 

Bit perfect is a nonsense term for audio, ain't gonna happen, unless :

 

- The waveform contains check bits that keep the pulses in sync with the system's clock all the way out of the computer

- The voltages on the power supplies are so stiff and low impedance, noise is trapped there and can't escape

- The CPU is lobotomised

- The OS is aware of real time

- Jitter is controlled (see first line)

 

Then maybe you can have "pulse or chunck perfect".

 

I didn't read the rest of the article, so won't comment. You may not like Ryan, but what he writes about audio playback is correct.

[4est]

Excuse me, I didn't see that. On the previous page they said is was the same as JRMC.

 

Should I believe you or my lying eyes?

 

Hi-Res Music Playback Software Comparison: Page 2 | Audioholics

[beetlemania]

Excuse me, I didn't see that. On the previous page they said is was the same as JRMC.

 

Yes, as I wrote, I was puzzled . . . the verbiage doesn't match the ratings.

[Sam Lord]

... Audirvana (free) is still free.

That part is correct.

[Esprit]

I hear a difference; I use another connection method.

 

Firewire.

[crisnee]

No I don't hear a difference, but then I'm too lazy to listen for those kind of subtleties. However, less subtly, JRMC sounds better on some Tuesdays than some Wednesdays, and then of course some Saturdays than some Sundays, not to mention some evenings than some afternoons, leaving mournings out altogether.

 

JPlay on the other hand sounds better (between intermittent silences, I'm using the trial version) some hot days than some rainy days..., well you get the picture.

[crisnee]

To clarify a bit. Often I think I do, only to realize I don't, or didn't, or don't remember what I heard before, or wonder if I even know how to remember what I heard before or if I'm....

 

There, that should clear it up.

[hytechrednek]

Yes, but only if the front end components, including computer, are capable of resolving the differences. If not, any difference is very hard to detect. The computer or system components are generating enough distortion to obscure low level information and make it next to impossible to hear the differences.

 

I use a USB/SPDIF converter and Toslink.

 

A big question I have is why do some USB ports do a better job than others, even when the bus has no other devices operating on it? The Empirical Audio website claims it has to do with latency but I find this difficult to rationalize when no other devices are on the USB bus.

[alexwgoody]

I have to wonder if there is more to the all supposedly bit-perfect sources sounding the same argument. I have been running my very old and barely hanging on Macbook pro for my music (it is so slow, it sometimes crashes just opening iTunes), and there is a very noticeable and measured as per my audio diff maker and RTA Measurements showing dramatically less noise, about -3dB >2kHz, and roughly 6dB quieter (I matched volume levels after discovering this) between iTunes and Bitperfect. In fact, even using my iPad to pick the music, which means i cannot see if Bitperfect is on or off, it is often quite obvious to me if it is on or off. I can almost always pick out whether it is on or off and test myself. Can I safely assume regular iTunes is giving bit-perfect output if the volume is 100% or is there another way to test?

Is it possible, or does it seem likely that significant bloatware loaded on the machine over the years make a difference in audio quality? Bitperfect blocks audio output from any and all other applications, so could something else on the software affect iTunes such that it is no longer bit-perfect or changed in some way? (Obviously, iTunes eq is turned off entirely). I'd use a computer in better shape if I had one.

[Audio_ELF]

Well ... only a few more days to go and the overwhelming result is that people (who have completed the poll) notice a difference.

 

I was mainly curious if there was any corrolation between connection method and hearing a difference, but there doesn't appear to be.

 

I was never intending this to be any form of definitive result just an interesting poll...

 

Eloise

[barrows]

What he is saying about bit perfect is correct, it's not possible. If you read the "my camp" two paragraphs, how can you have bits, when the waveform is a pulsed entity of voltages, time and bits on top of that voltage, plus common mode noise?????? Bits reside on the hard disk as a series of magnetic oriented particles. 'Assemblers' make the voltage waveform based on the data on the hard drive.

 

Bit perfect is a nonsense term for audio, ain't gonna happen, unless :

 

- The waveform contains check bits that keep the pulses in sync with the system's clock all the way out of the computer

- The voltages on the power supplies are so stiff and low impedance, noise is trapped there and can't escape

- The CPU is lobotomised

- The OS is aware of real time

- Jitter is controlled (see first line)

 

Then maybe you can have "pulse or chunck perfect".

 

I didn't read the rest of the article, so won't comment. You may not like Ryan, but what he writes about audio playback is correct.

 

No, it is clearly incorrect assuming an asynchronous interface between server and DAC. Audio file distribution is not "real time" until the output of the Asynchronous interface. Ryan is FOS, and indeed, music file transport from the HD to the asynchronous interface can indeed, and usually is "bit perfect" providing the correct SW and settings are used, and no DSP functions are engaged (even in iTunes). Yes, there is no error correction with USB audio, but bit errors will not produce analog like sound quality problems, bit errors result in small ticks, clicks, dropouts, not subtle sound quality degradation. If you hear none of these problems, you have no bit errors, as a bit error in USB audio results in no bit there (there is no correction applied). Once you time the data stream out of the asynchronous interface, then it is no longer bit perfect, as jitter begins there, which will alter the data, and of course, inside the DAC chip itself, all kinds of manipulation is often going on. But before the asynchronous interface, there is no jitter (that is audio jitter) and the data can indeed be bit perfect. If the "software jitter" he mentions were really a problem, the problem would manifest as dropped bits, and then one would hear a tick, click, pop, or dropout.

[Jud]

Once you time the data stream out of the asynchronous interface, then it is no longer bit perfect, as jitter begins there, which will alter the data, and of course, inside the DAC chip itself, all kinds of manipulation is often going on. But before the asynchronous interface, there is no jitter (that is audio jitter) and the data can indeed be bit perfect. If the "software jitter" he mentions were really a problem, the problem would manifest as dropped bits, and then one would hear a tick, click, pop, or dropout.

 

Agreed with what you were saying right up to that point. "Bit perfect" does not involve timing (jitter), unless timing is so bad a bit is dropped, which as you say will produce clearly audible results (tick or pop-type sounds) rather than the noise floor and THD increases characteristic of jitter. So although some amount of jitter (variation in timing between bits) is present in the bitstream, the 1s and 0s in the bitstream should occur in exactly the same sequence as they did in the stored file, so it is bit for bit identical, i.e., bit perfect.

 

Where it stops being bit perfect is the same point in the DAC chip as it would be outside the chip: sample rate conversion (or any other type of filtering, but that is the usual one).