Amarra Conclusions - Thumbs Up!

[ciamara]

Hi everyone. Some of you may recall my earlier posts regarding Amarra and iTunes. I have completed my work in testing the various options out there. I have extensively tested WaveEditor, SoundTrack Pro, Bias Peak LE and Bias Peak Pro, Digidesign Pro Tools and Logic Pro, as well as, of course, Amarra. After heavy listening on all kinds of material in a very high resolution TAD-loaded system (from Ciamara), I have concluded that Amarra simply sounds the best -- to my ears, and to several others I have had in our showroom here in Manhattan.

 

Compared to iTunes, the difference is not subtle. Amarra is warmer, rounder and presents a much more tightly controlled stereo image. In early tests, I thought that Amarra removed some of the bass information (from 80Hz down). But I later confirmed this NOT to be the case. Just listening to Patricia Barber's "Regular Pleasures" (Album: Verse) was more than enough proof that the bass information is all there. In some cases, I found that electronic/dance and disco music seemed to have more "oomf" in iTunes as compared to Amarra. However, this was only apparent when switching back and forth during constant A/B testing. It is not noticeable or bothersome otherwise. I also strongly believe -- though I have no proof -- that iTunes exaggerates the bass. And let's face it ... the extra "oomf" is a tradeoff, as the imaging in the mid and high frequencies is much poorer with iTunes. Even on medium resolution systems, this should be apparent.

 

I found Bias Peak Pro/LE to be a close 2nd place in terms of listening enjoyment. Certainly, it is a good playback engine. But its utility for computer audiophiles is limited -- it isn't very easy to use compared to Amarra. You need to drag and drop files into the playlist, and there is no sort feature -- AIFF files seem to line up according to the order in which the AIFF files were originally created. Not fun if you want to listen to an album in the order intended by the artist.

 

With the seamless integration with iTunes, I think Amarra is the hands down winner. The price does seem high for the full version -- but let's be honest with ourselves. We just think it is expensive because it is software that we can't really feel and touch. If it were a DAC or a turntable, we wouldn't be complaining. That said, our budgets are what they are ... And for those of us who are constrained, they do offer a mini version for $395. I have heard several people say on this forum they would pay around $200-400 for something like this, and with the mini version you get just that. According to the company, the sound engine is IDENTICAL in both versions, so the only thing you forgo with the mini version is the volume control and EQ facilities.

 

Oh yes ... and on the subject of sound engines ... I'm still not sure I fully understand, but what I do know for certain is that Amarra uses its own sound engine for playback and completely bypasses Core Audio -- this came directly from the company. The program delivers the sound "data," if you will, to directly to the interface, which in my case is a Lynx AES16e in a Mac Pro (Intel). Please don't start the bit perfect thing here ... I can neither answer these questions, nor do I think it is relevant to this discussion. We are talking about listening tests and trusting our ears here in this thread.

 

I encourage you all to try to the 30-day demo. The $50 charge is only for the purchase of the iLok dongle, which is fully refundable. Listening this way without the intermittent silence will definitely allow you to evaluate it properly. Just a warning, though .... Once you go Amarra, you will never want to go back!

 

Last point: Hardware setup makes a big difference, so if you go this way, you should consider getting some advice on setting the system up properly. Certainly the Lynx AES16(e) is a good way to go. The Amarra hardware is supposed to be even better, though I have yet to try it. I should be receiving demo equipment from Sonic Studio soon, so when I do, I will try to post my findings. Thanks all!

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Thanks for the detailed post Sanjay.

 

[grsteve]

$395 for the mini version would be very reasonable if it didn't max out at 24/96. That is a total deal breaker for me. So, it's back to deciding whether the full version is worth the price (for me personally).

 

-Steve

 

 

[cfmsp]

 

Agreed, I wouldn't buy the current Mini as is.

 

Strip off the unnecessary EQ functionality, etc. for a Mini version, fine ... but, crippling the sample rate sort of defeats the purpose of buying it.

 

 

Oh well, soon there will be competitors.

 

Clay

 

 

 

[ciamara]

Hi Steve,

 

I totally forgot about that -- and it is material. Whoops! But tell me ... how much of your library is at higher resolution than 24bit/96kHz? I went with a Lavry DA11 DAC. I think Lavry makes brilliant products. For what it's worth, Sony Studios uses Lavry exclusively. They will be using their DACs to convert their entire analogue back catalogue to 24bit/96kHz files. All this to say, I realize that by purchasing a converter that only goes up to 24bit/96kHz I have (temporarily) lost the upside that higher res formats have to offer .... But I took a good hard look at what I like to listen to vs. how much material is out there at higher res, and how much I expect in the next 1-2 years (my typical replacement cycle), and I decided 24/96kHz was an acceptable maximum for me for the next 2 years.

 

I'm not sure if this is the case, but I would bet that if you ask nicely, Sonic Studio might allow you to buy the Mini version and later upgrade to the full version at a discounted price. It is worth asking them.

 

I realize this doesn't fully address your concern, but perhaps partially?

 

[audiozorro]

I was interested in Amarra when I first heard of the software. That lasted until I was dismayed and shocked by the price. Then with news that there would be a reduced version at a much lower price, I was excited again. That is until I found out that Sonic Studio would deliberately cripple the sampling rate in the Amarra Mini. My initial reaction was to pass on Amarra Mini, but I may change my mind.

 

The reality for me and many others is that our Mac computers are limited to 24/96 using toslink or USB anyway. Yeah I wish Apple would fix the toslink limit especially when others report 24/192 toslink output using Windows OS on their Mac computer, but that another bone to pick. And I do have a 24/192 firewire DAC that I could use but it doesn't sound as good as my other DAC solutions that are limited to 24/96. Plus, thanks to the CA Audiophile Reference Music Server For A Song, I now have excellent low cost Windows music servers that are my mainstay and that also play 24/192, even though I have less than a dozen 24/176.4 or 24/192 recordings.

 

So I may buy Amarra Mini for $395 if just to keep my Mac music server in the game. I may like to have 24/192 capability and volume control, but these are not worth an additional $600 or $1100. I'm sure if I had a Weiss DAC2 I might spring for the full version of Amarra for $995 but I probably would decline the $1495 offer, but that's me and my budget. I am also interested on ADC software for digitizing vinyl but until that capability is incorporated into Amarra, tested and reviewed, it's just vaporware and a gamble that I would also decline.

 

So what has Sonic Studio accomplished by alienating potential customers and increasing the magnitude and complexity of technical support, which if not handled correctly will eat profits and alienate existing customers? Once again I have to criticize Sonic Studio's marketing and product strategies. I cannot recall the last time a manufacturer took potential customers on such a roller coaster ride. It's good that they have a good product otherwise we wouldn't even be discussing this.

 

[grsteve]

In fact my entire ultra hi res (> 24/96) PCM library consists of a single RR HRX disc and some free files from the 2L site (I also have some double bit rate DSD vinyl transfers and recordings made to a Korg MR1000 but those are irrelevant to this discussion). I will go as far as to say that I have been hard pressed to detect any improvement in sound quality beyond 24/96 or 24/88.2. In the case of the HRX disc, I had earlier purchased 24/96 files of the same material from HDTracks. I believe I detected a slight improvement with the 24/176.4 material, but I can't entirely rule out the possibility of wishful thinking.

 

My current setup is a Lenovo thinkpad laptop running J River MC 12 going fw out to an RME FF 800. My entire digital library resides on a RAID 5, standalone NAS, My network is wired gigabit ethernet. I know there are better sounding DACs out there. In fact I briefly had a friends MSB Powerdac in my system which sounded considerably better, although at the time I didn't have any ultra hi res files to play through it.

 

I closely followed the reports that trickled in following the Fantasy Studios Symposium. I took very seriously the claims made that ultra hi res files were significantly superior in sound quality on a highly resolving system. Especially those claims made by CA members who admitted to never having heard all that much of a difference before.

 

I am contemplating upgrading my digital front end in stages. One component I am leaning towards is a Weiss DAC2 to replace my FF for dedicated 2 channel out. This will allow me to still interface with my laptop via fw. If the Amarra mini had full resolution, I would find a used Macbook and download the free trial to hear for myself what all the buzz was about. If I liked what I heard, I would jump on the mini version for $395. As things stand, I doubt I would go to the trouble and/or expense of hunting down a Macbook to evaluate something that I may not purchase regardless of how much I liked it.

 

-Steve

 

 

[silverlight]

Well I just want to throw in my 2 cents (no flaming pls... just a friendly post!). I think Amarra is great, and I've also spent many hours comparing it to other software available on the Mac for playback including some of the Pro software like iZoptope, etc. To me Amarra sounds the best and I really place great value on the auto sample rate switching feature, changing from 44 to 192 to 176, etc without having to muck around makes listening to music more enjoyable and less distracting (as much as I enjoy fiddling with computers, it can get in the way of the point of all of this). I had a couple issues here and there with the DAC2 interface, and I have to say that Jon at Sonic was a treat to deal with, even did a remote viewing session on my computer to review settings and see what was up. I've been very satisfied so far with the experience, and they seem very responsive on issues and requested features. Vince at VRS has also be great to interact with and have gotten a lot of great tips throughout the process on HW and SF config and setup. While it seems like a big cost (and obviously is without question in any context), many audiophiles (no judgment, just a comment) have probably spent more for less in hardware tweaks and mod's. There will no doubt be other great software choices that are released over time as well at different price points and that's good for everyone.

 

[Mr.C]

I wonder, has anyone else compared Amarra to "Play" by sbooth? I recently did so and am curious because it made me come to a conclusion about Amarra. I won't say which side I'm leaning towards just yet because it may change, but I'd recommend that others compare the two and see what they hear.

 

[ciamara]

I totally agree. I think going on the attack against Amarra and Sonic Studio is perhaps misguided frustration -- i.e. "I want the best but can't afford it right now." We all have to make these choices ... "What you mean my private jet only goes HALF way around the world? What if I NEED to go 3/4 of the way around?" [Hint: fly the other way.]

 

We live in a free market economy, which means companies can price at whatever level they want. Generally, they price at levels that makes sense financially and maximizes profits. We can't assume that Amarra is overpriced just because it seems expensive to some of us. What else is out there that has all the features we want? Sure, I'll bet the company makes a great margin, but so do several other companies on many other products. Over time, competition will certainly bring other players to market, and prices will likely come down as a consequence. But first movers have the right to charge what they want, and for as long as they can.

 

Likewise, we consumers have the choice to be early adopters or wait until prices drop. Perfect examples are Plasma TVs and Blu-Ray players. If you wanted to be the first to own these cool new technologies, guess what ... you had to pay a huge premium. I would bet money that some of these amazing DACs we are willing to pay $5000 for today will come down in price as new entrants join in and technology moves forward.

 

So my answer to those who feel Amarra is ripping them off, just remember, you have the choice. You can always wait ... But if you have a few extra bucks lying around and you have a decent system into which you've invested a lot, this is one heck of a nice upgrade to the sound.

 

Also, I think the $395 mini-player is a great move. First, it shows that the Sonic Studio has listened to the market and is offering a cheaper option -- something they didn't offer before. Second, it has to be limited in some way or form -- otherwise, nobody would buy the full version. Let's also be honest with ourselves. If the extra $600 for the full version is too much of a stretch, then can we really afford all the 176 and 192kHz recordings, not to mention the DACs and stereo equipment to make the difference of 176 and 192 vs. 88 and 96kHz audible? I don't mean to infer that cost and quality are proportional, because they are not. But it is important to keep in mind that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link ....

 

That's how we approach audio at Ciamara. We want to maximize user enjoyment of music. Although we are experts in analogue systems, we are learning fast about digital and aren't afraid to ask for help from experts like Chris here if we need it. We take a systems approach to designing and implementing high end hi-fi sound. We care about warm, rich, enveloping and natural sound, and we spend a great deal of time and energy carefully developing and putting into systems fine components that maximize the synergy between them. But don't take my word for it. As I always say, trust your ears!

 

 

 

 

 

[ciamara]

I just did some more listening with Play vs. Amarra to double check my findings, and my conclusions are the same.

 

It seems to me that Play is very good. In fact, it has always been noticeably better than iTunes. But it still doesn't beat Amarra in the current setup in our showroom. The imaging with Play is a little mushy. It also seems like the noise floor is a little higher, so very quiet passages are slightly less intelligible.

 

Is Play a good engine? Absolutely. But I still prefer the sound of Amarra (personally) and think the features are enough to convince me. Hope that helps!

 

What were your findings? I'm curious to know.

 

[faberryman]

It has already been noted that Amarra mini is limited to 96/24. However, consider that perhaps the $395 spent on Amarra yields a greater improvement than an additional $395 spent on hardware. Presumably one can upgrade to the full version for the difference in price if one acquires 192/24 capability.

 

[Mr.C]

My findings were very similar to the differences I heard between the PS Audio DLIII and the Apogee Mini-Dac, between the Sim Audio Moon i-1 and a bi-amped Denon 5800, and between upsampling and non-upsampling. Amarra was sweeter, smoother, and the notes sounded smaller with more rounded edges so that they filled up the same space but transitioned smoothly. The impression this gives is of being slightly quieter but with loud peaks that are the centres of the notes. The detail/changes aren't emphasized as much. Play was direct, blocky, more like squares with rapid transitions between sounds. The impression this gives is of a more detailed presentation because the abruptness emphasizes changes (detail). It is a little like Amarra runs a low pass filter compared to Play's high pass filter. I can't say much on the imaging because I was using headphones (grado gs-1ks). I don't know if this explains it correctly, but its a stab at it anyways. Like I said, I'm still deciding which I prefer.

 

BTW, when I emailed Amarra, they indicated that you could trade up from Amarra mini to the full version for the difference in price. I don't know the details of this, but it seems that it is possible.

 

[cfmsp]

"perhaps the $395 spent on Amarra yields a greater improvement than an additional $395 spent on hardware"

 

 

I'd say that's pretty unlikely if someone is considering spending $400 or so upgrading to their first serious DAC.

 

In fact, I'd say it's not likely unless someone already has such an expensive system that it would cost a thousand (or more) dollars for any noticeable improvement in their hardware, in other words, beyond the knee of the diminishing returns curve.

 

YMMV, and apparently does.

 

clay

 

EDIT: I'm not trying to be confrontational, I just disagree.

 

 

 

[kana813]

sunjitwhy-

 

How did you do your A/B testing?

 

Did you use two computers?

 

[ciamara]

Hi kana813,

 

Good question. For most A/B tests, I used the same song/track played from two different players on the same computer. I then sat directly in front of my full range speakers (Ciamara Dream Series IV) and switched from one player to the other from within the computer. (I used the Screen Sharing feature in Mac OS to control the Mac Pro from a Macbook).

 

More specifically, I would first listen to the song from one player for 30-45 seconds, then stop that player and listen to the same song through the other player for 30-45 seconds. I would then do the switches back and forth more rapidly, until I was going back and forth every 1-2 seconds. To make the testing blind, I had someone else do the switching for me. I could pick out Amarra every time because the differences were so obvious.

 

I admit that this is slightly imperfect -- two computers with identical setups playing the same tracks synchronized and feeding a preamp or switcher with identical DACs, cables etc. would be more precise. But at least for these tests, I found that the differences were so material and obvious that it really did not matter. I also try to use program material that I am very familiar with (if not starting to get sick from listening to it so much -- ha ha)

 

Hope that helps. I'd be happy to hear how others do their A/B testing.

 

[kamil]

Hi Sanjay, what differences in sound quality did you notice between Peak Pro and Amarra? Really appreciate your comments.

 

Kamil

 

[ciamara]

Hi Kamil,

 

I found Peak Pro and LE to be identical to each other in sonic character. As compared to Amarra, I found that Peak was more forward and "in-your-face," but not necessarily in a bad way. Peak seems to have more impact, power and energy. Amarra seems to me to be more laid back, delicate and smooth. Judged solely on sound and ignoring features, I think the two are close competitors. Peak sounds great on dance, electronic and pop music. Amarra sounds best on Jazz, Classical, Vocals, Live Music, and pretty much everything. I find Peak to be "fun" on some material. I find Amarra to be natural on everything. Hope that helps ... We are starting to split hairs a bit, as both are good players. But I prefer Amarra, especially after they released version 1.01.

 

[Mercman]

I have Bias Peak Pro 6 and LE6. Amarra has the superior soundstage. Nothing I've heard does what Amarra can do for soundstage reporduction. Listen to good vinyl on a superior system and you will understand what most digital is missing in terms of soundstage reproduction.

 

Thanks for your comments Sanjay.

 

[silverlight]

So just for kicks I moved my iLok from my living to my little home office setup (iMac to EMU-0404 to MiniWatt amp). Wow, really impactful improvement! And the auto sample rate switching works great (44/88/96)! Just added a whole new level of enjoyment - I spend a decent amt of time here so that's very good!

 

[nghk]

Eventually, I also get the Amarra with the discount rate.

The set up and use is simple, but the instruction menu is too simple, I still don't understand how to use the EQ, anyway I am not not very fond of this but I hope that in future some company can incorporate DRC function in playback.

 

I enjoy the help of Amarra, the delay is tolerable and the sound improvement is significant. I agree that the price is expensive for a software but not so if we think it is a Hi Fi component.

 

However, I notice that Amarra can not be activate with some of my music, after reading the menu and repeated testing, These are music file with chinese or japanese character. The menu said that Amarra can not play if the file name contain foreign character, please change that to english. I live in Asia and I have over hundred of these album. The translation will be quite impossible.

 

I have already email the support team of Sonic Studio about this.

 

I hope that they can fix this bug later if they really want to go in the consumer market over the world.

 

As a computer idiot, I don't understand why this thing will happen. How can the file name affect the performance of the a playback engine.

 

[ciamara]

Hi nghk,

 

Yes, I had a customer today who mentioned the foreign character issue. It is a known issue with Amarra. In fact, it is actually in the FAQ section of the Amarra Manual (the PDF version is available on their website). That said, they are aware of it, and will be addressing it in a future release later this year. Why it happens, I do not know either. It probably has to do with the coding and recognition of "traditional" characters .... I laugh now, because Asian characters predate anything we in the US call traditional... HA!

 

The workaround -- and I realize this may be annoying for now -- is to rename the AIFF file. If you want to save the track name with the special characters, you might try copying the name with the special characters to the Comments section for easy re-entry later on. I believe -- though I have not tested this -- that the only field that matters is the Name field, as this corresponds to the name of the underlying AIFF or WAV file.

 

Please let us know if this solves your problem (for now). Thank you!

 

[kana813]

Over the weekend, I compared my Macbook Amarra(Ver.3170) set up to the same tracks(16/44.1 & 24/96) played back via a PS Audio PWT.

 

Preferred the SQ of the PWT.

 

Yes, I know the PWT isn't a music server, but I don't mind getting up to change disks if it sounds better.

 

[Purite Audio]

Do you not use a dac with your Mac?

 

[silverlight]

Kana - can you be more specific with your configuration on each? Which DAC did you use with both and which cables did you connect with each? (my impression the PWT is transport only and doesn't have a DAC, that's what the PWD is for, or where you using the PWT+PWD?) How did you rip the file played with Amarra -- which drive, which ripping software, from HD or SSD on your Mac? If you can be more specific your comments/impressions would be much more helpful and better placed in context. It will be very interesting to hear benchmarks of the PWT+PWD or PWD+Bridge+NAS compared to Amarra+Model4/Berkeley/Weiss over time. Thanks!