Anyone using Pure Music?

[Murmelbier]

Hello, I am interested to buy Pure Music Player so my question is if forum members have experiences with latest version and could share some setting tips and up sampling settings. I am using OSX 10.9.5 and have experienced with Demo that if my Macbook Pro Retina 15 falls in black screen mode also Pure Music don't play music in memory mode. Is this normal or which settings I must use to can hear a full album?

Sorry my English.

Thanks.

[Axiom05]

Hello, I am interested to buy Pure Music Player so my question is if forum members have experiences with latest version and could share some setting tips and up sampling settings. I am using OSX 10.9.5 and have experienced with Demo that if my Macbook Pro Retina 15 falls in black screen mode also Pure Music don't play music in memory mode. Is this normal or which settings I must use to can hear a full album?

Sorry my English.

Thanks.

 

To get you started I have listed my system set up below. Your choices will be different depending on your DAC and personal use preferences; I prefer to use integer mode. It is important to set your computer and monitor to not sleep while using the music player.

 

Pure Music v.2.0.4

Integer playback mode

Float off, link on

Mac Mini (late-2012), 2.3 GHz, Quad-Core i7,

16 GB RAM

OSX 10.9.5

iTunes 11.4 (18), 64-bit

All music in Apple Lossless format

iTunes library on external HDD via Firewire 800

Upsampling off

Computer & monitor set to not sleep

Memory Play is enabled, Gapless, Preallocate, and Hybrid modes are on, gapless analysis on the fly set to off; WiFi is off

No other applications are open when playing music except Activity Monitor (computer is dedicated to music playing)

[Murmelbier]

Thank you, are you satisfied with the player and have you compared it to others? Have you tried .aiff files or have you compared with ALAC files?

[flatmap]

Thank you, are you satisfied with the player and have you compared it to others? Have you tried .aiff files or have you compared with ALAC files?

 

Pure Music is the player I use the most often and -- on my system and according to my tastes -- the one that throws the nicest illusion of classical music performance. Am using most of the same settings as mentioned by Axiom05. Definitely set your computer not to sleep.

 

I think Audirvana+ is also excellent and honestly it also gets a lot of play time -- perhaps I go back and forth a bit on which is better. :-) Not to downplay Amarra or JRiver overmuch, but PM and A+ are in the top spots for me. YMMV.

 

Not sure on your question about ALAC vs AIFF. I've been in the habit of keeping everything in AIFF given that this saves one computational step at run time.

[church_mouse]

The only thing I can add to what Axiom05 said is to give the "Less is More" play option a try.

 

I own copies of Bitperfect, Decibel, Audirvana and Amarra, and I tested JRiver. In my simple set up, PM gives me the most solid, involving sound of these players - AIFF files, no upsampling, mainly 16/44. YMMV.

[Melvin]

Although Pure Music has fallen out of favor with many here at CA, it remains a GREAT choice for Mac users. I've often thought if I had to choose only 1 player due to cost (or whatever), it would be Pure Music. When in use, my Prefs are pretty much like Axiom05's. Keep in mind if you decide to engaged Integer Mode, all DSP functions are OFF. Personally, unlike Audirvana, I don't find Integer Mode "better" in Pure Music and I often use the app without it engaged. My iTunes library is in AIFF and I'm still using Mavericks BTW.

[Murmelbier]

Although Pure Music has fallen out of favor with many here at CA, it remains a GREAT choice for Mac users. I've often thought if I had to choose only 1 player due to cost (or whatever), it would be Pure Music. When in use, my Prefs are pretty much like Axiom05's. Keep in mind if you decide to engaged Integer Mode, all DSP functions are OFF. Personally, unlike Audirvana, I don't find Integer Mode "better" in Pure Music and I often use the app without it engaged. My iTunes library is in AIFF and I'm still using Mavericks BTW.

 

Yes, I saw that Pure Music are not favored here but I don't know. I find the SQ absolutely ok and for MAC users it is a great choice.

[flatmap]

Yes, I saw that Pure Music are not favored here but I don't know. I find the SQ absolutely ok and for MAC users it is a great choice.

 

Of course there are many factors to consider in choosing one player over another. For example, PM requires that you run iTunes concurrently as the library manager. For some that is great, but for others anathema.

[Murmelbier]

Of course there are many factors to consider in choosing one player over another. For example, PM requires that you run iTunes concurrently as the library manager. For some that is great, but for others anathema.

 

OK, but can the sound in comparison with the another "favored" players compete?

[flatmap]

OK, but can the sound in comparison with the another "favored" players compete?

 

Sure. If you like the user interface, design, and feature set, then its SQ is certainly competitive. On the basis of sound quality, I think you may well prefer it, but as usual, depending on your tastes and the nature of your system, etc.

[Melvin]

Sure. If you like the user interface, design, and feature set, then its SQ is certainly competitive. On the basis of sound quality, I think you may well prefer it, but as usual, depending on your tastes and the nature of your system, etc.

 

I agree with flatmap and it's all highly subjective, but IMO the SQ is indeed competitive. Again, if I could only have 1 paid-for player on my computer, I think it would be a toss-up between PM and JMRC with a slight edge in SQ going to PM. FWIW I'm awfully glad I'm not limited to just 1 .. I have a half dozen or more and use all of them (nice to have different flavors).

[Murmelbier]

You are lucky to have so many players to choose Melvin.

 

Other opinions or experiences with PM?

[bkinbk]

What are the "cons" of PM vs the other players other than needing to use iTunes as your library?

[Melvin]

What are the "cons" of PM vs the other players other than needing to use iTunes as your library?

 

Well, because of the iTunes factor I particularly dislike the handling of DSD and FLAC. It's more of a "work-around" solution because of iTunes limitations. Otherwise, if you can live with iTunes as a library manager (which is quite good IMO), Pure Music in general ticks all the boxes. Being picky .. I think Channel D should tweak the preference/configuration screens, which seem overly complex and reminds me of JRMC's confusion-fest "options".

[Murmelbier]

Have you compared it with Amarra 3 in terms of sound quality?

[Melvin]

Have you compared it with Amarra 3 in terms of sound quality?

 

Yes, I have and Amarra Symphony is the player I use most often. There is just something organic, yet beguiling about the Amarra sound.

[Murmelbier]

So you would recommend Amarra, but I only could effort the normal version. Symphony is too expansive for me.

[Melvin]

Yes, I would recommend it for it's SQ alone and encourage you to download a trial.

 

Keep in mind it's not going to up-sample (if up-sampling is of interest to you) on-the-fly as other apps do. Sonic Studio (and others) believe on-the-fly conversion harms SQ. The UI is not pretty. It's dated and could use an overhaul (if you care). There are other annoyances which are well documented if you look around.

 

If you try it, I would suggest using the app in it's simplest form using Playlist Mode (drag n' drop). I use only Playlist Mode (no iTunes) and no spinning drives for the best SQ .. superb. I'm not sure, but I don't think Playlist Mode is included with Amarra HiFi, only Amarra and Amarra Symphony w/iRC. Amarra HiFi is of course their most affordable version of Amarra.

[Murmelbier]

Yes, I would recommend it for it's SQ alone and encourage you to download a trial.

 

Keep in mind it's not going to up-sample (if up-sampling is of interest to you) on-the-fly as other apps do. Sonic Studio (and others) believe on-the-fly conversion harms SQ. The UI is not pretty. It's dated and could use an overhaul (if you care). There are other annoyances which are well documented if you look around.

 

If you try it, I would suggest using the app in it's simplest form using Playlist Mode (drag n' drop). I use only Playlist Mode (no iTunes) and no spinning drives for the best SQ .. superb. I'm not sure, but I don't think Playlist Mode is included with Amarra HiFi, only Amarra and Amarra Symphony w/iRC. Amarra HiFi is of course their most affordable version of Amarra.

 

I meant Amarra not Amarra Hifi. Have downloaded the trial yesterday.

 

With which program do you tag your files that they show correctly in the Amarra playlist? Which file format do you use? Keep flac or convert to alac or aiff?

[Melvin]

I meant Amarra not Amarra Hifi. Have downloaded the trial yesterday.

 

With which program do you tag your files that they show correctly in the Amarra playlist? Which file format do you use? Keep flac or convert to alac or aiff?

 

Just sent you a PM which answers the second part and I use Metadatics for tagging. Yate is another I understand to be quite good.

[Murmelbier]

Thank you Melvin.

 

Edit: Do you use the optimization scrip or not?

[Melvin]

Thank you Melvin.

 

Edit: Do you use the optimization scrip or not?

 

Your most welcome. I do not.

[Murmelbier]

Your most welcome. I do not.

 

OK, it seems I will definitively try out Amarra now.....The 2 demos I have installed and I find the SQ of Amarra better, it's more musical for my taste.

[Melvin]

OK, it seems I will definitively try out Amarra now.....The 2 demos I have installed and I find the SQ of Amarra better, it's more musical for my taste.

 

Key words being "my taste". Of course I quite agree and have found while I very much enjoy other players (all for different reasons) I always return to Amarra for the sound quality. Enjoy yourself CIMS!

[Murmelbier]

Cims?