Pro Software For Music Player

[EquaRack]

Has anyone compared the playback quality of pro software such as Adobe Audition to programs like JRiver and Media Monkey, Etc.

 

I use a PC and I care only about the music! I would happily give up convenience, playlists and album art to get better sound!

 

[PeterSt]

Supposed you explicitly look for Pro music software, quite some years back Wavelab sounded the best of everything (explicitly tested). Amongst the Pro software itself this still is so I guess, but also not much useful. A. because indeed of inconveniency, and B. because it has been outbettered by far by, say, consumer software;

 

If it is about the sound quality itself, I only know of two explicitly working on that, one being CPlay and the other just talking to you (sorry). They really make a (and "the") difference, always keeping in mind that this "leage" is about bit perfect throughput, hence this is not about equalizers and other DSP stuff. But for fun you could start off with Wavelab, to see (hear) what I mean. It's really obvious.

 

HTH,

Peter

 

[EquaRack]

Peter:

 

Thanks for the quick reply!

 

You said, "because it (Wavelab) has been outbettered by far by, say, consumer software." Are you saying that in your opinion, CPlay and your own current or about to be released software are better than Wavelab and other pro software? Please clarify.

 

Thanks,

Joe

 

[PeterSt]

Hi Joe,

 

Yes, that is what I am saying. But the story goes a little different than you may expect;

 

First off, there is no reason at all that Pro software will sound better. I could bring up stories like "Pro doesn't even need that", but it isn't about that. It is about the "scientific fact" from not long ago (and for many even up to today) that software can't even make a difference for SQ because bits are bits etc. etc. You know *that* story. Well, apart from the also fact that Pro is using DSP all over (explicitly (changing sound) or implicitly (make that panning right)) and thus that leage wouldn't even run into bit perfect etc. sound, nobody would even start thinking that "doing your best at development for better sound which doesn't change bits" could exist. And in fact this is still so.

 

I said it before, and I still do it : no single software developer of audio playback software explicitly works on better sound outside DSP. This includes all you can think of, so no names are necessary. Nevertheless, again *all* you can think of, sound different. It just is so, and exactly the reason why it is legit to explicitly work on SQ in the bit perfect realm, like I do.

 

If all sound different, obviously one can be the best sounding, and before I started this all (4 years back) this was Wavelab. Just "picked" out of all what could play music, and mind you Wavelab is no player at all, but you can play with it, with a dose of inconveniency. Not only I thought Wavelab was the best sounding, but quite some more, if you'd only take the time to investigate it (and have the software).

 

So, while Wavelab sounded the best, it still was (and is) so that this is by accident. I mean, they didn't do anything about it, but it just was so ...

 

Today nothing much changed about that, and although I don't anymore follow all the players from today, I estimate it still is so that Wavelab sounds better than the new players around. It sure does compared to the old ones, because no player inherently changes sound throughout time. I know, when something new comes up like WASAPI, it is an opportunity to sound different for a player supporting it (because the base sound engine will be totally different) but still there will be some base that never changes. Like ASIO always sounds similar over players, which is an even worse example (use ASIO as a devleoper, and you can't change it's base character).

 

While it will be fairly easy to think this is all blahblah only, I think it is easy to see how both leages behave;

The leage with an acccidentally good sounding player doesn't carry buzz on how to tweak this and that for better sound, the release notes of a new version won't tell about explicit sound changes (remember, the developer isn't working on that), and it's all a dead thing. But look at (AA and) cics and his player, and you immediately see the difference. Same with me.

Although we both use different strategies, and cics is more in the leage of tweaking the OS, it is the result what counts, and the explicit work on working in the bit perfect realm but improve on SQ anyway. And this really happens over and over again. If "we" provide an upgrade, you can bet a fair amount of release notes is about improved sound quality, or the way to get there. This really is different from only users telling about the changed SQ, be it about better or about worse, and all being coincidence.

 

Please notice that this not strictly tells that either CPlay or that other player should sound the best of them all, but chances that this is so are fair for reasons you know now.

 

Hope this was not too long-threaded,

Peter

 

[lonniedivers]

Blaze Media Pro is powerful music software, providing the capability of a music converter, music editor, music burner, music ripper, and music player all in one software application. The software offers many advanced, yet easy to use, features for converting between MP3, WAV, WMA, OGG, and more music formats.

 

 

 

[Bob Stern]

http://www.reaper.fm

 

Reaper is a sophisticated mixing workstation program, but for playback you can just read sections 2.4 - 2.6 of the user guide.

 

You can demo it for 30 days.

 

Barry Diament praises it.

 

[EquaRack]

Peter:

 

I appreciate your efforts to express your opinion and to guide me and others here along but again, your comments contain a contradiction.

 

You start by answering my previous question by saying,"Yes, that is what I am saying.", meaning that CPlay and your software do sound the best and better than Wavelab in your opinion. But then you go on to say, "So, while Wavelab sounded the best, it still was (and is) so that this is by accident." In the latter comment, "(and is)" refers to the present!

 

I don't mean to "grill" you but if we are to have a meaningful discussion, you really must eliminate this contradiction.

 

Many Thanks Again,

Joe Ciulla

 

 

 

 

[PeterSt]

Hi Joe,

 

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, but this was the context :

 

So, while Wavelab sounded the best, it still was (and is) so that this is by accident. I mean, they didn't do anything about it, but it just was so ...

 

Today nothing much changed about that, and although I don't anymore follow all the players from today, I estimate it still is so that Wavelab sounds better than the new players around.

 

I emphasized a few words for clarity. The "they" is about the old players, and the "new players" is, well, about the new players. I would say it is obvious that I count out CPlay and that other one (ok, mine) ? But if not, that is what I meant, knowing that Wavelab is no comparison anymore (and it was a kind of starting point for myself back then).

 

Regards,

Peter

 

 

[EquaRack]

Ok Peter. I supose we'll just leave it at that.

 

 

Thanks,

Joe Ciulla