Fidelia

[musiciseverything]

I have searched for more info and opinions about Fidelia but the search engine is crude and everything that ever mentions it, even in someone's system list, shows up. I have now updated to Lion and the iTunes in Lion now sounds better than Snow Leopard, but it may be my imagination. I then tried Fidelia and the sounds are more real and everything seems to "sparkle" with energy, sounding more like live music. I have had good results with Pure Music and Decibel, both sounding better than the previous iTunes/Snow Leopard. I am still in my trial with Fidelia and am curious about others experiences with it, especially compared to basic Amarra. Thanks!

 

[4est]

I find Fidelia to be perhaps the most unique sounding player program excluding Amarra (which I do not have a license for). For some reason I seem to be able to hear into the recording mix more than with any other player. I am not sure- it could be the most accurate or hopelessly flawed, but on my system it is very different than the rest. I have often thought to myself that if I were in a studio, it would be what I would use (that is assuming it is the former, and closer to the mic feed). I have often wondered why there isn't more talk about it- good or bad.

 

I hate the interface for anything other than playlists as it is too hard to search with in a large library. FWIW, I use the HOG mode version.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

"I have searched for more info and opinions about Fidelia but the search engine is crude and everything that ever mentions it, even in someone's system list, shows up."

 

Hi musiciseverything - The built-in CA search engine is Google. I'll contact Larry Page and Sergey Brin to tell them their search engine is crude :~)

 

 

 

[musiciseverything]

Please don't take offense. I don't have any computer experience but it would be better if the search included the following:

 

1. search word to match exactly, or any word or all words.

2. category for which category you want to search in (forum, equipment, show, etc.)

3. member's systems

4. date

5. relevancy score

6. sort by score or author or date

 

I'm sure there are others. I'm sure there is a way to define the search to make it more relevant for the searcher. My search for "fidelia" turned over more than 500 hits.

 

And, please don't take this personally. It wasn't meant to be harmful. I simply wanted to explain that I had tried to find the information by the search engine and resorted to posting to find the information because the search returned too many entries to sort through.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi musiciseverything - No offense taken. I agree that check boxes to search only specific items and good sorting capability would be really nice. Faceted search is what it's called. Sure much of this is possible by mastering Google search terminology but I don't expect CA readers to master Google in order to search CA.

 

Have a great evening :~)

 

 

 

[musiciseverything]

Chris, thanks for your reply. Do you have an opinion on Fidelia?

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

I've been using Fidelia quite a bit. I really like it.

 

[bottlerocket]

I agree with the comment that Fidelia somehow gets more separation of the tracks or instruments. To me it sounds very good although I hear more "air" with Amarra in memory mode (I hate Amarra's interface in memory mode though- don't get me started...).

 

I've been impressed with how solid Fidelia is also. I don't get glitches or playback problems. It just works and I really like the fact that I don't have to load playlists as it simply reads the iTunes xml file to pick up your iTunes playlists. I use playlists and only have about 200 of them so I can't comment on the search, as I don't use it much. The fact that it plays completely independently of iTunes is a great benefit to me also. In other words, although it relies on the iTunes playlist file, it does not rely on iTunes to be open during playback.

 

I also don't use all the effects, plug ins or the volume control. In fact I just keep it running, and hide in on my Mac Mini and then use the Fidelia Remote to play. The remote has a couple issues, primarily with returning you to the current track after your iPhone or Itouch goes to sleep, but I find the Remote completely adequate. I don't have a big need for Hog mode and can't hear a difference with it on, so I went with the basic license at $19.95 and the $9.95 remote. It's a bargain and the support from audiofile engineering is very good.

 

Try the other players and see what you like day to day. Other players have fallen in and out of favor with me and I'll be the first to say that my favor of Fidelia is mostly related to usability. Other users on these boards are more focused on the nuances of the sound, so that may be more the deciding factor for you.

 

[4est]

Due to this thread I re compared programs again last. Once again I was left with the impression of uber resolution. Somehow Fidelia seems to super delineate/separate the individual sources within the tracks. So much so that it may be at the expense of cohesion as a whole, but extremely precise nonetheless. Somehow I cannot help thinking that it is doing something right that the others may not. I swear that I can see the performers' facial expressions or head movements as they sing. A part of it may very well be a lack of sibilance, as in my system Fidelia makes the other programs appear to need a de-essers. They often appear to have a forward sounding wash laterally across soundstage to varying degrees. Something that I liken to older NOS DACs that would break up homogenize on complex passages, but to a much lesser extent.

 

I dunno, but I'd love to hear other takes on this as it may be an issue with my kit. It is just so different...

 

I may have to take Bottlerocket's approach, and make a bunch of playlists.

 

[musiciseverything]

Thanks for your insights so far. All comments are welcome. I definitely hear a difference from itunes in Lion and Fidelia. The decay of sounds as well as the attack is better. Listening to percussion is especially vivid. Time will tell, as there is a lot of psychoacoustics going on. I have 15 days. I also like the interface and use of iTunes lists without opening iTunes. I also only use the Mac Mini for music, so I can leave it on all the time. I haven't used the Fidelia remote yet. I am waiting to buy the Fidelia program.

 

[4est]

I agree about the attack. Fidelia seems to have better PRaT/swing than most of them. As a clarification on my original post, my mention of Amarra may not have been clear. I did not mean to say that I felt Amarra was better. I do not use Amarra. Initially I was turned off by it's price, dongle and their method of trial. I think they may have rectified most of that, but I see little reason to pursue their product as I am awash with the others...

 

[Mercman]

I also enjoy Fidelia with its remote app. I think it trounces Amarra for a fraction of the price.

 

[bottlerocket]

"I may have to take Bottlerocket's approach, and make a bunch of playlists."

 

One thing to consider is that the Fidelia remote app does give you Album and Artist groupings, so that may help if you don't want playlists. Just using the artist grouping probably does a lot (unless you are a classical fan and then there are probably issues that I am totally ignorant of)

 

I set up playlists basically at an Artist level and then use playlist folders for genre's, so I have folders for Alternative, Folk, Blues, Jazz, Rock etc and then have artist playlists under these as well as a few random playlists that I have under an "Assorted" folder. This sorts out well in the Fidelia iTunes view although the tree view in Fidelia is flat. E.g the folders show at the same indent level as the playlists although the folder content includes all tracks in all of the playlists below it as it would in iTunes.

 

[catastrofe]

If you like Fidelia (which I do), you might try Bitperfect. It interfaces seamlessly with iTunes allowing you to use the iTunes remote app. It's simpler to use than Pure Music, but gives a little more control of setup parameters than Fidelia. Sounds just as good to my ears.

 

[4est]

I may have to locate my Itouch in so that I can try the remote app. I run headless via screen sharing.

 

Last night I compared Fidelia to Bit Perfect, and was included in my observations. I love the Bit Perfect interface too btw!

 

[musiciseverything]

I appreciate all the info. I have a monitor for the mini but can run it headless as well, so using the remote app (free) is a plus. I'll try bitperfect today and compare.

 

[Nico]

In my envirement Fidelia cuts the silence at the end of the tracks. There is no pause between the tracks and that is very annoying! Do you have the same behaviour? Does somebody know why?

 

[Sik_Lescinovid]

I was thinking about making a separate thread but I will post my question here for now:

 

Has anyone tried using Fidelia "as a pre-amp"? What I mean by that is usually one has the following signal chain:

 

Fidelia at 100% volume --> DAC (without volume control) --> pre-amp --> power-amp --> speakers

 

or

 

Fidelia at 100% volume --> DAC (without volume control) --> integrated amp --> speakers

 

Using Fidelia "as a pre-amp" would be a signal chain of the following type:

 

Fidelia at appropriate volume (likely below 100%) --> DAC (without volume control) --> power-amp --> speakers

 

Has anyone tried the later? What were your experiences in terms of sound, what security measures did you undertake to make sure your speakers weren't blown?

 

[got tinnitus]

Fidelia user here. For the money, it's a no brainer. More importantly it sounds excellent.

 

Using a computer sans a pre-amp or any downstream attenuation is asking for serious trouble.

 

[Sik_Lescinovid]

Using a computer sans a pre-amp or any downstream attenuation is asking for serious trouble.

 

Could you maybe elaborate? I am aware that sudden audio messages produced by the computer might seriously hurt the system. But provided one has re-routed all non-deterministic sound sources to a dummy audio device (say Soundflower on OSX) allowing only Fidelia to use the DAC, what other risks are there? In my defense I will admit that this idea was not mine but rather something that (even to my own surprise) has come up many times on the net with very split opinions. Hence I was considering making a dedicated thread but for now this will do. Unless OP of course feels that I'm invading his thread.

 

[Paul on the Central Coast]

Hi, Nico

 

I noticed the same problem back in May and contacted Fidelia support. Here is my report and their reply:

 

Hi, Guys

 

I have experimented with several music players over the past months, and have inclined towards a preference for Fidelia because of a combination of its sound and stability.

 

However, there is one feature that both surprises me and makes it impossible to use for serious listening. This is the fact that silence at the end of a track is ignored, which means that all the tracks on an album simply run into each other, even when there is a clear artistic need for a "breathing space" between the tracks, as for example, between movements in a symphony.

 

A simple example is the first two tracks on Abbey Road. 'Come Together' lasts 4 minutes and 40 seconds, the last 8 seconds of which is silence. However, Fidelia moves on to the next track 5 seconds before the track ends, which means that this next track, 'Something', starts far too soon after the fade of 'Come Together'.

 

Is this something that can be changed?

 

------Reply from Audiofile Engineering:

 

Hello Paul,

 

I'm glad to hear that you like Fidelia.

 

We are, in fact, looking into revising the gapless playback engine to resolve issues like this. I can't give a specific ETA yet, but I'm hoping this will be addressed soon.

 

------end their reply

 

So, as you can see, it's a known issue, which was not resolved with the recent release.

 

Cheers

Paul

 

 

[4est]

A local here by the name of Scot once described using software to control volume as going "commando" (sans underwear).

 

Airy, but with risks. I use a pre amp myself...

 

[Sik_Lescinovid]

A local here by the name of Scot once described using software to control volume as going "commando" (sans underwear).

 

Airy, but with risks.

 

This must be one of the best things I've ever read.

 

[4est]

but memorable!

 

I keep hoping others will join in on this discussion to set me straight about the sonic signature. My system has been in flux for the past 6 months and I have lost some reference in the process.

 

[Paul R]

DACs can, upon occasion, loose lock with the signal and emit horrendous blasts of noise. It's rare, and most DACs auto mute anyway, but it is possible.

 

Also, you can sometimes send an audio stream to a DAC that it cannot handle. But, the DAC gets confused and thinks it can handle it, and the result is a blast of very loud noise.

 

I'm not sure that happens as much now as it did a few years ago, but... if the DAC does not have a handy "mute" switch on it, it is a bit of a risk.

 

-Paul