Poll

Which one do you prefer and why?

iTunes
Pure Music/Pure Vinyl
Amarra (any version)
Decibel
Audirvana (any version)
Bit Perfect
Fidelia
Play
Other
JRiver

Poll: Mac Music Player

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 14068 times.

Crimson

Poll: Mac Music Player
« on: 17 Dec 2012, 11:25 pm »
With the exception of one or two on the list, I've used them all. I've always had an affinity for Amarra, more so than PM, but now find myself using Audirvana+ more and more. The interface is simple, yet elegant; no issues (now) with iTunes integration; and, more importantly, the sound is very balanced in my system. I like it.

rpf

Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #1 on: 17 Dec 2012, 11:40 pm »
I've only heard Pure Music. It's better than ITunes obviously and I like the sound. It had the reputation of being the only really reliable one when I bought it.

Ern Dog

Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #2 on: 18 Dec 2012, 12:53 am »
I voted for Amarra because I like the way it sounds.  In my opinion it bested Audirvana and Bit Perfect.  The EQ feature is nice too.  Down side is that it doesn't have hog mode and it is spendy.

timind

Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #3 on: 18 Dec 2012, 01:06 am »
I use itunes for playback and XLD for ripping cds. Tried PM a while ago but thought it was a pain to use.

geowak

Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #4 on: 18 Dec 2012, 01:29 am »
I use Bitperfect and I like it. It just sounds better through Itunes. But I have not used the others.

wilsynet

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1233
Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #5 on: 18 Dec 2012, 02:39 am »
Just released Audirvana 1.4 has official support for integer mode.  It sounds terrific.  If you liked Amarra more, you might want to try Audirvana again.

Mr. Orange

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 83
  • Flat speakers RULE!
Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #6 on: 18 Dec 2012, 03:06 am »
iTunes because I've known no other. I'm not really sure what I would gain by investing in a different interface. With my set up I can't do hirez and if I want to do some serious listening I play the CD. What is the real advantage to switching?  :scratch:

WC

Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #7 on: 18 Dec 2012, 03:31 am »
I use iTunes currently. Mainly since I didn't have to pay anything for it. :D

Not sure I could notice much of a difference with my current system. I am working at upgrading parts of the system first, so I would then be able to actually notice a difference. I was thinking of going with PM when the time comes, since I think Pure Vinyl is pretty cool and it comes with it.

JLM

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 8537
  • The elephant normally IS the room
Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #8 on: 18 Dec 2012, 03:36 am »
I'm close to pulling the trigger on a 21 inch iMac for my everyday desktop and music server, need simplicity and EQ.

The rest of my system is a Jaton RC2000S pre, Channel Island Audio D-100 monoblocks, and Bob Brines transmission lines using Fostex F200A single driver designs (27-20,000 Hz, $3,100/pair) in dedicated listening room/man cave.

What would you guys recommend for a player?

Crimson

Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #9 on: 18 Dec 2012, 09:27 am »
The major players all come with a free trial period of some sort. Try them out and see which one you like.

JohnR

Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #10 on: 18 Dec 2012, 09:30 am »
Any chance of allowing multiple choices in the poll?

Different players have different feature sets. And not everyone has just one computer/system ;)

Crimson

Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #11 on: 18 Dec 2012, 10:07 am »
True, but the poll asks which one you prefer.  :P

mcgsxr

Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #12 on: 18 Dec 2012, 12:18 pm »
I have used Play and iTunes.  I prefer iTunes.

Once I get the balance of the system settled, I will explore a higher rez player, but for now the freebie is the way to go!

AllynW

Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #13 on: 22 Dec 2012, 04:42 pm »
I own and have used PM but find it buggy, but it may be a me issue. My Mac Mini is older (intel) and only has 2gigs of ram, and it upgraded fully.  I get more out of the cheap little digital equalizer program in iTunes. I've even given some though to buying a stand alone equalizer.

Atlplasma

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 960
  • Just off the boat
Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #14 on: 22 Dec 2012, 06:46 pm »
iTunes because I've known no other. I'm not really sure what I would gain by investing in a different interface. With my set up I can't do hirez and if I want to do some serious listening I play the CD. What is the real advantage to switching?  :scratch:

You really should try an alternative player. Pure Music offers a free trial and works with your existing iTunes library, so you don't have to redo anything. I think you will be surprised by how much your playback improves.

ralphoi

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 1
Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #15 on: 7 Jan 2013, 09:45 pm »
Yep. Couldn't agree more.
You owe yourself a free trial. AudirvanaPlus is available as a free trial so nothing lost if you try it.

In my system, its more detailed and involving than amarra, don't ask me why, I really dont know!

Alan UK

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 16
    • AudioChews
Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #16 on: 9 Jan 2013, 01:51 pm »
Audirvana+ here, integrated with iTunes. This means one can basically use the iTunes interface with A+ running the show behind the scenes. It gets even better in a 'headless' setup, I use Apple's 'Remote' app on an iPod touch to control iTunes (and therefore A+).

I have also used Decibel (and before it's release, AyreWave), BitPerfect, Amarra (Trial), iTunes. They all sound good but I am convinced A+ has the edge sonically,especially in the midrange, and it is the most integrated solution for sure.

jaylevine

Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #17 on: 2 Mar 2013, 06:23 pm »
I've just purchased Audirvarna Plus and dumped Pure Music re: have been struggling with Pure Music every since the iTunes 11 upgrade. Along with not working properly when selecting music on the first load, i've ben getting static between certain cuts. I like Aud Plus becaude I can bypass iTunes altogether...

jarcher

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 1937
  • It Just Sounds Right
Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #18 on: 2 Mar 2013, 10:33 pm »
I got Pure Music because it works on top of itunes, sounds better than itunes, and allows you to load / use on unlimited # of machines with one license (although supposedly not simultaneously).  Other nice features include ability to play / add FLAC + DSD files (essentially creates a "bookmark" in itunes) and conversion of formats such as FLAC to ALAC (which are subsequently put automatically in itunes library).

I tried listening to trial versions of Audiovarna and Pure Music and didn't here any substantial difference between each other (though they did sound better than itunes) ESPECIALLY in Memory Play.  IMHO there is no point to using these programs if you are not using them in Memory Play.  If you can't hear a difference between stock itunes vs one of these players in Memory Play mode, then don't buy it. The main purpose for me of these players should be improved sound quality vs stock itunes, otherwise there's not much point.

My only complaint with Pure Music is that it does crash on occasion, particularly if you are frequently hopping around songs.  This seems to happen more with itunes 11 than 10.7, but that's a general & not scientific / measured impression.

I'm using it w/ a 2007 i-mac + itunes 10.7 & mid 2010 mac mini with 11.1.2 controlling all with the free remote app for iphone.   

greenkiwi

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 24
Re: Poll: Mac Music Player
« Reply #19 on: 2 Jun 2013, 04:46 am »
I've been using JRiver now that it's getting close to stable on the Mac.  I really love it and JRemote.  Just so glad they are finally bringing it to the Mac world.