[oneinthepipe]

oip - While it sounds like you've got it handled, if you should go looking for an adapter in the future, and it's not out of budget, these are the alternate folks that Frank recommends http://www.inday.com/. Their base unit has 4 dual inputs, with single coax output pair ($129). Also comes with a remote. Has come in handy for the split 2 channel/HT system. Nice folks too. Am using one with the Insight DAC in the dual system, and one on the Ultra DAC as my Sony CD Changer only has optical out for digital.

Is this the unit?  http://www.inday.com/da4x/da4x.htm

This would be necessary if I had a single DAC, correct?   I am not concerned about the price (since it is only $129.00) if the sound quality would be better.  I will probably need something else anyway, if my monoprice adapter is like many of the others described in the customer reviews and stops working after a while.  (In the future, I should probably read the customer reviews before I buy the product.)

I noticed that the Inday unit is made in the U.S.A.  I hope that I don't offend anyone, but I started wondering if the monoprice unit ($11.16) was made by political prisoners or with some other slave labor in some far away land, since the unit is priced that low.  (monoprice doesn't read these boards, do they?)

[Brett Buck]

Is this the unit?  http://www.inday.com/da4x/da4x.htm

This would be necessary if I had a single DAC, correct?   I am not concerned about the price (since it is only $129.00) if the sound quality would be better. 

   I bought that unit, and so far it works just fine. It also obviates the need for optical->coax converters, since it does that conversion for you, it's just embedded in the box.

    I am not sure how a switcher could affect the quality, it's digital, either the bits come through or not. If it's losing bits, it will just fail to function.

     Brett

[ArthurDent]

Is this the unit?  http://www.inday.com/da4x/da4x.htm

This would be necessary if I had a single DAC, correct? 

That's the one. As noted I've got 2, though only using 2 inputs on one of them. Another friend turned me onto them via Frank, he's had his for several years now without problem. I figure 4 inputs + remote for 129 vs 1 in/out for Frank's was a bargain. You never know when you might want to feed something else thru to the DAC, and this gives you the capability.

They are located down the road a bit from here in Oregon. Real nice folks to deal with, and now you can order your indicator light in blue as well as green. Ahh, technology, ain't it grand. 

[cdorval1]

Great information in this thread.  Brett, thanks for setting me straight on the Airtunes digital transmission.  It's terrific to know that we can have this versatility.  In effect, it allows me to losslessly and wirelessly send music to a DAC anywhere in my house--and to fully control it from my iPhone.  Hmmmmm......  Gonna have to save for another DAC or two.

When listening via analog Airtunes, I sometimes would get a "blip"--a very brief interruption of the music caused by wireless interference or something.  Have you experienced anything like this--especially while listening digitally?

Craig

[oneinthepipe]

Here is the link to a thread on the Apple Core about Airport Express:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=67847.0

In the Apple Core thread, there is this link to a PS Audio newsletter about Airport Express and ATV:

http://67.192.249.47/~psaudio/ps/newsletters/march-2008/

[Brett Buck]

Great information in this thread.  Brett, thanks for setting me straight on the Airtunes digital transmission.  It's terrific to know that we can have this versatility.  In effect, it allows me to losslessly and wirelessly send music to a DAC anywhere in my house--and to fully control it from my iPhone.  Hmmmmm......  Gonna have to save for another DAC or two.

    Not really a matter of "setting you straight", just needed a little detail.

When listening via analog Airtunes, I sometimes would get a "blip"--a very brief interruption of the music caused by wireless interference or something.  Have you experienced anything like this--especially while listening digitally?

    I haven't had that with either analog or digital. What I have had is the thing lock up and lose connectivity completely. But only when I am using two Airport Expresses at once, fed from the same source. One or the other will just quit entirely, and there's no way I have found to fix it aside from rebooting both transponders and re-creating the network. It has never happened yet with a single transponder in use. I think, since they are on the same frequency, they interfere with each other in some conditions.

     I also presume that if you don't have a resampling DAC, jitter could hypothetically cause some variation in the quality. Thats another argument-starter, so I am not even going to try to get into it.

    Other than losing the network on rare occasions with two at once, I have had *no* issues and no detectable quality issues with Airtunes. I just couldn't be happier with the DAC, and this arrangement,  it was the last piece of the puzzle.

     Brett

[cdorval1]

oneinthepipe,  Thanks a lot for the thread referrals.  Very informative.  Good stuff.

Craig

[Crimson]

Just an FYI for you folks running a Mac: if you're going to rip to a lossless uncompressed format, your best bet is to rip to AIFF, not WAV. The reason is due to WAVs inability to store tags and metadata. AIFF, on the other hand, includes metadata in the file itself and is fully portable.

[oneinthepipe]

Just an FYI for you folks running a Mac: if you're going to rip to a lossless uncompressed format, your best bet is to rip to AIFF, not WAV. The reason is due to WAVs inability to store tags and metadata. AIFF, on the other hand, includes metadata in the file itself and is fully portable.

Are the tags and metadata the song names, album name, the year, etc.?  If so, the WAV files appear to have that information when ripped with iTunes, and the files can be burned to a CD-R.

[Crimson]

Just an FYI for you folks running a Mac: if you're going to rip to a lossless uncompressed format, your best bet is to rip to AIFF, not WAV. The reason is due to WAVs inability to store tags and metadata. AIFF, on the other hand, includes metadata in the file itself and is fully portable.

Are the tags and metadata the song names, album name, the year, etc.?  If so, the WAV files appear to have that information when ripped with iTunes, and the files can be burned to a CD-R.

You are quite correct, but that data is not part of the song file. What this means is, if you were to use a different player or transfer your music library to another drive or computer the data will not follow. iTunes (as well as other playback software) creates a separate unique database file where the track info is stored, and is not 'portable' to other playback programs or storage environments (without a lot of work).

[oneinthepipe]

Just an FYI for you folks running a Mac: if you're going to rip to a lossless uncompressed format, your best bet is to rip to AIFF, not WAV. The reason is due to WAVs inability to store tags and metadata. AIFF, on the other hand, includes metadata in the file itself and is fully portable.

Are the tags and metadata the song names, album name, the year, etc.?  If so, the WAV files appear to have that information when ripped with iTunes, and the files can be burned to a CD-R.

You are quite correct, but that data is not part of the song file. What this means is, if you were to use a different player or transfer your music library to another drive or computer the data will not follow. iTunes (as well as other playback software) creates a separate unique database file where the track info is stored, and is not 'portable' to other playback programs or storage environments (without a lot of work).

When I saved the WAV tracks from a playlist and burned them to a CD-R, I was able to play the CD-R in my CDP and in my car, and I could skip tracks, repeat, etc..  I don't have a problem ripping tracks in AIFF, however.  Truthfully, I don't know the differences between the various formats, although the WAV files were much larger than FLAC files, and I took the approach that bigger might be better.

[Crimson]

There are three types of music files:

1. Lossy compressed: These files have some bits thrown away (lossy) and undergo compression (similar to a zip file) to reduce file size e.g. MP3, AAC, etc. These typically have the smallest file size, and most of these formats retain metadata (song name, artists, etc).
2. Lossless compressed: These files contain all of the information of the original CD (lossless), and are compressed to reduce file size e.g. FLAC, ALAC. etc. These file types are larger than lossy compressed files, and store metadata.
3. Lossless uncompressed: These files contain all of the information of the original CD, and are not compressed e.g. WAV, AIFF, etc. These formats have the largest file size, but only AIFF retains metadata and tags. WAV does not, as I've described above.

CDs can be burnt from all of the above file types which has nothing to do with whether they include tag info or not. To better describe how WAV files do not store tags, download a different player for your Mac (Play, Max, etc.) and play one of your already ripped files. You'll notice that none of the song info will be available.

[oneinthepipe]

To better describe how WAV files do not store tags, download a different player for your Mac (Play, Max, etc.) and play one of your already ripped files. You'll notice that none of the song info will be available.

Yes, I opened a WAV file with Songbird.  The file played, but none of the info was available.  I'll use AIFF hereunto-fore.  If I convert the WAV files to AIFF in iTunes, will there be any loss in quality and will tags be stored if iTunes can find the track names, etc.?

[Crimson]

To better describe how WAV files do not store tags, download a different player for your Mac (Play, Max, etc.) and play one of your already ripped files. You'll notice that none of the song info will be available.

Yes, I opened a WAV file with Songbird.  The file played, but none of the info was available.  I'll use AIFF hereunto-fore.  If I convert the WAV files to AIFF in iTunes, will there be any loss in quality and will tags be stored if iTunes can find the track names, etc.?

Yes, if you convert your WAV files within iTunes all info will be attached to the AIFF files. AIFF and WAV are both straight PCM, so there should be no difference in quality.

[Brett Buck]

There are three types of music files:

1. Lossy compressed: These files have some bits thrown away (lossy) and undergo compression (similar to a zip file) to reduce file size e.g. MP3, AAC, etc. These typically have the smallest file size, and most of these formats retain metadata (song name, artists, etc).
2. Lossless compressed: These files contain all of the information of the original CD (lossless), and are compressed to reduce file size e.g. FLAC, ALAC. etc. These file types are larger than lossy compressed files, and store metadata.
3. Lossless uncompressed: These files contain all of the information of the original CD, and are not compressed e.g. WAV, AIFF, etc. These formats have the largest file size, but only AIFF retains metadata and tags. WAV does not, as I've described above.

CDs can be burnt from all of the above file types which has nothing to do with whether they include tag info or not. To better describe how WAV files do not store tags, download a different player for your Mac (Play, Max, etc.) and play one of your already ripped files. You'll notice that none of the song info will be available.

  Although I noticed that if you make the CD with iTunes, there's a checkbox to include CD Text, regardless of whether there is any meta-data in the file itself. It comes from the iTunes library. And I think (although I don't know for sure and don't have a Red Book at hand) that that is the *only* type of Meta-Data available in the CD format.

   I think there almost needs to be a separate, maybe even pinned, topic on "digital music formats for people who only care about the end result" or something like that. Your post might be a good start, we *do* need to know that there are lossy and non-lossy formats and which ones are which. Most of the stuff you see goes way down into the guts, way too quickly, for people who just want to know the basics of how to get the best sound. Without the bullcrap (i.e. $99 "hi-fi" coax cables*, etc )

   Brett

* I don't know why I am surprised by this any more, and this is a little off-topic, but I was - I went to get 3 foot HDMI cable and found that people are selling them for more than $100. It's pointless enough for analog cables, but at least you could argue that *theoretically* it could change something. But *digital* signals??!! PT Barnum, as always, was right.