[viggen]

I've read quite a bit about Mac being the superior operating system for audio purposes.  But, I never got to compare for myself until a few months ago.

My wife has a Macbook Pro. So, I borrowed it and ripped a CD in Lossless in iTunes onto it.  The only adjustment I made in iTune is switching output from internal speaker to USB DAC.  Nothing else is changed as I don't know what else there is to change.  This is unlike my PC setup where I rip with EAC to FLAC, play with Foobar and output to dac bypassing kmixer with USB-Audio ASIO.  So, it's not plug in play like Apple is.

I can hear a difference immediately.  Music through Mac sounded muffled in mids and truncated on top and bottom compared to music through PC.  I stopped comparing half way through one song.  Didn't see any point to go any further.  OK, it's not as bad as I make it out to sound.  The difference is small between PC and Mac but readily apparent to my ears and definitely a let down as I was expecting the Mac to do better.

My experience seems to go against norm? Am I doing something wrong?  I know I didn't have my PC set up right during my foray into PC audio as I wasn't bypassing kmixer. 

It's good that I am happier with the PC setup as I am not induced to switch to a Mac or buy a Mac solely for music.  I am a heavy excel user and dislike Mac interface overall.

[srb]

Kind of a tough comparison, as the ripper, player and file type are different.
 
Using iTunes with .wav files on both the PC and Mac would eliminate the differences between ripping software, playing software and file types, and would be a truer comparison between the hardware platforms and operating systems only.
 
You are using Foobar (freeware) on the PC, which by all accounts, is better than the native Media Player.  To improve on the native iTunes on the Mac, I don't know if there is an inexpensive or free player similar to Foobar, as an alternative to spending $400 - $1000 for the Amarra software music player.
 
When you did your Mac test, did you:
 
1.  Make sure that the Audio Midi setup was set to 44.1KHz / 16 bit ?
 
2.  Enable Error Correction in the iTunes Import ?
 
3.  Have the iTunes volume control all the way up for playback ?
 
I use iTunes to rip .wav files with error correction on the PC, but have not had the opportunity to do any Mac comparisons.
 
Steve

[viggen]

Hey Steve:

You're right that the files are not exactly apples to apples.  At the time, I figured the difference between Apple Lossless and FLAC is probably very very hard to perceive.  Just an assumption.

Yes, Foobar and iTunes aren't exactly apples to apples but difference in terms of audio quality shouldn't be huge? 

My assumption was iTunes/Mac combo should have exceed Foobar/PC combo.

Regarding your questions:

1. Not sure about the Audio midi set up.  Wasn't aware there is one.  Would Mac output lower bit rate even when playing higher res file?

2. I did enable error correction.

3. I did put volume all the way up.

Thanks,

Ed

[srb]

My assumption was iTunes/Mac combo should have exceed Foobar/PC combo.

Since Foobar seemed to be the best playback the PC could offer, my assumption was that something other than iTunes, i.e. Amarra, Pure Vinyl, etc. was needed on the Mac platform to equal or surpass it.
 
I wouldn't have expected the difference to be as much as you found in your test though, so I was looking for something that might bring them a little closer together.

Not sure about the Audio Midi setup.  Wasn't aware there is one.  Would Mac output lower bit rate even when playing higher res file?

Apparently if the Audio Midi settings are different than the file's native resolution, the file would be resampled according to those settings.  I would assume that 44.1KHz/16bit would be the default, but was just something I thought should be verified.
 
If a change is made in the Audio Midi setup, iTunes needs to be restarted to recognize the change.
 
Here is a basic Mac USB setup from the Ayre website:
http://www.ayre.com/usb-apple.htm
 
Steve

[JohnR]

Was the laptop power supply connected?

[skunark]

Whether it's lossless formats of ALAC, FLAC, AIFF or WAV they all have the ability to match the CD bit for bit.   So either there's a difference in the ripping or the drivers to the USB dac is adding jitter.   Since you can have iTunes on both PCs and Macs and you can play ALAC/WAV/AIFF along with the CD you can see if the USB drivers make a difference between mac and pc.  I can only assume they would add jitter or the player is doing something funky.

[viggen]

Steve, I doubt my wife ever touched the audio midi settings.  So, I am pretty sure I was using 44.1khz 16bit output if it is the default.

I know of Amarra and thought that it is supposed to be a huge step up from both iTunes?  Not aware of any direct comparisons between iTunes and Foobar though.  So, don't know which is better in absolute terms.  But, I always thought iTunes/Mac is better than Foobar/PC from all the internet comments like those from Gordon Rankin.  And, I thought there are better players than Foobar for PC such as Wasapi or Cplay if I remember correctly.  Some claim Jriver is better too.

John, my PC is a Sony tower, so it's plugged in all the time.  And, the Mac was unplugged.  So, the advantage should swing towards the Mac.

Skunark, that's my assumption too that Lossless and FLAC should sound identical or at least be very close that differences are not normally perceivable. 

I am using the same USB DAC, Audio Sector USB DAC, with either MAC or PC so the DAC shouldn't be a variable.

I don't have iTunes on my PC though.  I have stubbornly refused to use it and much prefer unbloated programs like Foobar.

So, most people are more inclined to think there's a setup error with the Mac?  Maybe it's a synergy issue... I don't think my current system provides as much detail particularly in the higher frequencies as my previous systems have... not sure if that is an issue.

[bunnyma357]

It is possible that the default iTunes ripping is to a compressed format - is it possible that you are comparing a full-rez copy to something like a 128K compressed AAC format?

On the Mac open iTunes and go to Preferences and under general click on the import settings button and that will let you see what you are ripping to. You could also check file sizes, Apple Lossless will be about the same size as a FLAC, if it's compressed it will be a lot smaller.


Jim C

[viggen]

Hey Jim:

Definitely made sure that I ripped to Apple Lossless using error correction.

[srb]

Steve, I doubt my wife ever touched the audio midi settings.  So, I am pretty sure I was using 44.1khz 16bit output if it is the default.

I said I thought it may be the default, but it may not be.  If it is lower, that would explain the loss in quality.  If it for some reason defaults to the maximum rate of your selected USB DAC (48KHz/16bit ?), then it would resample to 48KHz, and that could also explain a loss in quality (just like when Windows resamples to 48KHz through K-Mixer).
 
So although you may certainly find that it is 44.1/KHz/16bit (when the USB DAC is connected and selected), I learned many years ago to never assume anything without checking and verifying.
 
Steve

[viggen]

Hey Steve:

Was just reluctant to kick my wife off her Macbook as she's in mad Photoshop mode. 

Forced her to take a break, so I can get into audio midi and found it to be 44.1khz but 24bit.  Ayre site say that is optimal setting, but, sadly, I don't have an Ayre DAC.  So, maybe it wasn't in the optimal setting? 

My DAC is 16bit NOS.  So, perhaps you are onto something!

Next chance I get to pry the Macbook away from my wife, I will AB against the pc again.

Thanks,

Ed

[skunark]

What you can do then is rip a couple of songs to WAV on both the PC and MAC since it's the most universal lossless format and swap them to rule out any ripping issues between the platforms.   You can also use the digital output on the macbook that is shared with the headphone jack if you have a mini-toslink adapter.

[srb]

"If you select a sample rate that is different than the sample rate of the music file itself, OS X will perform a sample-rate conversion, and the data sent to the Ayre USB D/A converter will not be bit-perfect.  Be sure to set the “Audio Output - Format:” setting to the native sample rate of the music file that you wish to play.  You must exit iTunes first for the sample rate change to take effect.  Then restart iTunes and play the desired music file."
 
Ed, with those settings it sounds like OSX would upsample the file to 24-bit.  But in your case, since the DAC is 16-bit only, it is either resampled a second time back down to 16-bit, OR your DAC will actually accept a 24-bit file, merely truncating the extra 8 bits.
 
In either case, check the Audio Midi setup with the DAC connected and selected, in case the settings change when the DAC is chosen as the output.
 
Steve

[Quiet Earth]

viggen,

The Macbook "sees" a song from a CD as an AIFF file. Put a CD in the mac and wait for it to show up on the desktop (not itunes). Open the CD folder and see all of the track numbers that say AIFF. Click once on any track to highlight it. Hold the command button down and press the letter i on the keyboard. The information window will pop up and show that the song data is an AIFF file.

I rip to AIFF (with error correction) on my Mac to avoid any conversion at all. Voume up all the way, no equalizer or any other sound level adjustments turned on. I think that's your best bet.

[viggen]

Finally got another chance to A/B between my Thinkpad X60 Tablet and my wife's Macbook Pro 13".

I made sure the Macbook's settings are correct as explained in the Ayre pdf Steve posted above.  Then, off to the music.  However, a few things have changed since my last post.

First, I removed a large table from the room which actually caused echo and some ringing.  There's still some ringing in the room but not nearly as much after the table is out of the room.

Second, replaced OTA speaker wire with Grover Huffman S series bi-wires.

Third, replaced JMR Evolution with Klipsch Heresy.  The JMRs were over powering my 10x10' room.  The Klipsch limited LFE actually benefits from being placed in a small room.

So, now, the Macbook sounds halfway decent.  It's very clean sounding.  However, it isn't very musical.  It's tone and pitch are sorta subdued and doesn't move very much.  Imagine the vocalist and musicians standing in one place and doesn't turn their head or move their body. 

On to the Thinkpad, I now have USB-ASIO installed in place of ASIO4ALL.  There's air, rhythm and personality.  I can "hear" the vocalist move and sway as she's singing especially when she switches between bass to falsetto.  When playing the same track, the Macbook sounds bland.

I am A/Bing with my wife, and she said her computer "suck".

I think the Macbook does lots of technical things better.  It's clean and accurate but sort of lifeless.

I have a sub coming in a few weeks.  Shall revisit and see which direction I go with this new addition.  However, I am glad I am not buying a Mac for now.

[skunark]

This topic would be more interesting to me if you took your wife's macbook and dual boot it and compared the windows vs mac vs linux on the same hardware.  At least then, this would be purely a software exercise, but the debate of which players to try could be an endless one. 

If you can establish that one OS/Player combo sounds better between you and your wife, then perhaps you can compare linux vs linux and windows vs windows between the two laptops.

For the mac I would use both the optical output and a USB dac. For the IBM, probably your only viable option is a USB dac.  Also, volume control should be taken completely out of the picture.

Also what does "air, rhythm and personality" mean to you?  Different sound stage? More dynamics?  As i read these posts, I tend to scratch my head on how folks describe how sound changes between components/upgrades. 

[viggen]

This topic would be more interesting to me if you took your wife's macbook and dual boot it and compared the windows vs mac vs linux on the same hardware.  At least then, this would be purely a software exercise, but the debate of which players to try could be an endless one. 

If you can establish that one OS/Player combo sounds better between you and your wife, then perhaps you can compare linux vs linux and windows vs windows between the two laptops.

For the mac I would use both the optical output and a USB dac. For the IBM, probably your only viable option is a USB dac.  Also, volume control should be taken completely out of the picture.

Also what does "air, rhythm and personality" mean to you?  Different sound stage? More dynamics?  As i read these posts, I tend to scratch my head on how folks describe how sound changes between components/upgrades.

Yes, that would be a much more meaningful comparison but wouldn't serve my purpose as much since I was merely curious as whether all the hype around Mac's audio superiority warranted that I make a switch.  Maybe in a different system or with a different DAC, the Mac might be the superior source but not in mine. 

This is not to say I am not curious as to which OS is superior.  I am.  But, I am hoping someone else would put the effort into researching this.  I actually am curious as to whether switching from XP to 7 will have audio benefits.  But, being that my laptop is a tablet, I am probably stuck with the XP as it is a tablet version.

Regarding the suprelatives, I was just trying to describe the music's personality as played by each source.  Sound wise, each is fairly similar.  The main difference to me is in the way the music is portrayed.  The Thinkpad is more emotional while the Mac is more staid. 

That being said, the sound coming out of the Thinkpad has never been considered emotional by me.  It's only when compared to the Mac that I would say the Thinkpad is MORE emotional.  All relative.

[WGH]

I actually am curious as to whether switching from XP to 7 will have audio benefits.  But, being that my laptop is a tablet, I am probably stuck with the XP as it is a tablet version.

Switching from XP to 7 does make a audible difference. I compared XP with USB-ASIO to a laptop running Vista with WASAPI and Vista is much clearer with tighter deeper bass, 7 would sound the same or better than Vista. Now my WAV files are always played through the laptop. FLAC always sounds off somehow, I can't put my finger on it but it's just uninvolving.

Wayne

[viggen]

Hi Wayne:

I used to use all WAV files too before switching to FLAC.  Honestly, I can't hear the difference, but that was many years ago with different house/room and system.  Presently, maybe I could.

But, what prompted me to re-rip all my CDs to FLAC is because I WAV files are not tagged.  Maybe I will rip a few WAVS and report back. 

I am not certain, however, since my current XP is designed for tablets, I am afraid my screen's multitouch (as well as other tablet features) wouldn't work if I replaced the XP Tablet with 7 or any other non-tablet operating system.

Of course, if someone were to bring a Win7 laptop to my house and let me hear the difference, and indeed 7 is mucho superioso, I might not be able to resist switching.

[WGH]

The WAV - FLAC sound thing is totally mystifying to me. In side-by-side listening comparisons they both sound the same. I was listening to some Cowboy Junkies albums I never heard before and they sounded badly recorded, kind of flat, and this was when I was in another room. The music never drew me in and made me listen, then I converted the FLAC's to WAV and my brain said this is better. 

I'm too old school to worry much about tags, vinyl never had tags. I did play around with a Squeezebox and all my music is ripped to MP3's with tags, great for background music but too low-fi for everyday use.

Do try to borrow a laptop with Vista or 7 with Foobar, just to see if you can hear a difference.

Wayne