|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.53.172.141
In Reply to: Re: getting started in computer-based audio posted by fmak on April 13, 2007 at 11:30:57:
Gordon, I have an IMAC, there is not one software that I would use for serious playback. If you are using Itunes, then you've missed the boat already.
Follow Ups:
Vincent,If you are just using the iMac output then sure it would suck. You have to use something at least as good as the Lynx card you are using in your Products.
I have a ton of pc's and mac's here. The best PC I have found is a MAC running Bootcamp. I have already specified that this is mainly due to the custom drivers that Apple wrote. The original Bootcamp did not do any better than my Hush or custom PC (runs on batteries no DCDC covertors).
You should really try some better dac connected to your iMac and see if that helps.
I have pretty many customers and so far everyone that has switched from PC to MAC using iTunes has felt that it is a great improvement.
Gordon, I use on the Mac the Echo Audiofire firewire audio interface and the Focusrite Pro Sapphire which is firewire as well. I do not use I'tunes for playback. I spent the money and brought Bias Peak pro 5. Is it overkill, yes, but I would rather have my music played back at pristine quality vs. any commerical software. Take a listen and then you would never mention I'tunes again!
Vincent,I am new to your products. I checked out your site and read about the Revelation Music Studio.
You mentioned that "All software players add their own sonic stamp to the sound through DSP and resampling".
What is Apple specifically doing with their iTunes?
Thank you,
Steve
All consumer music playback software developers use shortcuts and pre-made components to build the software. If you were to develop software for playback correctly, it would cost more than the free they charge for iTunes and Windows Media Player. This is one reason why professional editing and mastering software costs $1,000 or more for a license.The shortcuts that are taken include less than ideal resampling of the data, premade DSP components (for volume control etc.) and algorhythms that are not as accurate as pro editing algorhythms etc.
These add up to a compromise of sound quality compared to what is theoretically possible. Download a demo of some of the quality mastering suites and playback some Wav files and you should hear the difference. Unfortunately iTunes (whether PC or MAC) and Windows Media Player etc. are not ideal players by any means from a sonic perspective.
Which mastering suites or players do you recommend for high quality sonics? I would be interested in downloading demos and trying them out.Thanks in advance!
Here is a link that I think that all of you would enjoy so have fun!
nt
Scab, please do a google search on pro audio editing suites or softwares. You will find an array of them, but a word of caution, they are not user friendly as ITunes, Windows Media player or Foobar. They do have a learning curve. Have Fun and let us know what you hear.
There is always some type of DSP processing going on underneath playback softwares, weather resampling before it gets to the audio device or adding some type of effect filter or a combo of both. These type of programs are not written to preserve the music. As a matter of fact, we have spoken to companies that have written these type of programs and have said that there should be no difference in audio quality, as bits are bits. This statement is absolutely false!
You understand the nature of computer programming. Most people seem to think it creates a perefect magic box!
Poorly written algorithms.
| ||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: