Hambone

I have a pair of Grado SR-80s which have served me pretty well, even though they're a bit beat up (no "grattle" yet). I never needed a DAC or preamp when I used them on my home system, but with the computer, I don't know if I will or won't. I've heard so many horror stories at this point about listening to music on the computer--fan noise, distortion because you didn't choose the right format, interference from the motherboard, and on and on and on (although I haven't heard of any of these issues being prevalent on the Mac desktop)--that I really don't know. Probably going to get something just for peace of mind.

were all ripped via my cousin's backwards compatible PS3 using SACD Ripper. From that program, you can create an .ISO which you can either burn to a DVD-R and make a physical backup of the SACD layer, or what I do is extract the tracks from the .ISO into WAV files using Foobar, and from there convert to ALAC using XLD. It seems like a lot , but unfortunately Foobar doesn't natively convert to ALAC, and XLD won't decode SACD .ISO files from what I've seen.

read, that paper. As I understand it, what they're saying is that SACDs and the like sound better not because the technology is inherently better or because of a higher bit rate, but because the engineers are freed from having to work with the artificial loudness and extra compression that companies think most consumers want. I've heard that before and I agree, to a point; sometimes, the differences are just plain psychological. How does that work with vinyl rips, though? If I've ripped ten of my LPs at 24/192 direct from vinyl and then attempt playback through a source that only outputs at 24/44.1, naturally the signal quality will degrade, won't it? In that case, wouldn't a DAC prove useful? I just want to cover all my bases before I sit back and say, "okay, I've got it now."

Help the silly newbie, please. I am a music lover that has everything from SACDs to HQ vinyl to MFSL CDs in my collection. However, space recently became a concern for me (i.e., my wife told me to get rid of a bunch of stuff). So over the past year or so, I have steadily converting my physical music collection to digital. I already have my trusty, beaten-up headphones so I'm set there. Now I've been doing (or trying to do) some research, but I am still mostly in the dark when it comes to getting the most out of my computer, audio-wise. I thought my regular home audio guy was bad about being intentionally vague (which I guess I understand because at the end of the day, audio preferences are all subjective anyway and he just wants to make a sale), but some of the people I've spoken to about high-end computer audio can't give me a straight answer on anything! I have a early 2009 Mac. Now, some have told me that I should get a headphone amp in conjunction with at least a 24/96 DAC (one friend, whose opinion I value, suggested the NuForce uDac-2 as a starting point because of the low price). Another guy told me that DACs are only really useful for comps with lower-quality soundcards, and the Mac should be fine as it is. Yet another guy told me that while the Mac does have a decent-quality soundcard, it only puts out max quality of 24/44.1 (have no idea if that's actually the case or not). The headphone amp doesn't really worry me; my cans are low-impedance at only 32 ohms, and the Mac headphone output is 24 ohms, so it's not a huge deal. My biggest concern is that I have many SACD rips (@ 24/88.2 and 24/176) and vinyl rips (some @ 24/96, some @ 24/192). I've never had much experience with DACs on my regular setup; to me, the improvement was detectable, but only slightly so and definitely not worth the extra money at the time. But now, I want to make sure that I'm not losing out in the process of porting my stuff to the computer because of my inexperience with using it as a dedicated listening station. Do I need the DAC or not? Does it make that much of a difference on the Mac? (If it matters, I'm listening in ALAC using basic iTunes only; I don't use Hear or anything like that.)