soooowhat

"I just use only one tool, my ears. That's it. And that is what I recommend to every single person, trust your ears." I wish I could use only my ears, but we must also choose a DAC, and a computer and a software player for computer audio playback. "...since BIS's 24/44.1kHz downloads sound considerably smoother than any 16/44.1kHz..." What system do you use to hear a difference between 24/44.1 and 16/44.1 recordings?

anyone?

<br /> <br /> wappinghigh,<br /> <br /> "You simply copied the exact same Apple obituary from Apple.com over to this forum. There was really no need to do this, as every Apple user saw the Apple obituary on the relevant webpage: Apple.com." <br /> <br /> so, now you're bitching because Chris chose to even post about the death of Steve Jobs here, saying in effect that an obituary only needed to be posted at Apple.com.<br /> <br /> And your rationale is that EVERY Apple user (already) saw it on the Apple.com site?<br /> <br /> <br /> WTF? <br /> <br /> <br />

"Apple was late in the MP3 business"<br /> <br /> as far as I can tell, there was no significant MP3 business until the advent of the iTunes Music store in 2003, unless you call pirating of music 'business'.<br /> <br /> <br /> As for thanking Rio for the portable player, as it turns out they didn't invent the mp3 player - they were two years late on that.<br /> <br /> Neither were they first to market with a commercial mp3 player - they were some months late on that.<br /> <br /> so, let's recap shall we - Rio took someone else's idea, then brought their own version to market, and were more successful than their predecessors, which is the same as Steve Jobs and Apple did, except that Apple's contribution (developing a business model for selling music instead of stealing it) launched a multi-billion dollar industry. <br /> <br /> Meanwhile, the company producing the Rio filed for chapter 11 the same year that the iTunes music store was started - 2003. <br /> <br /> Alas, Apple didn't create the marketplace fast enough to save the Rio.<br /> <br /> For those who wonder why Rio was still around past 2003, DNM picked up the remnants of Rio after chapter 11, but then pulled the Rio product set from the market in mid-2005.<br /> <br /> <br />

Try disconnecting the USB cable entirely after ripping with different cables and see if any of the ripped samples still sound different. The cheapest (and best option) in my opinion is likely to be: unplugging your DVD drive from the wall and also from your computer for playback, unless you like noise with your playback. In my opinion, the only way your drive can impact the sound from of your DAC (assuming the files are all bit perfect) is if noise is interfering with your DAC from either the drive itself, or it's power supply. YMMV, of course,

"I've purchased TWO seperate Apple G4 1.25 laptops with 1.33 ghz processors and 768 Ram. Most current OS and itunes on both." The problem is most likely the combination of most current OS AND Apple G4. Use an OS that the G4 was designed for and you'll have no problems. Even a G4 Cube with 450 Mhz can play music just fine using Tiger. Try Leopard.

I paid around $150 over a year ago for two Oyaide neo+ 1394 cables, including shipping from Japan, which took only a few days. http://global.rakuten.com/en/store/dj/item/d_firewire6x6-06/ Current price is $64.06 US$ each. The '730' figure is NOT US$ - it's Hong Kong dollars.

"I think Apple's future is very bright..." I agree. Tomorrow will be a great time to buy Apple stock, in my opinion, after the knee jerkers sell.

He's pointing to the fact that he got AIFF big-endian from iTunes, and you are getting AIFF-C. OTOH, looks like you're using an older version.

thanks Miska, for the clarification so, if the theory that additional processing could add noise and detract from playback quality holds true, AIFF and Intel architectures are a bad combination, and AIFF-C is also a crap shoot with Intel, but at least has a chance of better matching. Now to find an OS X ripper than is configurable.

Thanks. It's hard to tell without testing the files, but I believe that WAV will likely be big endian. Miska reported earlier that recent iTunes rips to big endian as well. Perhaps Miska is incorrect, but I am doubtful of that, as he's a developer. Suspicion is that little endian AIFF files, being different from WAV (if indeed WAV data is always stored as big endian), might be cause for different sonics. WIkipedia says this (but even second graders aren't allowed to use Wikipedia for facts): "Because the AIFF architecture has no provision for alternative byte order, Apple used the existing AIFF-C compression architecture, and created a "pseudo-compressed" codec called sowt (twos spelled backwards). The only difference between a standard AIFF file and an AIFF-C/sowt file is the byte order; there is no compression involved at all. Apple uses this new little-endian AIFF type as its standard on Mac OS X." This seems to say that AIFF-C files are switched to little-endian, although who knows if this info is out of date. Perhaps the presumed "transparency" between AIFF and AIFF-C has allowed inconsistencies to grow like wildfire? That's my bet!

thanks for clarifying your ripping & wav file generation approach would certainly be interesting to see the endian-ness of the files in question. Perhaps you can put them in "dropbox" for someone who knows how to checK? Or perhaps someone can teach the rest of us how to check?

Hi Barry, "If a difference is established, I'd want to know which sounds like the original." Understood. I"m assuming bit perfectness of the actual PCM data with either format. Indeed, this can be checked and confirmed (thanks to digital). This sonic differences are likely in the obfuscation category, i.e. AIFF files on some systems are perhaps causing some additional processing which interferes with playback, obscuring small details and adding noise. My point being, both are likely to be as faithful to the original as the noise spectra allows. OTOH, Since the mechanism for interfering with playback is unknown (or at least not a consensus opinion) and unreliable, it will affect systems differently, so who knows. I certainly don't.

"Also, if you use iTunes for ripping or XLD you finish with an old big-endian AIFF format" I've only ever used XLD or iTunes for ripping my files. Can't help but wonder if the folks who're able to tell the difference have used dbPoweramp for ripping and inadvertently created the conditions for hearing a difference. another variable to consider. curiouser and curiouser PS. this is consistent with what Miska reported earlier - despite what Wikipedia says about little-endian, big-endian seems to be the current Apple standard for endianness.

possibly not relevant, but... My thought process was that Integer mode would allow the application code to bypass any untoward downstream conversions of data (due to possible different formats as Paul supposed) in support of your supposition that Audirvana would only need to stream a single format data. Perhaps you can just ask Damien?