ajmcl05

... And my apologies for not responding earlier. @ davidR - thanks for that, I was concerned that the bass response may be softer, or looser than with the smaller drivers on the BM6As. @Rob - your comments surprise me a little. These monitors have better tweeters (same as in contour range) than those in my dynaudio 52s and the woofers are larger too. In addition they are driven by four seperate, dedicated amps. To get Cyrus ouput of that power I'd need two power amps and still have lower spec speakers. This would cost around double the cost of the monitors too. Also I can recoup some costs from selling the 52s. Usually the BM12As are ca £1300, the combined cost of my Cyrus 8 and 52s was ca £1400. I can get the 12s at £800... So around £600 net. Seems good to me given that proaudio gear nearly always gives greater bang per buck than non - you aren't paying for cosmetics to the same extent. Anyway, in light of all that I'd be interested to hear your response since you seem very dismissive of monitors in your initial reply. Not trying to pick a fight, just want to understand your comments more clearly.

... And my apologies for not responding earlier. @ davidR - thanks for that, I was concerned that the bass response may be softer, or looser than with the smaller drivers on the BM6As. @Rob - your comments surprise me a little. These monitors have better tweeters (same as in contour range) than those in my dynaudio 52s and the woofers are larger too. In addition they are driven by four seperate, dedicated amps. To get Cyrus ouput of that power I'd need two power amps and still have lower spec speakers. This would cost around double the cost of the monitors too. Also I can recoup some costs from selling the 52s. Usually the BM12As are ca £1300, the combined cost of my Cyrus 8 and 52s was ca £1400. I can get the 12s at £800... So around £600 net. Seems good to me given that proaudio gear nearly always gives greater bang per buck than non - you aren't paying for cosmetics to the same extent. Anyway, in light of all that I'd be interested to hear your response since you seem very dismissive of monitors in your initial reply. Not trying to pick a fight, just want to understand your comments more clearly.

I was wondering whether anyone here has any experience of these? I have the opportunity to get hold of a pair at a very good discount (25%) and have considered going 'active' for a while. Presently i'm using cyrus8 (80W per channel) amp to dynaudio 52s... so i'm predisposed to dynaudio. I will not be using them as desk-top monitors but in my main listening room. I have heard and like the BM6's... so is the sound from the BM12s as good? Would they be more suitable for main room listening vs what i already have? I would like a little more power behind my speakers and i'm not really a fan of floorstanders... Any thoughts/experience would be much appreciated.

"If I introduce an iPhone with 802.11G as a remote control, could it impair my network's performance to the point that it could create dropouts or the like in my music?" I use iMac->AE->dac(via optical)->amp->speakers and the iphone 3G as a remote for the last couple of weeks or so and have experienced no drop-outs or signal distortion at all, nor have seen any posts here to the effect that it may disrupt your network as you fear. No doubt you will hear about any negative experiences that i have missed. I think it is a brilliant little remote that frees up your entire music collection at a stroke (...or touch). I also find it very useful indeed as a telephone (amongst other things) over and above as a remote, of course :-)

"I'm increasingly of the opinion that it is best to just 'jump in' with the cheapest compliant piece and if you like it, be happy. If you don't, figure out why, unload it and find something more suitable. I think the odds are you will like the first thing you buy enough to stay with it - ignorance is bliss." I think you are probably right about this :-). It is neigh impossible to check out all the various suggestions yourself before buying; that mythical hifi shop doesn't exist. The thing about computer audio is that you do get high quality sound fairly cheap with one of these dacs. Certainly cheaper than 5 or 6 years ago using CD players and while i agree with your sentiments about various hifi magazines and websites and their reviews, it may just be the case that pretty much all these dacs are good value for money. I'm begining to suspect that is the case. Either way, the luxury of being able to directly compare one component to another in your home before making a decision is usually the preserve of making some fairly high expenditure through your local dealer... or spending 3 times more than you'd like from the net-dealers and then sending a couple back. The bottom line is that sticking any half decent DAC between your computer out and your amp in (in my case the dacmagic) makes a very significant difference vs not using one at all, at least in my experience. In that regard it has been more bang for yerr buck than any single h-ifi purchase i have ever made. Oh and to answer your question about what is controlled by the iphone remote - itunes on the imac a couple of rooms away from the hifi. The experience of others may be different, but i have experienced no drop outs at all using AE and ultimately what really pushes computer audio is its sheer convenience coupled with reasonable cost if you have decent components down the chain anyway.

.... depends on the vacuum cleaner, whether it is bag/vortex. We prefer the 'feel' of a 'Henry', but over on "vacuumophile" they claim the mkII Dyson is better....

Hi Cubist, I'm new to computer audio myself and faced similar questions to those you are asking yourself. I had an imac, ibook G4, airport express and iphone.... so there was no real decision to make; i'd go with apple streaming aplpe lossless using itunes from the imac to the AE to the dac using the AE's optical out into the dac. Remember that you have everything you need to set up a wifi music system with only an AE unit; with sonos you are paying for fancy remote and hardware that duplicates what you already have to a great extent. You can always use the AE for other things should you decide to go Sonos down the line. I eventually got a dacmagic. There are concerns about the USB... and you should read the 'stereophile' review on it and the musical fidelity V dac that Clay mentions, but otherwise, using non-usb links, the dacmagic was viewed as a superb performer in its price range. That conclusion has been drawn in several other reviews too. In the UK, the price of the dacmagic increased from £200 to £220; not a huge increase and certainly not enough to make a good deal into a bad one. Anyway, i am very happy with mine going into cyrus 8 amp -> dynaudio 52 speakers. Stereo imaging and detail are very good indeed, i'm experiencing no drop outs in sound at all and the iphone remote is superb. once my CD8 returns from repair than i will write a more detailed comparison between the two sources, but as things stand, the sheer convenience of computer audio over CD is compensating for any slight drop in SQ that i may be experiencing. Anyway, you have had several dac suggestions and i seriously doubt that any so far would be a terrible deal. Reading around, the concensus hereabouts seems to be that optical is better than USB anyway, not necc just for the dacmagic. Why do you want to use USB?

... thanks for the response and clarification. "Hopefully next week I will have the AFI1 in my system. Also looking forward to know if I can hear any differences between firewire interfaces.." THAT does sound like something to be looking forward to :-). Any responses from sonic so far are to the effect that if you don't ask Amarra to do its tricks, then it doesn't do them.... so having a non "qualified" output does bring into question the effects of having Amarra running at all, since presumably Amarra will only respond to whatever your "qualified" output is.... ...assuming my speculations have something to them (a big ask), then imagine if you also had "qualified" amps and speakers down line? You'd have a "fly by wire" hi-fi system with actively and constantly tuned digital ouput to maximise the analog behaviour of all down stream components... Afterall if you can fly something with the aerodynamic properties of a brick using active software control, then you should in principle be able to transfer that approach to sound generation too. OK, i have spun off into sheer conjecture if not outright fantasy over a possibility that may not have anything to do with how Amarra runs its tricks. All the same, i look forward to hearing how you get on with this and sincerely hope you are impressed by the (noticeable) results.

...... maybe the wrong questions are being asked of sonic studio....? "Amarra Has Been Qualified To Work With These Audio Interfaces: • Amarra Model Four • Amarra Model Three • Sonic Studio Series 302 • Sonic Studio Series 303 • Sonic Studio Series 304 • Sonic Studio Series 305 • Weiss Engineering Vesta, Minerva, • AFI1, ADC2, DAC2 • Lynx AES16e PCIe (Mac Pro) • More interfaces will be approved." Did either of the two posters earlier in this thread use Amarra with one of these DACs/interfaces? Sonic studio also mentions "advanced hardware based sonic equalisation" as well as "automatic hardware sample rate adjustment". Perhaps asking about "bit perfect" output from Amarra is the wrong question? (Please bear in mind that I know next to nothing about electronic engineering or software development) Maybe Amarra is capable of manipulating the hitherto "perfect" bit stream in an appropriate/specifically tailored manner to optimise the ANALOG output of whichever particular "qualified" piece of hardware is attached downstream? A kind of "active" but "imperfect" bit stream tuned to give an "almost perfect" analog output from a recognised DAC, rather than the current "passive" but "perfect" bit stream we use which gives us an "imperfect" analog output from a non-recognised one? At the end of the day, what is it that we actually want.... bit perfect input into or optimal analog output from our DAC(s)? As i say, i have no idea about the practicalities of doing this on the fly, but if one has developed a software based, non-SQ-destructive digital equaliser and volume control, then mightn't you not just give it a bash? I'd rather have my software doing that than leaving me to be tweaking a graphic equaliser for every single song, album or whatever. This is supposed to be hi-FIDELITY. Not sticking a beard and glasses on the Mona Lisa :-)

"Would you apply some filters and colour correction to the Mona Lisa because you prefer blondes to brunettes?" Of course! How do you know Leonardo didn't already? :-)

... that this is an expensive piece of software priced above industry leaders in the fields of photography and video production. Amarra is being advertised as a revolutionary bolt on to itunes that will transform the sound. Not exactly comparable to these stand alone industry leading software packages... and if the music engine in it is pro class, then they have already developed it... so why charge $1500? One can buy very nice amp or speakers or DAC for that... There are no details on the Sonic at all about this.... and $1500 seems a great deal to charge for a non-destructive graphic equaliser. At least it seems that way to me. So, like you.... I asked someone who has performed the blind tests and finds Amarra to be better. Or at least that is the cryptic message to his post. That was my point. I don't question that sonic studio are industry leaders, that taking all their kit in synergy will produce great results. I am questioning whether Amarra does anything at all to itunes 16bit lossless when all the equalising software is turned off.... because the sonic site doesn't talk about this at all.

Your post about being technically challenged is somewhat cryptic.... the give away being in your equipment profile which lists ...itunes->amarra... Are we to understand that you have carried out blind tests to 'prove' amarra is better than itunes alone? If so, then why not expand on that, given the context of the discussion? This is $1500 software. Final cut pro (a pro level video production programme) and full photoshop (again a pro level piece of software) are less expensive than amarra. So what is it that you are getting from amarra (assuming that you are listening to 16bit recorded CDs in a lossless format) that you don't with itunes?

Your post about being technically challenged is somewhat cryptic.... the give away being in your equipment profile which lists ...itunes->amarra... Are we to understand that you have carried out blind tests to 'prove' amarra is better than itunes alone? If so, then why not expand on that, given the context of the discussion? This is $1500 software. Final cut pro (a pro level video production programme) and full photoshop (again a pro level piece of software) are less expensive than amarra. So what is it that you are getting from amarra (assuming that you are listening to 16bit recorded CDs in a lossless format) that you don't with itunes?

... very interesting thread you've started and has developed:-) I've just bought a cheapish DAC (yup the CA:-/). Streaming apple lossless from imac via AE using itunes. From DAC into cyrus 8 amp and dynaudio 52s. The results are very, very good indeed and utterly bely the costs of a relatively cheap DAC vs a 'serious' cd player; the law of diminishing returns has, for me at least, just been re-calibrated. Reading through this thread and scanning others about enhancement/cleansing software, call what you will, it strikes me that the real question is "what sort of system do you need before you will hear an improvement?", and for any given level of system, "what degree of improvement can one expect?" If any at all... Reading around the forum here I don't really see any real answers and any comments that do appear, don't emphasise what level of kit is being significantly improved upon, once again - if at all. For example, is it reasonable to expect that stamping on jitterbugs with SS gear will have any audible affect on my mac based system? And what about these software packages.... will they turn my £200 DAC into a £1200 one?, or do i need a £2000 DAC and appropriate amps and speakers to hear a difference?, let alone a $40 000 system! ... and more to the point, is a £1200 DAC significantly better than a £200 one anyway?... for the system i have, if indeed at all? I mean is it £1000s better? Also, unless the software and/or jitterbug stamper makes my £200 DAC into say a £1500 one, then why buy it at all and not just buy the more expensive DAC? Or will it make my £200 DAC into a £3000 one?... and so on.... I'd like to see some group, blind tests here. I understand that possibly some manufacturers aren't keen, but why bother otherwise? There are many, many sites and magazines repeating the same old approach. I came to computer audio for its convenience and have ended up smitten by its sound per buck as it were. We listen to more music more often now than ever before. Threads like this one are important and have great value; where are the answers to your, eloise and other's questions?

... this may be the blind leading the blind since i'm new to this myself, but why can't you use airport express? Apple lossless is 16bit, AE is 16 bit then straight into your dac.... or am i missing something?