2. digital
  3. 1241754906

Apple Macintosh Music System

This post has been along time coming for me. I have been lurking around for years, and have learned a lot from the people here. So here it is....

I really like my Apple Mac and iPhone. I like the quality hardware and simple software. I like that it works. I like than I can automatically backup with Time Machine and Time Capsule. I like the AirPort Express. I like the Remote App. I have ripped all of my music to Apple Lossless. I have a main system that I connect directly to and other systems that I stream using the AirPort Express. I like the way Apple allows me to access my music and share it with other devices, and around the house. I am very, VERY happy with my Apple setup.

I want to squeeze every bit of "musical information" out of my Apple system. Here is what I have found works best, but please feel free to make recommendations. I haven't listened to and tried everything.

1. MacBook Pro with a nice SSD drive. It sounds silly, but the SSD makes a huge difference. Not to mention how quick boot time and app launches are.

2. Van Den Hul polished glass optical cable to DAC. I've tried "coax" and "USB", but the optical output seems to sound a little better and more consistent.

3. Altmann DAC with a Optima Red Top power supply. Geeky, but that DAC sounds wonderful when battery powered.

4. Altmann AMP or 47 Labs Shigaraki amp. Both are sweet and gentle.

5. 47 Labs Lens speaker. Amazing!

6. 47 Labs OTA cable for interconnect and speaker cable.

As you can see, I like a smaller (more intimate) sound. I have owned a lot of Linn and Naim gear in the past, but the Altmann and 47 Labs gear still amazes me with every listen.

I'm open to something new, if I can improve.

What other DACs with optical inputs should I consider?

What about "chip amps" and single driver designs?

Any suggestions?

Thanks for your time....
timbrepitch
jax2
3,031 posts
 
I have experimented no issues working with WAV files on the MAC so far, all track names, art cover and extended file info (like star rating) are there....

Try adding your own artwork to a WAV file. Try copying a few WAV files to a thumb drive and moving them to a different computer in your house. I hope you never have to restore your entire library from a backup, but if so, I don't envy the task if using Mac+WAV. AIFF is optimized for Mac and is basically the same type of bit-for-bit full-rez file as WAV. It is so much easier to deal with on a Mac, and will support all the critical metadata outside of the iTunes interface (which the WAV files depend upon to keep that data organized). You may not have run into problems yet, but I'd once again warn you that this may not always be the case. I have found in the past that WAV are no fun at all to deal with on a MAC.
flg2001's avatar
flg2001
543 posts
 
Jax2 - now I am scared!!! :-)

Is there any way to convert my WAV files at iTunes to AIFF in a seamless way?
jax2
3,031 posts
 
Jax2 - now I am scared!!! :-)

Is there any way to convert my WAV files at iTunes to AIFF in a seamless way?

Be afraid. I'm not sure how well this works. In iTunes you can highlight the WAV files and then go to the menu Advanced>Create AIFF Version. I've not tried it, but I imagine it's pretty direct and that you'll probably then have to delete the WAV files manually as it implies that you are creating a duplicate. Perhaps someone else has done this and can comment?
flg2001's avatar
flg2001
543 posts
 
I did the same going from LoseLess to WAV - and delete manually the original files.

I will try with an specific playlist and let all know...

Thanks again.
jax2
3,031 posts
 
I do not know what effect these conversions you are accomplishing within iTunes will have on the SQ of the files. I have not tried it myself. More important is using Error Correction on the original rip, as well as the ripping software that implements that correction. As far as the double conversions, in theory, all those file types are bit-for-bit. You may want to try one, then rip the same file directly to AIFF and compare the two to see if there is a loss in SQ. Just a thought.
More to discover