Can Mac/PC compete with High End CDT??

I believe so however, there are so many combinations I would imagine it's impossible to come to a consensus. I would certainly be concerned if anyone made absolute statements regarding either approach, now or in the future. The number of possible combinations in the computer, DAC and audio equipment world are too vast.

For my part, I was using a Mark Levinson No. 37 transport with a 360S DAC. I wasn't listening to it much anymore having dedicated more and more time and resources to analog so I sold the Mark Levinson gear. I personally liked the sound of this set-up but it's lack of use made me think I should move on and try something else. I like to try different things and see what works for me and I also like trying new technology, even if I ultimately determine that it's not for me.

In deciding to experiment with computer audio, I selected an older MacBook Pro (something I already had on-hand), connected it to a Weiss DAC-2 via Firewire and used the Amarra playback software with iTunes. I've found the experiment quite interesting and very satisfying. I've since added the Saracon up-sampling software from Weiss and I'm considering a Weiss DAC-1 now that they have added a Firewire input to it.

I appreciated the Weiss approach to computer audio as it uses asymmetrical Firewire allowing the DAC to control the computer. To me, this eliminates a certain number of variables that could theoretically degrade sound quality and it made sense to try and minimize the amount of audio hardware inside the computer. Other manufacturers use this approach using asymmetrical USB but I have no experience with that. It may work well too.

I find the Apple/Weiss/Amarra/Saracon combination to be very relaxed and musical, doing everything the Mark Levinson did well while adding a significant amount of detail. This detail did not come through in a cold, clinical, analytical way nor did it come through in a warm, dark, "heavy" way. It seems to me that it lives right in the middle giving a good dose of musical honesty.

Please remember that I'm describing what I hear, in my system. It's quite a startling difference at first but the more I listen to it the more I realize the Mark Levinson was either missing this information or perhaps masking it.

For a little context I'm using an Atma-Sphere MP-1 preamp with Atma-Sphere MA-2 monoblocks driving SoundLab A1-PX panels. My analog front end consists of an SME 30 with Graham Phantom II tonearm and a Benz LP and an Ampex ATR-102 with ARIA electronics. I value musicality and accuracy equally and prefer to live in the neutral zone or perhaps a tad on the warm side when required. I think this is why I liked the Mark Levinson gear in my system. It added some warmth and weight to CD's which I felt was required for my taste.

So, returning to the sound of my Apple/Weiss/Amarra/Saracon combination - On high resolution file formats or up-sampled formats you can really start to hear a positive difference, especially with the Reference Recordings HRX disks. The higher the resolution, the more detail, spacial information, dynamics and accuracy you get all while increasing the relaxed nature of the presentation. Obviously starting with the highest resolution possible is a great improvement over CD. It becomes more analog-like while giving you dynamics and impact that analog just can't quite do.

For me the Mac/Weiss/Amarra/Saracon combination is relatively easy to use. I understand Macs fairly well having used them in some form or another since the early 80's and the Weiss information on their web site combined with the instructions on "How to Make a Music Server" on the Amarra web site go a long way to getting the best sound out of this combination.

I would state that it does require some technical know-how and a bit of fiddling with software to get everything right. There are operating system issues that need to be addressed, dongles that need to be attached, drivers that need to be installed and things that need to be turned off in order to get it to work well. It's just not as simple as buying a CD player and plugging it in however, as long as you like experimenting and have some basic knowledge of the computer it's fun and you will get some really satisfying results.

There is certainly far greater flexibility with regards to the final sound from the computer approach than the CD player approach. In other words, you can alter the flavor to suit your personal taste in a way that is simply impossible with a CD player. It's like having multiple cartridge and arm combinations on a turntable. The Amarra software for example, has a digital EQ that can make nasty sounding CDs sound listenable and even enjoyable. The Saracon software has various options for up-sampling your files yielding subtle differences in the final digital file.

In conclusion, it has been my experience that computer audio can compete with high end CD transports while offering the opportunity to listen to high resolution file formats, up-sample any resolution (to 196 kHz in my set-up), adjust EQ in the digital domain if required or desired and the convenience of a music server. These are things that a CD player can't do. It does require some experimenting so don't expect to simply drop in a computer and expect to come to a conclusion in a few hours of listening. I've been woking on this and enjoying it for several months - and I'm not finished yet - but I do believe that computer audio can yield some very satisfying results.

Have fun!

Rick, can I ask you about the Saracon software from Weiss. How do you use it? Is it used in conjunction with Itones as is Amarra?

Hi Tbg,

It's stand-alone software and it does not do it's conversion in real-time. What you do is take the digital file (perhaps a CD or download) and up-sample to a desired target sample rate. Typically you double, triple or quadruple the sample rate based on the original file sample rate. You can also change the word length so a 16 bit file can change to a 24 bit file or higher.

It's a tool used in mastering studios to move files up or down in resolution. There is even a DSD version but my DAC doesn't deal with that so I purchased the Saracon software that only handles PCM formats. I assume some studios may master in DSD but mix down to standard CD.

There are different options for converting the file which I think are different mathematical models used in the process. I haven't had a chance to compare these sonically yet but I am starting to experiment with them.

Right now I've converted several favorite digital files and I've been listening to the original and the up-sampled file. Since disk space is so inexpensive these days I can keep multiple versions of the same file around until I settle on a sample rate. The software is a batch processor so you can convert many files at once as long as you have the disk space.

The sound quality is excellent and the control it gives you goes well beyond anything I have experienced in the hardware domain. I find it remarkable that an audiophile can have access to such powerful digital tools now for less money than many components.

Rick, thanks for the information. I'm going to look into getting it.

I should clarify one thing. The software does not do it's conversion in real-time. It's much faster than real-time so when you are converting an entire disk it does it in a matter of minutes, not hours. You could convert several hundred files overnight if you wanted to... perhaps several thousand.