Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac mini M1 - only 48KHz audio?

marstan said:
Most assuredly there are differences in DACs. Go to BenchmarkMedia's site to read up on what makes a good DAC.

But really there is no point in getting a high quality DAC until you fix other devices in the audio chain that produce orders of magnitude greater errors than a DAC or any electronic device. And I am, of course, talking about monitors/speakers and room acoustics and EQ and recordings themselves. USB is the standard high quality interface for DACs although thunderbolt and even ethernet and other proprietary interfaces are used as well.
Click to expand...
Well, the measure here is the Mac itself as the comparison between what it produces (processes) vs USB DAC of reasonable quality. Similarly, many external DACs certainly do a better job than some AVR DAC/pre. I took a compromise with my desktop and went with powered speakers with 24/96 capability DAC. As you pointed out, the entire system is only good as its weakest link. Small speakers are never going to be great but I can certainly hear the difference between my Mac processing, the USB connection to the speaker, blue tooth to the speaker and analogue RCA connect (Peachtree M24). USB opens up the sound a bit and yes, others too noticed.

When I had home set up for large screen view and for room music, AVR and/or Oppo pre, and a nice modest surround system. It met my needs quite well and certainly, others seem to get a kick watching any kind of movie and listening to everything from Jazz to hard rock and all that is in between.
 
vddobrev said:
Indeed, you are very right! It must be a very bad sample rate conversion! Most of my collection, and as a matter of fact Apple Music Lossless is 24bit/44.1kHz, the standard of CD.

Undoubtedly, the song that we were A/B listening was 24bit/44.1kHz, and to be exact it was Toto's "Gift of Faith" from their album "Tambu". We also sampled other songs from the same album, e.g. "I Will Remember", "If You Belong to Me", and they all sounded degraded.

Edit: Just to note again, even on my iPad Pro 12.9, the same song "Gift of Faith" sounds much better played via AirPlay to my AirPods 2, something I can't explain why...
Click to expand...
Redbook CD is 16/44.1 not 24bit which is part of what makes them sound so bad.
 
phrehdd said:
16/44.1 doesn't have to sound "so bad." Ironically, very accurate recordings don't always sound as good (to the ear) as engineered recordings.
Click to expand...
The truth is, literally no one can tell the difference between the sound of otherwise-identical 24/44 and 16/44 masters in a true blind test. The jury's out for hi-res (96kHz+): I know I certainly can't. The various hi-res albums I own sound better than their CDs, but they also sound just as good when I re-sample the hi-res file down to 16/44, proving they sound better just because the master was better to start with. So I'm not convinced by hi-res either.

But...I've found during 25+ years of being online that literally no one with a strong opinion ever came onto an internet forum and had their opinion successfully changed by some anonymous guy trying to explain the opposite. So I've given up arguing the toss with people on forums, even when they type twaddle. It's not worth the wear and tear on my keyboard nor on my finger joints.

The older I get, the less I care about people who don't want to learn fact from fiction, and the more I concentrate my efforts on teaching those who do.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bob_DM, strawbale, Joe D33 and 2 others
vddobrev said:
Forget Atmos, even speaking about 2 channel audio, why should I use USB DAC to convert to analogue and feed to my receiver via RCA, then my receiver will convert back to digital to apply room corrections and bass management, then convert it yet again to analogue...
Click to expand...
Do whatever you like, but...

Most receivers have somewhat capable DACs, all the in 24/192 range. That doesn't mean your entire signal path is 24/192 and not even 96kHz for that matter. Most "cheap" consumer systems resample to 48kHz when applying room correction, because they lack the processing power to do room correction at higher rates. There are a few notable exceptions from Meridian, Theta Digital, Trinnov Audio and (Steinway) Lyngdorf, all in the $20k+ range with the exception of the Lyngdorf MP50/60 starting at around $13k. All the other systems will resample the >48kHz input signal to 48kHz for processing and once processed back to 96kHz or 192kHz depending on specs. This has been discussed up and down in different specialized forums.

Another reason to use analogue on NAD vs digital inputs. The digital inputs (S/PDIF and HDMI) on NADs of that generation are poor. When set to 0dB you get a massive amount of third harmonic distortion. It has quite a bit of FFT noise floor. Linearity measure shows barely enough headroom for 16 bit, with the input being 24 bits. If you want distortion free audio, you are limited to 70dB or 11.6 bits. If you run a frequency response sweep with 192kHz the response ends at 48kHz (+ a rolloff just under 1dB at the bottom end and at 20kHz).

This is also the case for the regular analogue inputs, however you have 7.1 inputs which are not resampled without room correction (using them as pass-through). The rolloff is gone and the sweep ends at 192kHz as expected.

So if you have the choice between analogue inputs and digital in that generation of NADs, then analogue is giving you the edge for performance.

There are other factors as well of course, such as power output to the speakers, load stability and many more. But focusing on inputs only, that's what you get. Personally I'd add a Trinnov ST-2, utilize the Digital inputs + room correction. In the end, the choice is yours.
 
  • Like
Reactions: entropi, 346 and MajorFubar
MajorFubar said:
Correct. Literally no one can tell the difference between the sound of otherwise-identical 24/44 and 16/44 masters in a true blind test.
Click to expand...
That is true, because many people lack the speaker to reproduce 24 bits of dynamic range. We're talking 144dB and even if you can reproduce this, it can cause hearing loss. 16bit or 96dB can already cause hearing loss over extended periods of time. Add to that the noise floor in untreated rooms which is usually >30dB. You'll be fine. For music, most music is not very dynamic in contrast to movies. But even then, it's usually good enough for THX reference specs @105dB at MLP. This whole sampling rate and bit depth discussion is overrated, at least for normal listening. There are advantages from a signal processing point of view when up-/down-sampling and applying room correction however.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MajorFubar
GrumpyCoder said:
This whole sampling rate and bit depth discussion is overrated, at least for normal listening. There are advantages from a signal processing point of view when up-/down-sampling and applying room correction however.
Click to expand...
Correct, and for the same reason why from a music-production point of view it's often preferential to record and mix in 32-bit or higher: it's literally the same reason why your math teacher would tell you to only round down at the end of the equation and do the inbetween workings at greater decimal places than the answer required. The end result does not need to be more than 16-bit. No one needs 144dB dynamic range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GrumpyCoder
MajorFubar said:
The truth is, literally no one can tell the difference between the sound of otherwise-identical 24/44 and 16/44 masters in a true blind test. The jury's out for hi-res (96kHz+): I know I certainly can't. The various hi-res albums I own sound better than their CDs, but they also sound just as good when I re-sample the hi-res file down to 16/44, proving they sound better just because the master was better to start with. So I'm not convinced by hi-res either.

But...I've found during 25+ years of being online that literally no one with a strong opinion ever came onto an internet forum and had their opinion successfully changed by some anonymous guy trying to explain the opposite. So I've given up arguing the toss with people on forums, even when they type twaddle. It's not worth the wear and tear on my keyboard nor on my finger joints.

The older I get, the less I care about people who don't want to learn fact from fiction, and the more I concentrate my efforts on teaching those who do.
Click to expand...
I’ll be the first to admit that many people can’t hear the difference between an .mp3 file and 24/192 .bwf file. However, I have been a "Production Sound Mixer"(that’s just the union’s name for Y1 pay) for a few decades and most of us sound mixers/audio engineers/music mixers/FOH mixers/monitor mixers/dialogue editors/effects editors/music editors/supervising sound editors,etc can hear the subtle differences between the many things that make important impacts on sound, recorded, live, etc. that’s why we do what we do. Some are better than others and I certainly don’t think I’m the best there is, but I do know that I must be pretty good or I wouldn’t be paid almost double the scale rate. Yea I know I sound cocky and I probably am to an extent but I am definitely not trying to pick a fight with you. Rather, I am just trying to explain where I am coming from and why I have a particular point of view.

I hope you have a happy and safe holiday season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vddobrev
@GrumpyCoder - thanks for taking the time, this was educating. I am not at all prepared to go that route, this an area which I do not want to explore, nor can I afford a Trinnov ST-2.

Thanks to all others that contributed to this thread.

Let me repeat the problem and the solution:

My use case: I have a very good sounding (to me) system that includes NAD T785 Receiver, Mac mini 2014, and Martin Logan speakers. I am using the system for playing Apple Music Lossless and Hi-Res Lossless, as well as Watching movies (multichannel audio).

I wanted to renew the aging Mac mini 2014 and replace it with M1 Mac mini.

Problem: The M1 Mac mini introduced in my system, only supports 48kHz. In addition, it sounds worse via HDMI than the Mac mini 2014.

Solution 1: Add a USB DAC to the system.
Solution 1 Pros: Improve (supposedly) the sound of the M1 mini
Solution 1 Cons: Additional cost; Only 2 channel audio

Solution 2: Go back to the 2014 Mac mini.
Solution 2 Pros: No additional costs, tried and true.
Solution 2 Cons: Mac mini 2014 is aging and will not be supported soon.

I chose solution 2. Problem solved.

The M1 Mac mini will be used for other work, but not media playback via HDMI.

@You’re not me - thanks for your post. I am not a sound engineer, but I appreciate good sound and good mix, thanks to people like you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stx66
vddobrev said:
My use case: I have a very good sounding (to me) system that includes NAD T785 Receiver, Mac mini 2014, and Martin Logan speakers. I am using the system for playing Apple Music Lossless and Hi-Res Lossless, as well as Watching movies (multichannel audio).
Click to expand...
You have achieved what so many of these people that call themselves "Audiophiles" won’t. Everyone hears things differently. Some of the seemingly insignificant details can change the way something sounds like, humidity, barometric pressure, temperature at the venue, the mood you’re in and so many psychoacoustic variables I won’t go into or this would become a dissertation and then there’s the equipment and the structure of your ear. Ok, I’ll stop now.
What is important is that you like the sound you get from your system, not what anyone else thinks. I’m glad you found a quick, easy and low cost fix to the issue you had. Newer does not always mean better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vddobrev
Coming late to this thread, but I think there is a much cheaper solution (one I am using with my Anthem receiver that also does not have USB input). All you need is USB to SPDIF coaxial convertor - a device that will connect to your Mac M1 Mini via USB, and convert this to SPDIF coaxial (also optical but coaxial is better) you can connect to your receiver. I am currently using Musical Fidelity VLink (the original one that only goes up to 24/96, didn't get the updated one that goes to 192kHz). A cost-effective alternative today would be Topping D10s that is a ESS DAC that can also serve as USB to Digital adapter.

Like Musical Fidelity, Topping D10s employs asynchronous USB which means that it controls the clock by telling the computer when to send data, greatly reducing timing errors and ensuing jitter (in fact, some people claim that asynchronous USB is superior to HDMI sonically because HDMI has higher jitter numbers and because noisy video signal flows on the wires very close to audio inside the HTML cable). Of course, this will only work well for 2-channel hi-res files. You need HDMI for multi-channel PCM, where you go back to the aforementioned 48kHz limitation. Does not affect me as I don't really have any hi-res multi-channel PCM files (actually I do, a DVD Audio rip of my Acura Demonstration disk from 2007 - hardly a collection :)).

I wonder if the new M2-based Mac Mini has the same hardware limitation - have we found anything online?
 
  • Like
Reactions: robotica
dglozic said:
Coming late to this thread, but I think there is a much cheaper solution (one I am using with my Anthem receiver that also does not have USB input). All you need is USB to SPDIF coaxial convertor - a device that will connect to your Mac M1 Mini via USB, and convert this to SPDIF coaxial (also optical but coaxial is better) you can connect to your receiver. I am currently using Musical Fidelity VLink (the original one that only goes up to 24/96, didn't get the updated one that goes to 192kHz). A cost-effective alternative today would be Topping D10s that is a ESS DAC that can also serve as USB to Digital adapter.

Like Musical Fidelity, Topping D10s employs asynchronous USB which means that it controls the clock by telling the computer when to send data, greatly reducing timing errors and ensuing jitter (in fact, some people claim that asynchronous USB is superior to HDMI sonically because HDMI has higher jitter numbers and because noisy video signal flows on the wires very close to audio inside the HTML cable). Of course, this will only work well for 2-channel hi-res files. You need HDMI for multi-channel PCM, where you go back to the aforementioned 48kHz limitation. Does not affect me as I don't really have any hi-res multi-channel PCM files (actually I do, a DVD Audio rip of my Acura Demonstration disk from 2007 - hardly a collection :)).

I wonder if the new M2-based Mac Mini has the same hardware limitation - have we found anything online?
Click to expand...
Well we can hope Apple would do better by those more serious about their music and overall audio experience but alas, unless they find a reason (say for ATV etc.) that integrates with their vision. So far, I think the vast majority of people don't realize that they could do better than what they are getting presently.

Your reference to a DAC (digital to analogue converter) such as what Topping offers is a smart choice to get more from the Mini. Similarly, using a network to external device that handles the files is a good option.

My desktop - Studio Max (previously M1 Mini) to Peachtree M24(built in 24/96 DAC) running Audirvana Origin software (check it out for fun...as this software isn't the prettiest but does great with music files of all sorts). Btw, my music is not stored on my computer but in a NAS.
 
phrehdd said:
Your reference to a DAC (digital to analogue converter) such as what Topping offers is a smart choice to get more from the Mini. Similarly, using a network to external device that handles the files is a good option.

My desktop - Studio Max (previously M1 Mini) to Peachtree M24(built in 24/96 DAC) running Audirvana Origin software
Click to expand...

I was actually not mentioning Topping as a DAC here (specifically because op didn't want a DAC route), but using it as asynchronous USB -> SPDIF coaxial adapter.

I presume you are also using USB input on your Peachtree M24 active speakers, thus not hitting the fixed HDMI sample rate. In addition, Audirvana Origin allows you to use exclusive access to M24 DAC, allowing for bit-perfect digital audio stream transfer.
 
@vddobrev I found something promising. All the comments so far implied that the 48kHz limitation was hardware/chipset based. But based on this discussion in apple support website, op (informedandarrogant - :)) suggested that it was actually coming from the software limitation. He implied that the 48Khz playback sample rate was based on the limitation of the built in DAC of M1 mac mini (since the DAC could only handle 48kHz, Mac Mini assumed HDMI can only be decoded at that rate as well).

The workaround that seems promising is that op created a composite audio device, combining 'black hole' virtual device and the external AVR capable of handling hi rez multichannel HDMI audio. Follow the link for details - it looks like he was able to force M1 mini to send 24/96 (or up to 24/192) multi-channel PCM to the receiver over HDMI this way.
 
Last edited:
dglozic said:
@vddobrev I found something promising. All the comments so far implied that the 48kHz limitation was hardware/chipset based. But based on this discussion in apple support website, op (informedandarrogant - :)) suggested that it was actually coming from the software limitation. He implied that the 48Khz playback sample rate was based on the limitation of the built in DAC of M1 mac mini (since the DAC could only handle 48kHz, Mac Mini assumed HDMI can only be decoded at that rate as well).

The workaround that seems promising is that op created a composite audio device, combining 'black hole' virtual device and the external AVR capable of handling hi rez multichannel HDMI audio. Follow the link for details - it looks like he was able to force M1 mini to send 24/96 (or up to 24/192) multi-channel PCM to the receiver over HDMI this way.
Click to expand...

Your link is for an image…from the discussion, I presume.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
  • Like
Reactions: Fozziebear40
Yes, the DAC within the Peachtree does provide up to 24/96 capable playback. I don't believe that the 24/96 DAC is "bit perfect" in handling, but the signal going out via USB could be. We both know that not all 24/96 DACs are created equal. If people want to use the Mac as storage for audio, they would want to bypass everything in the Mac in favour of total outside processing/playback.

There are simple DACs out there such as Dragonfly and similar that can improve audio in most cases and handle higher bitrates. The reason I step outside of iTunes is also because of file formats. I use flac often enough (downloads from HDtracks as example), lossless Apple and odd files not yet converted.

Candidly, I just don't think a "workaround" is needed but acceptance that an additional item is needed to get the job done. Recall that PC world for years used audio cards with software, later external devices that plugged in via USB etc. The proposition was for better sound and handling of different files with ease. I see today no different with Apple. Simply add a DAC externally then on to the AVR/Amp. This is a path of least resistance. I do admit I would love to see a DAC+ in the shape of a Mac Mini for stacking. Perhaps one of those external drives refitted with a DAC would make a nice project. Maybe something like a Schitt DAC or similar would fit in.

(Going from USB to SPDIF Coax is a conversion that some do refer to the unit incorrectly as a DAC but that reference is commonplace as a conversion is being done with the potential for loss. Btw, SPDIF should carry 24/96 but with Apple and some other devices, they follow the old rule that render it to 48 rather than 96. Peachtree has an optical in and I used a nice converter from USB to SPDIF (I think at the time it was an NVidia Shield TV unit) and it rendered the audio at 24/48. I was disappointed and thought the converter was the culprit until I did some reading.)

- dglozic, I don't spend much time as I used to on these topics. If you find flaw in what I say please do share. Things change quickly and what work in the past may have better answers or solutions today. Also, you may want to check out those third party software as I and others have done and other ways to play back PCM files (M2TS/MKV etc.).
 
vddobrev said:
I could not resist but share this:

View attachment 1929504

View attachment 1929506
Click to expand...
Hi @vddobrev - did you ever get any farther with this? I am literally going down the same rat-hole with Apple ... here is something I have posted around .....

Big fan of Apple music but the best I can get into a hi-fi system (NAD M17) is CD quality (44-48K). Anyone figure this out? Here is what I have tried:

  1. Apple 4K - latest and greatest - downscales audio to 48K! It cannot do lossless which is bewildering (which means that Tidal on Apple TV is also useless) considering it is 4K and I have the latest 8K HDMI cables on it. It is a limit of the software?
  2. Streaming from a MAC Studio to the M17 (Airplay) will not go beyond 48K! (So illogical!) The music app on Studio does not stream lossless (so what is the point?)
  3. From an iPAD (latest Pro), same thing - drops to 48K! (When I select NAD M17 for output)
  4. I tried an optical coax from the studio to the NAD - same, 48K.
I ensured I was playing the "apple master" lossless version (I use Hotel California).

But with Tidal:

  1. BluOS I can stream in 88K with their masters content to the NAD. 88K no problem.
  2. From the Tidal app on the Mac studio - I can select M17 and it streams at 88K
  3. On the iPad - same - Tidal app streams just fine in 88K to the NAD
So I am really confused .. what is the point of apple music lossless if it cannot be transported anywhere?
 
mweening said:
Hi @vddobrev - did you ever get any farther with this? I am literally going down the same rat-hole with Apple ... here is something I have posted around .....

Big fan of Apple music but the best I can get into a hi-fi system (NAD M17) is CD quality (44-48K). Anyone figure this out? Here is what I have tried:

  1. Apple 4K - latest and greatest - downscales audio to 48K! It cannot do lossless which is bewildering (which means that Tidal on Apple TV is also useless) considering it is 4K and I have the latest 8K HDMI cables on it. It is a limit of the software?
  2. Streaming from a MAC Studio to the M17 (Airplay) will not go beyond 48K! (So illogical!) The music app on Studio does not stream lossless (so what is the point?)
  3. From an iPAD (latest Pro), same thing - drops to 48K! (When I select NAD M17 for output)
  4. I tried an optical coax from the studio to the NAD - same, 48K.
I ensured I was playing the "apple master" lossless version (I use Hotel California).

But with Tidal:

  1. BluOS I can stream in 88K with their masters content to the NAD. 88K no problem.
  2. From the Tidal app on the Mac studio - I can select M17 and it streams at 88K
  3. On the iPad - same - Tidal app streams just fine in 88K to the NAD
So I am really confused .. what is the point of apple music lossless if it cannot be transported anywhere?
Click to expand...
Yes, my solution was to go back to a 2018 Intel Mac mini. I also use an app called LosslessSwitcher that helps to switch the Audio MIDI Device to the same rate of the playing song.

The new Apple M1 chip is locked at 48KHz.

Music app does not support exclusive audio mode, it will only output to the system selected device for output, hence it will only do 48KHz, no more no less.

Tidal, on the other hand you can select the output device within the app, and hence bypass the system output device limitations.
 
@mweening Look at all the supported rates on a 2018 Intel Mac mini connected to my NAD T778:

Screenshot 2023-02-20 at 22.37.27.png


And this little program detects what rate is the played song in the Music app and switches the Audio MIDI format:
github.com

GitHub - vincentneo/LosslessSwitcher: Automated Apple Music Lossless Sample Rate Switching for Audio Devices on Macs.

Automated Apple Music Lossless Sample Rate Switching for Audio Devices on Macs. - vincentneo/LosslessSwitcher
github.com github.com

I am keeping my 2018 Mac mini forever for music playback.
Hope this helps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mweening
Thanks @vddobrev after reading through a lot of posts .. I figured out that if I want high-res I have to hard connect. No way around it .. and Apple TV doesn't support it (even 4K). Which is super annoying - when Tidal supports it natively - and works great - zero hassle.
 
I am fully accepting the fact Apple wants music done their way. Well I like the Mini/Studio and have no desire to do it the Apple way. Better to get USB out and go to an external resource that is fully capable. Simply use the Mac as storage and in some instance, apps that will do well by sending out the file "as is" rather than processed.

I have various file formats beyond Apple's 'approved' list and also they include 24/96, 24/48, 16/44.1 etc. For me, I used Audirvana Origin along with powered speakers that allow for digital in (USB), optical in, Bluetooth, and analogue. i can play up to 24/96 as well as items such as MQA files quite nicely.

I really do think it is a better way than fussing over Apple's (to paraphrase Ford) you can have any colour you want as long as it's black.

There are DACs that are not overly expensive, combo DAC/Pre/Amp etc. that can go to passive speakers. The list is long and there are some nice apps out there to master your files.
 
Thanks. I am sticking with Tidal until Apple solves the issue with the APPLE TV 4K and Airplay to get beyond 48K. Tidal to my NAD does native by supporting streaming up to 192K and the MQA remastering.

I don't want to be hardwiring a single Apple PC to my receiver - I want to be able to do it on any device. Tidal allows me to do it on the app on the any MAC OS, or iPad via BluOS.

Come on Apple .. hate having to music subscriptions!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back