Mac OS X, itunes and Apple fail audiophiles and prosumers

[WinterMute]

It's not about the encoding, because that's not an issue with open source stuff like max lieing around, but that they've changed a bit transparent player into one that is no longer.

Seshi - some disagree with me, but you're just getting slated.

For sure, but nobody who really cares about what their audio sounds like is going to entrust it to software and standard PC/mac hardware.

That was all I meant really.

RADAR is still the best sounding audio hardware recorder on the market, shame it;s such a biatch to use.

 

[Tarkovsky]

There are a number of reasons computers can be better for digital audio to be found at http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue22/nugent.htm. It's certainly a good way of getting into audiophile listening. Of course until everything at 192/24 or at least 96/24 that's not that much of an issue. It's the convenience of it really. However in the UK vinyl is quite expensive, which is why we try to get the best we can from our CD kit.

 

[Tarkovsky]

Looks like those legends at sbooth.org have provided me with an answer - it's called 'play'. Sounds pretty good so far. I think even the volume levelling is well implemented, though I'd rather reach for my remote.

 

[Diatribe]

Now that everyone has contributed their views on anything but the original news can we get bacl on topic please?

And besides, it is a bug in iTunes that hasn't been there before so I think iTunes/Apple fails audiophiles is exaggerating it a lot.
Just post the bug on RADAR or give them feedback so it can be fixed in the next version. Until then I agree it sucks, but I guess people should have noticed that when they first upgraded iTunes versions that the sound quality degraded.
Either way, just write them. **** happens.

 

[Consultant]

I hate to break up your disagreements but has it every occurred to you that iTunes wasn't made for the audiophile but for the average joe?

In addition to superior usability that the average joe can figure out how to use, lots of professionals such as DJs and radio stations use iTunes for organization of their songs due to the superior cataloging and searching ability of iTunes.

 

[Sesshi]

It's certainly the default best choice if you can't be bothered to look for anything better - and that's what it comes to really. Most people can't be bothered when something reasonable is served up to them on a plate.

 

[kolax]

iTunes is designed for people to listen to music on their home computer using average speakers. He fails to realise that.

Also, professional musicians don't replay recorded tracks in iTunes do they? Because it isn't a professional application. It isn't designed for that.

I stream music via iTunes to my Airport Express where I have a 1000 watt amp connected via optical, pumping the blood to an array of high quality speakers.

The sound amazes me, and I tend to notice little things.

Maybe this only applies to the optical out on the Mac's rather than AirTunes?

 

[Tarkovsky]

Wattage is irrelevant. Is this how it was sold to you? On the basis of numbers? Wattage, audio quality, and ability to drive speakers do not necessarily correlate.

On the subject of itunes
The fender bassman wasn't designed as a guitar amp...
So what?
It has the best interface of any audio/library software I've seen, and IT USED TO BE BIT TRANSPARENT. The point is, it is no longer. Which as I have mentioned before is rather annoying.

 

[kolax]

Wattage is irrelevant. Is this how it was sold to you? On the basis of numbers? Wattage, audio quality, and ability to drive speakers do not necessarily correlate.

Where did I say that the wattage is what provided me with sound quality? I was merely saying that I have a decent sound system and that I do not suffer any quality loss from using iTunes.

Care.

 

[Sesshi]

iTunes is designed for people to listen to music on their home computer using average speakers. He fails to realise that.

He may fail to realise that, but is there another option on OS X? No. Is there another option for Windows? Tonnes. It's why OS X isn't the ideal platform to start with for serious listeners who want more digital convenience in their life.

 

[lord patton]

Another opinion thrown on the pile:

I've got a modest audiophile quality setup (B&W speakers driven by Bryston amps). Sometimes I play vinyl through it, mostly I play iTunes through it, from the analog out on the PB.

And you know what? It never makes a lick of difference to me. I can play highly-compressed mp3s of analog recordings that Louis Armstrong made in the 20s and it fills my world with joy. I can play some Donald Fagen recorded digitally (16 bits and no dithering ) in the 80s and I like it. I can compare Heifetz's Beethoven Violin Concerto to Itzhak Perlman's version and learn from it. None of that stopped when I upgraded to iT 7.5

My brother has a $100,000 stereo (Martin Logan, Ayre Acoustics, Kimber Kable, Proceed front-end blah blah blah) but he never hears live music and never listens to music for pleasure. But what does that matter—he can speak the language of audiophilia well enough to be hired by the Robb Report to do reviews of record players. Doesn't seem to matter to them that he's never actually owned a record player.

I've got nothing against audiophiles. God bless 'em, their efforts trickle down to all of us. But if your ratio of listening to music v. evaluating equipment is anything south of 20:1, you're engaging in what might be a legitmate, enjoyable hobby, but is certainly not to be called "music loving."

 

[Sesshi]

I'd agree partly to that. The indicator of the problem with many audiophiles - even those, perhaps especially those who do reviews - is for example that they can spend ages explaining jitter to you, then write up some review that's completely subjective without any real frame of reference. Most audiophile reviews qualify as stand-alone prose for that reason. There is no validity of opinion without consistency.

That aside, in the context of software it's not all about the sound but what you can do with the music, and how you can access it. For a musicphile, I'd say that - the versatility and ease of use in terms of actual practical usability of those things without frustration - is also as important. While it has decent usability for casual use, iTunes lags behind superior PC software in that respect, as does Front Row. It also extends beyond the immediate computer listening experience. You're more or less locked in to syncing with the iPod, so your only choice is with a non-market-leading (in terms of sound quality) player for example. And the way Front Row presents music in a home environment, while acceptable, leaves something to be desired when compared with some other (invariably Windows) solutions.

I don't think anyone is ultimately arguing that the OSX/iTunes setup is anything other than OK, in terms of sound coming out of it as much as anything else - it is perfectly usable for 'the average joe' as said before by others. But when you want more control over your music and how you listen to it as both a serious audiophile or musicphile might, that is when it lags behind.

That wouldn't be a bad thing if there were other superior options, since different people can opt for what they feel comfortable with - but there are no other real options, and that brings me back to what I've effectively said about three times already, that OS X is not a platform for musicphiles and audiophiles despite it being a perfectly viable music production platform. And in that way, it does indeed fail 'prosumers' and audiophiles.

...This attitude to iTunes some of you guys have really is like arguing for Bose

 

[c-Row]

I would rather enjoy my music than my audio hardware setup. Maybe I am not audiophile enough...

 

[Diatribe]

That wouldn't be a bad thing if there were other superior options, since different people can opt for what they feel comfortable with - but there are no other real options, and that brings me back to what I've effectively said about three times already, that OS X is not a platform for musicphiles and audiophiles despite it being a perfectly viable music production platform. And in that way, it does indeed fail 'prosumers' and audiophiles.

...This attitude to iTunes some of you guys have really is like arguing for Bose

But still you don't give any examples. iTunes DID have a bit transparent output. That with a digital out and a good D/A converter is pretty much all you need as a source to be as audiophile as you want (well minus the CD spray, etc.). The rest is in the speakers and amp(s).

Sorry for being harsh, but saying OS X isn't a feasible option for audiophiles is just complete and utter crap until you actually have some proof instead of empty opinions.

 

[Tarkovsky]

Please check the links I have posted.

I think os x was better, which is why I switched from winblows. However, we're tied to itunes. So when they mess up, it makes life very difficult. The inbuilt sample rate conversion in os x, is apparently awful, I don't like the sound of it anyway.

 

[Diatribe]

Please check the links I have posted.

I think os x was better, which is why I switched from winblows. However, we're tied to itunes. So when they mess up, it makes life very difficult. The inbuilt sample rate conversion in os x, is apparently awful, I don't like the sound of it anyway.

As I said, just write them feedback. Not much else we can do.

http://www.apple.com/feedback/itunesapp.html

 

[Eric Piercey]

Very entertaining post. I'm one of the unwashed masses I'm afraid, one to whom Bose might even be an upgrade but nevertheless -the geekdom has been most pleasing. Anyway- it sounds to me like 7.5 screwed the pooch. Fortunately, iTunes has an update every 6 hours or so, one of which will return iT to its former glory. The big question is of whether this is intentional on Apple's part, and if so why and what can we do to convince them otherwise.

 

[Loge]

For a musicphile, I'd say that - the versatility and ease of use in terms of actual practical usability of those things without frustration - is also as important.

What on earth is a "musicphile" ?? Never heard that before in 35+ years of listening to music.

 

[Tarkovsky]

Seshi - There's nothing wrong with arguing for bose. It's just that they don't manufacture audiophile hi-fi but fashionable consumer orientated hi-fi, like an ipod sound dock. 'Subjectivity' is not the same as invalidity, or incredibility.

-Save the poor sample rate conversion I still don't see what your argument is against OSX, considering that it can be bit perfect - what else would you ask of an audiophile system?
-It doesn't crash, get viruses, run at 1/5th the speed of XP and there's loads of good free software available for it

 

[ocbo41]

I grabbed my iTunes 7.4 out of time machine and put it in a separate folder in the apps folder...problem solved

I tired both 7.4 and 7.5 and I honestly cant tell the difference using 44khz .aiff files ripped with soundbooth CS3 and I'm using a decent headphone (Sennheiser 280 Pro).

Does this effect the M-Audio soundcards or just the onboard audio?

 

[Tarkovsky]

Found a copy

http://mac.oldapps.com/itunes.php

Wicked webs site.
Science bless the internet!

 

[cschreppel]

Very interesting thread -- lots of valid points on all fronts. I work as a recording engineer and tend to enjoy high quality audio when I'm listening to music at home through my recording rig (mainly used for recording overdubs, mixing, and mastering).

Anyway, I have my MacBook's output sent to my monitoring station via 1/8" to RCA as I keep my music on my MacBook -- I have another dedicated recording computer. The system is pretty transparent, so what I'm hearing is the analog outputs from the MacBook -- haven't messed with the Digital Outs much.

About 70% of my music is ripped from CD into the Apple Lossless format. Even so, the AAC and any MP3's still sound alright through my Dynaudio BM5a's. I haven't really noticed that much of a difference through various versions of iTunes.

In fact, I imported a .wav file that I just mixed into iTunes and had the original mix outputting from my iMac in Pro Tools through my audio interface -- toggling back and forth between them.

To be honest, there isn't that much of a difference -- in fact, when I could line up the iTunes and Pro Tools playback, I couldn't tell the difference.

Also, listening on my Sennheiser HD580's, I couldn't tell the difference.

One thing I have noticed, however, is that the D/A on the new iPod Touch and iPhones seem to be of higher quality than the previous generations.

Just my two cents.

 

[hempcamp]

Well, there's a simple way to end this protracted argument. If someone who actually cares would just compare a hash of the bits coming out of the digital optical output (via iTunes 7.5) to the the source (CD, digital file, whatever) and spare us the semantical back-and-forth.

I notice no difference between iTunes versions (through a Headroom Total BitHead amp and AKG K-701, Sony V6, and Etymotic ER-6 headphones).

--Chris

 

[Sesshi]

But still you don't give any examples. iTunes DID have a bit transparent output. That with a digital out and a good D/A converter is pretty much all you need as a source to be as audiophile as you want (well minus the CD spray, etc.). The rest is in the speakers and amp(s).

Sorry for being harsh, but saying OS X isn't a feasible option for audiophiles is just complete and utter crap until you actually have some proof instead of empty opinions.

Seems like I'm not the party that has to provide 'proof'. I have - at length in this thread - related to superior solutions under Windows and why the quality of the audio output is not the only issue at hand as far as the listening experience is concerned.

Perhaps if you actually had experience of the alternatives it would not be so difficult for me to get some information through to that skull of yours. I'm pretty much typed out here in terms of the information.

Specific products? I'd say check out j.River Media Center first, then look at Vista Media Center. As I said there are many other alternatives but these will be a start. I'm assuming that you have state-of-the-art Windows / audio hardware, as do I on both Apple and Windows sides, to make a valid comparison and to have a valid opinion.

The overall listening experience encompasses both interfacing with pro and high-end consumer audio hardware, the ease of access to the music and the control over said music in terms of a high-level domestic listening experience, and other potential listening situations such as in media syncing with portable players for the audiophile on the go. The Apple solution excels for the undemanding, middle-of-the-road user. It should not, however, satisfy the more demanding audio / musicphile. That's it from me in this thread.

 

[Audiofile]

This is a long thread that wonders all over the place. I will assume the issue about iTunes not being an audiophile solution is still at hand. So, I will give my two cents on this one.

iTunes 7.5 is an audiophile solution that can output bit-perfect audio. Stereophile and the engineers at Benchmark Media Systems have been discussing the version 7.5 issue for about a month and they have provided the solution.


I am not tying to shamelessly plug my own site, but I have discussed this several times and will point out two of the articles regarding this topic.

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/node/87

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/node/78