Over the previous pages I'd come to the conclusion that the two software players were sonically too close to truly separate and that a choice should be based on the feature set you desired and the budget you felt was acceptable.
#Audirvana vs amarra full#
I was unexpectedly able to over a few weeks deepen my comparisons against Pure Music thanks to a far more resolving full Ocellia system I happened to have on review in my music room. Reading Paul Candy's report on JPlay had me suddenly realize that I owed our readers a quick follow-up on Audirvana. I don't know if I would because I'm loving Pure Music a lot at the moment.This review page is supported in part by the sponsors whose ad banners are displayed below Sound quality wise I find A2+ and PM to be on par.well at least to my ears. The ability to hear Spotify (Youtube included) through Pure Music is very nice. I was looking for an app that plays music much better than iTunes but at the same time uses the iTunes database and also allow 3rd party music streamers like Spotify to tap into their sound enhancing software.Īudirvana 2+ sounds really good but creates it's own folder when use as stand alone and does not cater for music streaming from Spotify to tap into their software.
I also subscribed to Spotify Premium because for a low fee I get to sample a vast selection of songs and tunes from all genres. I have so much fun just switching between the 3 headphones although I much prefer hd650, dt880 and m50x in that order. I have a JDS Lab o2+odac connected via USB to the iMac and my headphones are Beyerdynamic dt880 pro, Audio Technica ath m50x and Sennheiser hd650. I have an iMac with 1tb of storage and it's used mainly for music playback. My entire CD collection is held in iTunes ripped in Apple Lossless format.
#Audirvana vs amarra plus#
I've been trying out Audirvana 2 Plus and Pure Music for a week. I ended up buying Amarra after resisting for the past 5 years. I finally got around to having a session with Pure Music and Amarra the improvement was immediately apparent.The brittle edge disappeared with PM or Amarra (or even iTunes alone) and returned as soon as Audirvana Play was used. I've since switched to a Soekris DAM1021 diy dac, and was finding that DAC was sounding a little bit too thin and bright. I was running A+ on a system that was sounding a bit dark due to the DAC and it was clearly better than Pure Music and Amarra in that setup. On a system that is slightly dark and warm it will come across better detailed and sharper focus. Compared with iTunes, Pure Music and Amarra, Audirvana sounds slightly thin, bright and forward. It really depends on your system//DAC but Audirvana has a decidedly different tonal presentation in my system. Tried Amarra, Bitperfect, Fidelia and keep going back to Audivarna. You need a DAC that will accept at least 24bit and preferably 32bit to make digital level control work well. Yet the effect of different dither settings is very, very audible when running DAC direct into power amp and using plenty of attenuation.Ģ4-bit DACs may not even need dithering – or perhaps need only very simple random dither.ġ6bits and digital volume control = a very bad idea.Īs the above page says, you " lose resolution and get more noise!" My DAC is definitely a 16-bit DAC but my data stream from Audirvana via Audiophilleo is going out at 24 bits. Like you say, dithering at the 24th bit is kind of pointless in every normal circumstance I can think of. It's hard to find authoritative confirmation of this, but the impression I get from both reading and experimenting is that the dither being applied by Audirvana during live playback with digital volume attenuation is being done at the 16-bit level.
0 kommentar(er)
