Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 79

Thread: iTunes or Looney Tunes? The great music server debate.

  1. #51
    Member Sponsor [WBF Founding Member] FrantzM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    6,469
    Hi

    Let's not drift too much toward router ... Yet I would say that for such Apple is not your friend .. D-Link , Linksys and Netgear are.. With D-Link a solid and somewhat under-appreciated performer.

    Let's re-center toward the Apple vs Windows debate... where I think for once one would be wise to stick to Windoze , specially W7 ... There are out there a plethora of Media player... No don't use Windows Media Player .. NOt worth it
    Use rather
    Media Monkey ( free) or Foobar but I am repeating myself ... I am willing to try JRC... I cannot really see what it will bring to my table since I already have bit-perfect through foobar ...

    ANother question .. Why Amarra ? Does it really sound better ? I can't see why it should and so far I hear no differences between Media Monkey and Foobar on the Windows PC....
    Last edited by FrantzM; 08-01-2010 at 05:26 PM.
    Frantz
    __________________________________

    "For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
    —Carl Sagan
    "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius -- and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction."
    — E. F. Schumacher
    (mis-attributed to A. Einstein)

  2. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by FrantzM View Post
    Hi

    Let's not drift too much toward router ... Yet I would say that for such Apple is not your friend .. D-Link , Linksys and Netgear are.. With D-Link a solid and somewhat under-appreciated performer.

    Let's re-center toward the Apple vs Windows debate... where I think for once one would be wise to stick to Windoze , specially W7 ... There are out there a plethora of Media player... No don't use Windows Media Player .. NOt worth it
    Use rather
    Media Monkey ( free) or Foobar but I am repeating myself ... I am willing to try JRC... I cannot really see what it will bring to my table since I already have bit-perfect through foobar ...

    ANother question .. Why Amarra ? Does it really sound better ? I can't see why it should and so far I hear no differences between Media Monkey and Foobar on the Windows PC....
    I've tried both Amarra and Pure Music and I don't hear a difference. But people hear what they hear.

    P

  3. #53
    Site Founder And Administrator Steve Williams's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Coto De Caza, California on the 13th fairway of the south golf course
    Posts
    26,827
    Does Amarra running on top of itunes allow for HiRez files
    Steve Williams
    aka oneobgyn
    There's ALWAYS another Steve Williams BUT there's only "oneobgyn"
    USA Dealer of Center Stage Feet and owner of PitchPerfect Sound (www.pitchperfectsound.com)
    Dealer Lamm Electronics
    My System

  4. #54
    Computer Audio [Technical Expert]
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    860
    iTunes (or better QuickTime) plays all audio according to the setting in the audio midi panel.
    Amarra and Pure Music play everything at its native sample rate.
    If they do have an advantage, this is probably the one as SRC is not a trivial thing.
    This is a nice one: http://src.infinitewave.ca/
    They compare the SRC of various re-samplers.
    Check a 64 bit one like iZotope.
    In Win7 you can get automatic sample rate switching when using WASAPI.
    Obvious in both cases the hardware must support the sample rate, bit depth and number of channels of the source.

  5. #55
    Addicted to Best! Old Listener's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    SF Bay area
    Posts
    372

    your choice of player s/w depend son what you want from it

    Quote Originally Posted by FrantzM View Post
    Let's re-center toward the Apple vs Windows debate... where I think for once one would be wise to stick to Windoze , specially W7 ... There are out there a plethora of Media player... No don't use Windows Media Player .. NOt worth it
    Use rather
    Media Monkey ( free) or Foobar but I am repeating myself ... I am willing to try JRC... I cannot really see what it will bring to my table since I already have bit-perfect through foobar ...
    ..
    Some audiophiles see PC based audio as just a way to get better sound quality - a change of transport. For me, the real value is in the new functionality it brings. Player software differs in the features provided, in the details of how they work and in the user interface you use.

    In my case, using more than the lowest common denominator tags was important. Most of music collection is classical music and other genres where both Composer and Performer are important. I tried a number of player programs over a period of months to develop a thorough understanding of what I wanted and to find software that would deliver what I wanted.

    Bill

  6. #56
    Some audiophiles see PC based audio as just a way to get better sound quality - a change of transport.
    A good reason. If there were any reason to believe it could improve sound quality, I'd be tempted. There's not. And I don't hear it.


    In my case, using more than the lowest common denominator tags was important. Most of music collection is classical music and other genres where both Composer and Performer are important. I tried a number of player programs over a period of months to develop a thorough understanding of what I wanted and to find software that would deliver what I wanted.
    iTunes supports composer and artist. Same thing. I think the choice of Apple vs PC should have to do with the operating system, the human interface, the available software, etc. It should be about the computer. Music playback is not a demanding function for contemporary computer. It's not even close. Even an outdated Mac or PC can handle it while multifunctioning quite well. Pick the computer that suits you and play music on it as one of its many functions. The functional differences between iTunes and Media Monkey are few compared to the differences between W7 and OSX.

    P

  7. #57
    Member Sponsor [WBF Founding Member] rblnr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    NYC/NJ
    Posts
    1,884
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Williams View Post
    Does Amarra running on top of itunes allow for HiRez files
    Yes, and so does Squeezebox FYI.

    One possible advantage of computer audio via USB is the use of asynchronous DACs that control the timing of the computer feed.

    iTunes supports composer and artist. Same thing. I think the choice of Apple vs PC should have to do with the operating system, the human interface, the available software, etc
    Agreed. And that's why I'm a hardcore Mac guy. May be that W7 has closed the interface/ease of use/it just works gap, but this was not the case for me with the thirty or so prior versions of Windows.

    As for Apple routers, I've owned several as well as some D-link and Netgear stuff. I don't find their performance any better, in fact, their range is not outstanding (maybe one of the five new antenna engineers will work on routers!), but again, they just work and the Airport Utility makes them simple to re-configure. Haven't used them in a few years, but the Netgear/D-link web based software was a confusing disaster, and though not a programmer, I'm not exactly a tech moron either.

  8. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    16,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Phelonious Ponk View Post
    I think the choice of Apple vs PC should have to do with the operating system, the human interface, the available software, etc.
    "etc" should also include the infinite range of hardware that is available to Windows PC users. That is a key consideration for people like me.

    It should be about the computer. Music playback is not a demanding function for contemporary computer. It's not even close. Even an outdated Mac or PC can handle it while multifunctioning quite well.
    That's true although until recently, you couldn't easily build a platform that was cool and quiet because of the high power consumption of the CPU even when doing nothing.

    The functional differences between iTunes and Media Monkey are few compared to the differences between W7 and OSX.

    P
    I am not following this comment. You can run iTunes on Windows. If that is the sole function of this music server (in its playback mode), what is it that is different about it when running iTunes on both? And what is hard about that difference?

  9. #59
    Addicted to Best! Old Listener's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    SF Bay area
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by Phelonious Ponk View Post
    A good reason. If there were any reason to believe it could improve sound quality, I'd be tempted. There's not. And I don't hear it.
    P
    I was using "PC" in a generic way. The statement was an introduction to a discussion of functionality and not a claim of superior sound quality.

    > iTunes supports composer and artist

    A bit of context. FranzM said

    >> I am willing to try JRC... I cannot really see what it will bring to my table since I already have
    >> bit-perfect through foobar ...

    And I responded that PC playback offered more than a potential sound quality improvement. I offered using tags as an example of increased functionality in PC playback. And I pointed out that different players had different features. I offered the example of using Composer and performer information. This was all addressed to FranzM and none of it was about Windows versus Mac OSX.

    Since you brought up iTunes support for Composer tag values, i'll comment on my experience. When I experimented with iTunes (v4.7x), the Composer tag was filled out from the online tag database iTunes used. However, you couldn't display Composer values in a browser pane the way you could use genre, Artist and Album tag values.

    My normal way to arrange classical CDs was by Composer, then Work name and then by Artist. I wanted be able to browse in the same order (Composer->Work Name->Artist) in my music player software. While iTunes nominally supported the Composer tag, it was completely inadequate for my purpose.

    When new versions of iTunes appeared, I checked to see if support for the Composer tag had improved. Not luck until a few months ago. I read that you could use the Composer values in a browser pane. However, by then I was happily using all sorts of great features in JRMC than iTunes didn't have. (For example, multiple views selecting files as I wanted with different browser panes, different tags displayed and a different sort order for each view.) I didn't bother

    iTunes may now allow me to browse using the Composer tag values in a Browser Pane. In the meantime, the competition has moved along much further. I now use a sub-genre tag to reduce the number of works for Composers like Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and Dvorak. I use a version Tag to separate reissues from earlier versions or mono performances from stereo. Any tag can be used in a browser pane in JRMC. I use features in JRMC that aren't in iTunes. I'd be an idiot to settle for iTunes on a Mac.

    The whole point is that in the Windows world, you have a chance to figure out what you want from software and then find an application that fits. In the Mac world, your options are far more limited.

    > The functional differences between iTunes and Media Monkey are few compared to the differences
    > between W7 and OSX.

    The differences between iTunes and JRMC are real and significant to me.

    And what are these differences between W7 and OSX that are significant?

    Bill
    Last edited by Old Listener; 09-30-2010 at 10:19 PM.

  10. #60
    The functional differences between iTunes and Media Monkey are few compared to the differences between W7 and OSX.

    P
    I am not following this comment. You can run iTunes on Windows. If that is the sole function of this music server (in its playback mode), what is it that is different about it when running iTunes on both? And what is hard about that difference?
    I think I was just being inarticulate, Amir. I was really only trying to say that it is easy to get great digital audio from either platform, so the Mac/PC decision should probably be made for other reasons -- OS, price, hardware needs all qualify.

    And what are these differences W7 and OSX that are significant?
    I can't really say, Old Listener. Even though there is a W7 system sitting just a few feet away from my Mac, I don't know it well enough to detail the differences. Like I said before, W7 may have addressed all the problems I had in the past, I really can't say. At this point it's just burned fingers. If, after a couple of more generations, I'm still getting reports that Windows is working as well as OSX, I may give it a shot, but that's not consistent with my experience with W95 or XP.

    P

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Music Server Project
    By PNWAS in forum The Pacific Northwest Audio Society Forum
    Replies: 195
    Last Post: 04-02-2012, 11:32 AM
  2. Music Server my way
    By Wardsweb in forum Computer Based Music Server Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-22-2011, 07:16 PM
  3. New Classical Music Server
    By RBFC in forum Computer Based Music Server Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-31-2011, 10:18 PM
  4. The Great Cable Debate
    By Steve Williams in forum General Audio Forum
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 07-24-2010, 04:38 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •