#Bitperfect vs audirvana how to#
#Bitperfect vs audirvana pro#
#Bitperfect vs audirvana software#
#Bitperfect vs audirvana trial#

ITunes is a fantastic piece of software and ditching it for a whole new application would be silly.

I ultimately decided to go with BitPerfect because it integrates perfectly with iTunes, and it was also the most affordable option. Amarra, Decibel, and Aurivana are three examples. There are actually many apps on the market that promise to do the exact same thing as BitPerfect. BitPerfect acts as the middleman and does its best to transfer perfect data between the music library and the DAC. In digital audio, jitter and interference can cause imperfect streaming of data to the DAC, which can be perceived as degradation in sound quality. The DAC takes those 0’s an 1’s and converts it into an electrical signal that can be amplified and heard. The audio file is streamed from the hard drive to a DAC (digital to analog converter). Here’s what happens behind the scenes when you press play in iTunes. I needed that remaining minuscule fraction of sound quality, and that’s how I found BitPerfect. I had this strange idea that iTunes was lying to me and delivered only 99.999% of the maximum possible sound quality in my library. A few recent purchases, which included an AudioQuest DragonFly USB DAC and a pair of Shure SE846s, successfully put into another one of those maximum sound quality moods that approximately 0.001% of the world’s population experience at any point in their lives. Yes, I am aware that this sounds incredibly nerdy.

#Bitperfect vs audirvana how to#

But the contrary is not a problem.I had a rare day off a few weeks ago, and decided the goal for the day would be to figure out how to maximize my Mac’s sound quality. My only suggestion is not to make the comparison by quit only each app.īefore listening A+ it's better to restart the Mac after listening by iTunes. For example: J river is more powerfull than Foobar for doing any kind of internal processing (Volume, room correction, resample.) The only real difference between audio players is his 'Internal Processing'. Has anyone else had this experience or am I suffering a hearing disease that I just found about? I switched over to Audirvana (with all the requisite recommended settings, including connecting my usb cable to its own hi-speed port) and, well, I dont get it.ĭo I have to perform this A/B'ng in an anechoic chamber? At 5000 feet? At a certain ambient temperature? Or maybe I need to go back in time to when I was 20 and had superior hearing.

In fact, this morning I started with iTunes and I thought, damn, this sounds pretty good. The Audirvana and iTunes sound equally well. I'm using a cheap USB cable between my Mac and Dac.

#Bitperfect vs audirvana trial#

I'm about two days into my trial version of the latest version of Audirvana and I've been trying to A/B it and the latest version of iTunes playing a mixture of AAC, Apple Lossless and HDTracks Stones stuff.

#Bitperfect vs audirvana pro#

This is running from a Macbook Pro through a Schiit Audio Modi right into powered PSB bookshelf speakers (just a basic home-office setup, but still illustrates how iTunes can provide good clarity for SOME things, while when the bits start to contain music more complex by nature, it can choke under pressure) The difference in clarity of the bass solos is also notable. I find with the former examples the detail of frequencies is much more there with bitPerfect, and with iTunes alone the bass and drums can sound kind of muddy, and the frequencies in the lead passages not very refined. I don't really hear any difference with Louis Armstrong remasters or Neil Young's Harvest. For example, two of the albums that I can easily hear a difference with are the Oscar Peterson album with Roy Hargrove and Ralph Moore, as well as Red by King Crimson. I have to agree that iTunes with bitPerfect running is the best solution, but I only notice the difference bitPerfect provides with certain kinds of music.