[Zoom25]

   
I have an HTC One (M7) and use Remote for iTunes (Google Play Store).  Works WAAAYYY better than the Apple remote app on iOS - no kidding, it's more responsive and doesn't disconnect you from the remote iTunes when the screen goes to sleep, which is really annoying with the Apple version.
 
Just be aware that this only works for Audirvana in iTunes integration mode, but this combination is my most used digital source and it's very robust with my headless Mac Mini.

Thanks. I'll be sure to get that app.

 

[miceblue]

Not being able to drag 'n drop your files into the library totally kills A+ 2.0 for me.

That's exactly why I haven't upgraded to A+ 2.0 yet. I drag-n-drop stuff on A+ 1.5 all the time since it makes it easy to create on-the-fly playlists.

 

[Silent One]

 No drag-n-drop...in 2015 2014? I was just fixin' to upgrade to v2.0
 
Been satisfied with the current version but would love the new library management and interface.

 

[bpcans]

That's exactly why I haven't upgraded to A+ 2.0 yet. I drag-n-drop stuff on A+ 1.5 all the time since it makes it easy to create on-the-fly playlists.

:blink:  No drag-n-drop...in 2015 2014? I was just fixin' to upgrade to v2.0

Been satisfied with the current version but would love the new library management and interface.

I here you guys. I purchased Audirvana 2.0 today and I can't get it to add my license file for the full version. But when I heard my FLAC recordings of Diane Krall I had to sit back and remember that I'm getting it for the sound of the music and not for the ease of operation.

 

[Silent One]

@bpcans  

 

[bpcans]

@bpcans
  

Thanks Silent One. Like my girlfriend I needed some validation. $80 for music player software that my MacBook Pro, though obviously not of the same quality, already has would seem really crazy to anybody not into this hobby.

 

[thecourier]

Is anyone using Clementine music player? Been sick of iTunes. Need to try something different

 

[Kiats]

I here you guys. I purchased Audirvana 2.0 today and I can't get it to add my license file for the full version. But when I heard my FLAC recordings of Diane Krall I had to sit back and remember that I'm getting it for the sound of the music and not for the ease of operation.

Good for you! Enjoy the music!

 

[Currawong]

I'm thinking of getting a Mac Mini as a music server. I am using my MacBook Air at the moment (which I then unplug and take to work) but I'm not sure it is ideal. A dedicated machine I could where I can install an SSD and disable absolutely everything unnecessary I'm thinking might be a better option.
 
Quote:

I'm trying to make the comparisons between media players controlled, but I don't know if what I'm hearing is a brain bias, or if the differences are legitimate. I recorded the audio straight out of my Geek Out from the bit-perfect line-out connection while playing audio samples in Audirvana Plus or Amarra. I used Audacity 2.0.6 on another computer as the recorder and I recorded at 24/88.2 format. With the following recordings, I can't detect any differences in sound, so I'm not sure why I think I'm hearing differences between media players.

 
But how are you playing them back? Going through that whole chain you surely are going to lose whatever improvement (if any) you gained aren't you?

 

[Zoom25]

   
I'm thinking of getting a Mac Mini as a music server. I am using my MacBook Air at the moment (which I then unplug and take to work) but I'm not sure it is ideal. A dedicated machine I could where I can install an SSD and disable absolutely everything unnecessary I'm thinking might be a better option.
 

 
I'm similarly using a 2012 macbook pro Retina w/ 500 gb SSD, i7, 2.6 gHz, 8 gb ram. Although whenever I always listen seriously, I'll always have it running with it plugged into the wall. I was also contemplating getting a second computer, most probably a mac mini solely for the purpose of music, so that way I could always have everything disabled and then some on top of it. Although here's the thing, you'll need to upgrade your hard drive SSD and maybe the power supply for it to really get sounding decent. At that point, you'll easily be at the $1k-1.5k mark.
 
If you take the lower interval of $1000 as the cost, why not consider something like Auralic Aries LE ($999) or the full Auralic Aries with upgraded power supply and femto clocks) at $1599. So far everyone on the other computer forum coming off of stock mac minis to full on C.A.P.S version are preferring their Auralic Aries. Something like the Aries would sound better, look better in the room, will free you up from worrying about "Am I getting the best sound possible from this mac mini?" There's literally so many upgrades that can be made on a computer that once you get started, it will drive you crazy. If video and other features are required, then mac mini wins by default, but for music alone, I think a product like Aries is the better solution. Simple, elegant, no need to worry about upgrades and really good sound. There's even Olive ONE at $499 that can be fitted with SSD. Although don't know where the sound ranks.
 
Thought I'd share my ideas here to see how people respond to this thinking and reasoning and bounce ideas in general.

 

[isquirrel]

I am still confused with all this. If the files are on a MacBook or Mac Mini with an internal SSD and using an external DAC/AMP isn't the signal path shorter than using something like the Aurelic Aries as a streamer from the Mac Mini (source) to the DAC/AMP? As the source is the same but a streamer has been added which I am thinking must introduce more links into the playback chain?

 

[miceblue]

But how are you playing them back? Going through that whole chain you surely are going to lose whatever improvement (if any) you gained aren't you?

I was playing back the audio through Audirvana Plus (1.5). I'm not sure if any gains would be lost to be honest. I was just trying to see if there are measurable differences between the two media players since people say there are differences, including myself upon subjective listening. I don't know of a better way to attempt to capture these differences on the other hand.

 

[Krutsch]

Originally Posted by Zoom25 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
<snip, snip>
 
Something like the Aries would sound better, look better in the room, will free you up from worrying about "Am I getting the best sound possible from this mac mini?" There's literally so many upgrades that can be made on a computer that once you get started, it will drive you crazy.

 
Well, if you spend too much time on that other computer forum, you can read about how changing from an SSD to an SDXC card for hosting your library will yield H-U-G-E audio improvements.  If a person is in that camp, there are endless options and, yes, it will drive you crazy.
 
For me, after a lifetime of working as a software engineer for hardware focused companies, I just couldn't take those discussions seriously.
 
FWIW, I use a 2009 Mac Mini, which shipped with an outboard switching power supply, but at least it isn't in the case and can be placed far away from the Mac Mini.
 
I added RAM (to 8GB) but kept the original HDD, using an external, portable Firewire 800 drive to host media.  The 2009 Mini came with 2 GB of RAM, so I had to add RAM to run Audirvana+ 1.5.12 w/ iTunes integration (which is the most reliable headless solution for a Mac Mini, in my experience).  Using Firewire keeps drive access off the USB bus for audio, but the Mac Mini has separate USB controllers for groups of ports, so you can still use a USB DAC and a USB drive if you choose your ports carefully.
 
I added a Schiit Wyrd to deal with the occasional popping sounds (they were pretty rare, but now they are completely absent).  And, the best upgrade was to add a Bel Canto mLink USB-to-SPDIF converter, which provides complete isolation from electrical noise issues from the Mac Mini (and is just silky smooth sounding).
 
Finally, I went through the trouble to disable unneeded services/apps on the Mac Mini, but I'm not sure I really needed to do that (I just like to tinker and it was free).
 
Done and pretty inexpensive, for me, since I had the old Mac Mini lying around.  The Mac Mini is very attractive in any room, but that's a personal preference.

 

[Lohb]

Anyone using Audirvana+ on Macbook Air and also have a DX90 ?
Long-shot I know for comparison, but I wonder how the sound quality would compare with A+ on interger mode 1 and direct mode :
 
MBA internal DAC and A+ vs DX90
or
MBA with Sabre U2 ES9023 DAC and A+ vs DX90
or
MBA with Sabre U2 ES9023 DAC ,A+ and some small portable amp vs DX90
 
I'm just looking at a transportable solution vs portable DAP so I could use my MBA and A+ in a notebook sling with playlist loaded up for short trips  if the SQ jump is not that big.
Headphones were modded T50RP.

 

[JHern]

I've recently been exploring the ability of Audirvana (still using 1.5.12) to make great music from less-than-CD quality tracks. I'm using Audio-Technica ATH-ES10 headphones, which tend to emphasize the bass guitar dimension of rock music, and are high quality dynamic full-sounding HPs able to pick out many details in the sound track. Normally, I use the Fostex HP-A3 DAC coupled from Audirvana Plus to listen to tracks, but the external DAC.amp has become integrated into my home system paired with a PC and working wonderfully well with RCA-out to a Marantz amp powering Dali speakers. At work I just plug my ATH-ES10 into my MacBook Pro, and I run Audirvana Plus via iTunes.
 
I was really wondering how well Audirvana could improve files downgraded relative to CD quality, after converting to AAC via iTunes, and I now have the answer. I converted from AIFF CD quality to 256k+ AAC files. I should say that I really wish that I couldn't hear a difference between these file types, there is an enormous file size difference (~10X), but holy crap, there is a huge difference...it is not the answer I wanted. I chose what I consider to be a very sonically challenging album: Red Hot Chili Peppers, By the Way. In this album, the RHCP weren't content to simply jam with 4 tracks, they filled out the entire sound stage with all kinds of extra tracks, backup vocals, instrumental tweaks, etc., and all very delicate and sensitive, but combining via syngergy to produce a full sound that is destined to bowl over audiophiles with the proper system. When I downloaded the AAC file to my iPhone, the rich and smooth treble and musicality disappeared, and it sometime sounds more like a cacophany in songs with many vocals and instrumentals over-lapping, lots of distortion in the highs. On the other end of the quality spectrum, the AIFF via Audirvana sounds incredibly detailed, organic, and just...juicy! I find myself bouncing in my chair to the music, all is revealed and clear to my ear, it is a pure and joyous experience.
 
So...what about the 256k+ version AAC delivered to Audirvana? It is a much much better soundstage that the iPhone can manage, and punchier low end as expected from the power differences between the MBP and iPhone. But the treble growl from the bass guitar and blended vocals is distorted, rather than silky chrome shiny yumminess I hear from the AIFF file. Intentionally distorted tracks sound messy, rather than crisply manicured and detailed. Conclusion...Audirvana does a wonderful job manicuring the sound, but at least to my ears it cannot overcome the downgrade from CD to AAC.