USB DAC

[Doc B.]

I have recently been in the process of acquiring a couple of older Minis. I just received a very early PowerPC 1.25GHz Mini which I plan to use with an 0404USB. Also I have the next generation Mini with an Intel Solo chip coming as well. The Apple site specs it as having an optical digital in and out, and that should allow me to connect directly to the current iteration of the DAC, which has TOSLINK in/out. Hopefully I will be able to develop a database of info about how all this Mac stuff will hook up as we continue to develop the DAC project.

[Natural Sound]

Yoder,

For your budget and for the simplest, most direct setup I'd recommend either the HRT MusicStreamer II (for a high-res dac) or the Valab dac from China (for a NOS dac).  Both are excellent and perform well above their price points and the valab can also use toslink and spdif.  The HRT is very small and compact, requires no external power supply -- just plug the usb into one end and your RCAs into the other, and you're done.  Give it a couple hundred hours (for either dac) and they will settle down and sound excellent.  Of course to get the most out of each of them your playback software should be carefully configured, and they both benefit from a better usb cable -- the Wireworld UltraViolet is a very nice cable at a good price, and the StarLight is slightly more expensive, but also noticably better especially in the bass and top end.

HTH,

Jim

Last month I picked up a VA lab DAC and a pure silver USB cable from an eBayer in Taiwan. I've got about 100 hours on the setup now and I must say it sounds much better than a $200 DAC should sound. I'm very happy with it so far.

[Maxwell_E]

After reading these posts, I read the 6moons review on the VA Lab DAC and saw a FPIII in the reviewers system. Seems like everyone's got a little Bottlehead in them.

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/teradak/chameleon_3.html

[mrarroyo]

I too used the airport extreme, although mine is used mostly to stream netflix programs to the apple tv in the living room. Works pretty good.

[ssssly]

Macs have a combination headphone jack/mini toslink connector. At least all the Macs I have (don't have a mini....yet). Currently using a mini toslink to full toslink adapter out from my MacBook Pro to a Hlly Matrix Mini DAC for my digital setup. Am very pleased with the sound I get out of it.

Been looking into getting a MacMini for a dedicated music server so I can stop schlepping my MacBook to my listening room. Be interested to see the Docs impression of the Mini.   

[Doc B.]

Re the Mini, it is apparently only the earliest PPC model that is lacking the TOSLINK ins and outs. That is what I have right now, and thus why I plan to use it with an EMU 0404 USB. This Mini has OS X 10.3.9. The crazy thing I have run into is that OS X 10.5 (necessary for the later Itunes versions) seems to be a collectable - it costs about as much as an old Mini! Once it is all set up I hope to have a nice little server for home, that I can control with my iPhone.

[AudioDave]

Myself along with many others on this forum are anxiously awaiting the new Bottlehead DAC.  As always, when a new Bottlehead product is in the making I start doing research and find out that I am very illiterate about audio.  Sorry in advance for this basic question but first, what is the advantage of a USB DAC, and secondly,  if you connect a USB DAC to your PC do you even need a sound card?   I am originally from Nebraska and as you can tell I am cornfused.
Thanks
Dave

[HF9]

When you use a USB sound device you don't need an internal sound card (or if you already have one, it will bypass it), it's handled by software within your computer and external interfacing, at least if I understand it correctly

[Yoder]

When you use a USB sound device you don't need an internal sound card (or if you already have one, it will bypass it), it's handled by software within your computer and external interfacing, at least if I understand it correctly

Actually, if you have both a sound card and a USB sound device connected simultaneously, then you can select which of the two you want to use simply by going to your Preferences (Mac OS.) On my Macmini, I can choose from the Panasonic HDMI, E-MU 0404 (USB), default output, or TOSLINK. On my iMac I jump between the Duet (Firewire) and TOSLINK.

With USB or FW you can adjust the volume from the Preferences or Audio MIDI Setup. I recently hooked-up a TOSLINK adapter to my iMac and ran it into a DAC. I was initially surprised that from within the AMS I could only specify the bit depth/rate, but could not do a thing with the audio level. Then it made sense, since TOSLINK is a true digital source then only 1's and 0' are being sent and there is no way to adjust the source volume.

[mrarroyo]

The other thing that has become the "in word" is asynchronous. Also how high will it allow sampling? 24/96 or 26/192 including up-sampling or not.

[Jim R.]

Yoder,

If your playback software supports dithered volume control, there's no reason why that shouldn't work with TOSlink.  The dithered volume control in iTunes is terrible, but in PureMusic it is quite good, even with a 16/44 dac (but works even nicer with 24/96 and higher.)  I know there are folks who use the PM dithered volume control with toslink on their minis.

-- Jim

[Doc B.]

Yoder,
 I know there are folks who use the PM dithered volume control with toslink on their minis.

-- Jim

Yes, in fact I control the volume on my Mini with my iphone and the remote app. The server will be playing upstairs, filling up the whole place with music, and I can control the level from my desk or the lab or wherever with the iPhone when I get a call on the office line.

[Yoder]

@Jim, I may not have been too clear in what I was saying. Basically, the more I dive into the OS X the more impressed I am. It has just been in the last couple of months that I have played with the TOSLINK adapter. The fact that you get true digital data, if desired, impresses me. This is something that does not come easily with Win boxes, and to say Windows is a nightmare to work with anymore is a gross understatement for me. I jumped into OS X in 1998, but only in the last 2 years have I really been pushed into the audio side of OS X and I am impressed.

There are a ton of audio apps here, some free, some demos, etc. http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/audio/index_abc1.html I think I saw the app Doc mentions on one of these pages earlier, but can't locate it now.

[Jim R.]

Yoder,

Sorry, now I see what you're saying and that's why I don't use the dithered volume control in PureMusic either.  As good as it is, it still has some audible artifacts and things just sound cleaner without it.

And I completely agree on the OSX vs windows in audio.  I worked for a long time trying to get a stripped down windows machine optimized for audio playback, and when I got my mid 2010 mini and connected it bone stock and with nothing but iTunes, it instantly surpassed all the work I did on the windows platform.  Then when I got Pure Music installed, the SSD, 8 gb memory, external firewire storage and the Mach2 tweaks to the OS, well, it left the windows stuff light years behind.

Even my MBP, setup as an office machine and with no special tweaks for audio, stomps all over the fully-tweaked windows boxes.  I honestly don't even use windows for audio anymore.

-- Jim

[Yoder]

Today I spent a lot of time on the Web comparing Pure Music to Amarra. I will make the dive one of these days, but am not sure what pool I will go into. The downside to Amarra is money. Damn, you have to drop some serious cash to get the full unit. One frustration today was the lack of specs for Pure Music. They had the specs for Pure Vinyl listed on the site, but I could not find any for PM. I visited numerous sites/forums and I think that as far as quality goes, the nod went to the mini version of Amarra...but everyone backed down when the price was introduced. Have you had the opportunity to compare PM to Amarra side-by-side? I could not find any reviews comparing PM to the full version of Amarra.

Based on the various readings, Amarra grabbed me for several reasons. The fact that they have been doing this since the days of floppy discs tells me that they have a lot of R&D invested into their audio engine and are continually improving upon the old. I also was impressed with the various tools that you could buy, and they were definitely more affordable. The parametric equalizer is highly desirable, but the thing that really sent me over the top was how they emphasized their use of "mathematics" to differentiate their product from others on the market. Granted, anything dealing with digital is going to involve math but the fact that they emphasized it's refined use in their algorithms had me drooling. Much of my reasoning here is more of a matter of personal preferences and "candy toys" of sorts. When I add my take on the subjective consensus I read about...that being that Amarra just had a better sound to it. Some said PM had an overly bright sound, others said the bass just was not there, and a lot of small things like that. Granted there were some who preferred PM. Add everything up, and I am heading towards Amarra. BUT, $695 for a piece of software! Ouch, I have never paid that kind of cash for software. I will definitely try the demo of each once I get my system set-up. There is one big plus for PM and that is it's affordability and the fact that market forces will most like help bring down the price of Amarra a bit more.