- PURE MUSIC VS AUDIRVANA PLUS FOR MAC
- PURE MUSIC VS AUDIRVANA PLUS 64 BIT
- PURE MUSIC VS AUDIRVANA PLUS PORTABLE
The Amarra Sonic EQ works well, and is pretty transparent to my ears. I can understand why there was feedback that Amarra might be better for vocals/jazz while PM for classical especially orchestra music. However, it does sound more 'musical' or emotional. It does not however, emphasise details and ambient cues as much as PM. Initial impressions are that Amarra is smoother, more pleasant sounding. Just a short comparison of Amarra vs Puremusic (with 'Less is More' mode). Ok, so I downloaded a trial version of Amarra Full. The problem is that C2D processor is too slow nowadays for the type of processing required for your required EQ processing. Go buy a new I7 2011 Macmini, restore back the Mach2music customised OSX on there and you will be free of your CPU processing problems. I remember that you are still using the old Core2Duo processor for the Mach2music server. Nevertheless, there is a good chance that with EQ integrated, the overall CPU loading of Amarra will be lower than Pure Music with EQ. I recall reading somewhere that Amarra may have a smaller CPU footprint vs Pure Music but I'm not sure if this is still the case. However, if EQ isn't a requirement then no issues with playback of hi-res files. My own experience is that the latter can become a CPU hog, so much so that I have problems playing any file above 24/96 without crackling distortion. But again this is personal preference I guess.įor me, another interesting aspect of Amarra vs Pure Music is that the higher versions of Amarra has built in EQ while Pure Music requires installing 3rd party EQ software as a plug-in. I think one of the biggest pluses of computer music is the convenience of playback and selection of music, so to me this is like taking a hit in the very area where I think computer music has the biggest appeal. Maybe it's me but I find the need to toggle back and forth between 2 interfaces - iTunes Remote App AND a VNC app - just to change a track, is a bit of a pain. If you are using Mac, i would highly recommend Audirvana Plus.I have tried Less is More mode before. Unlike EQ, the results seem to be more natural and coherent. Personally, i find this very exiting to play around with the settings. These are some of the components that i thought we could never change in a system without change in hardware. There is a difference in staging, airiness / smoothness based on the tuning.I would like to point to a particular post for reference. > An interesting thread in computer audiophile There is quite a bit of reading involved. There is no EQ involved (which i don't prefer). I started playing around with only today, and already noticed percievable difference. You can read more about it in the above link. The Parameters are steepness, Filter max length, Cut off freq, Anti aliasing, Pre-ringing.
PURE MUSIC VS AUDIRVANA PLUS 64 BIT
What i find more interesting in Audirvana Plus is the advanced filter options for Sample Rate conversion with Izotope 64 bit SRC. Now, i am using Audirvana Plus for about 2 weeks now. But, most of the online reviews suggested Audirvana Plus and Pure Music over JRiver.
PURE MUSIC VS AUDIRVANA PLUS FOR MAC
I was seriously considering upgrading my JRiver licence for Mac as well.
PURE MUSIC VS AUDIRVANA PLUS PORTABLE
For portable use, i was looking for a suitable software for my Mac. I have been using JRiver on my Windows 7 PC for quite sometime now.
0 kommentar(er)
