Audible difference in players? (Audirvana, JRiver, Roon, MusicBee, etc.)

[MediumRare]

Define "huge"...

Huge for me was when I could immediately hear a difference between settings. I also have a few "hand me down" laptops from my kids and tried various ones to see if I could dedicate one to audio. Unfortunately none of the Windows machines, even with WASAPI or ASIO4ALL could hold a candle to the mac with any settings. Once I got used to the Mac I couldn't stand listening to Windows despite trying several times.

 

[Eirikur]

I also hear clear differences between Foobar (for example) and Roon (or Audirvana or ... ). I think there's more going on than meets the eye, and I don't like it, frankly being mostly a "bits is bits" kind of guy usually.

I know for sure that foobar2000 is sending the correct bits for DSD, since I'm using a DAC that only accepts DoP for that - any bit variation simply kills the signal (tried that too of course). There is no reason to think it will do anything different with normal PCM, unless you instruct it to do ReplayGain or DSP for instance. My DAC is a Topping D10 and I'm using the ASIO interface.

Unfortunately I cannot check the exact bit content coming out of the DAC; as it turns out my old computer with SPDIF input has random noise on this interface at about -90db. This I have measured, so bits are certainly not bits on that motherboard!

 

[MediumRare]

I gotta say, this thread got suspiciously subjective compared to the rest of this site. Can anybody here actually produce evidence of differences between players?

And preferably excluding the effects of resampling, that are dependent on the quality of algorithms and such. Just a plain example of two players playing the same 44.1khz/16bit file without any DSP running, sounding different.

Exactly - that's my hope - for us to get some objective data.

 

[MediumRare]

For the most part, they do sound the same, in my opinion.

That said, I HAVE heard clear, repeatable differences even with "bit perfect" output. For example, there's a track on a very well-recorded Celtic music album (I'd have to find it again) where there's a certain tenor note that CLEARLY distorts when played through iTunes (every time) but is rendered perfectly via Audirvana. And, yes, I confirmed both programs were set for bit perfect (i.e., no processing), the Audio MIDI settings were correct for playback from iTunes, etc.

I also hear clear differences between Foobar (for example) and Roon (or Audirvana or ... ). I think there's more going on than meets the eye, and I don't like it, frankly being mostly a "bits is bits" kind of guy usually.

+1

 

[Krunok]

Unfortunately I cannot check the exact bit content coming out of the DAC; as it turns out my old computer with SPDIF input has random noise on this interface at about -90db. This I have measured, so bits are certainly not bits on that motherboard!

SPDIF output of D10 is really good, it has been tested here using RME ADI-2 as a reference.

 

[Ron Texas]

It's possible there could be differences in how DSP's are applied, but bit perfect playback is bit perfect playback.

 

[Rockfella]

My personal opinion: not really different.

The only difference which I could confidently detect is when I use WASAPI versus directsound on my surface pro...using the same app (especially foobar).

Duly noted. I noticed a good improvement when I upgraded from Windows 7 to Windows 8.1 too.

 

[Eirikur]

Exactly - that's my hope - for us to get some objective data.

You'll have to tell more about your setup too - what DAC you are using for instance and what interface (USB/coax/optical).
If anything, "clear audible differences" are usually easily measurable, especially when you're always using the same DAC with the same PC or MAC and only the software stack changes.

Our friend Archimago performed some nice tests on the measurable differences between hardware, even when using the USB interface.

 

[pierre]

On windows, it depends if your machine is busy or not, if you have a lot latency then glitched can happens. Pro app usually have a whole book on how to minimize interferences on Windows (summary: stop everything else, enable high perf mode, plus tricks ...). Ex at Sweetwater, at Bluecataudio ...

On Mac or on Linux, never heard a difference between 2 apps (both are less susceptible then windows but you can generate plenty of artificacts too: high interrupts load, cpu saturated, mem bandwidth saturation, GPU driver going berzerk, ...). You hear issues on rpi for ex if you have too many channels and convolution running are the same time.

the main difference is that it happens early on Windows and it is harder to trigger on the other two.

 

[Eirikur]

On windows, it depends if your machine is busy or not, if you have a lot latency then glitched can happens.

My player app (foobar) always starts with elevated priority to everything else - no glitches unless I'm causing them, e.g. when I'm editing the file that I'm playing, i.e. changing metatags.
I can bring the whole system (quad-core J3455 NUC) to its knees of course, but that is equally true for Linux or Mac.

EDIT: that said, when updating DR data and ReplayGain for multiple albums running for 10s of minutes, all CPU cores indicate 100% usage and the music just plays, still no glitches.
Optimizations? None, just don't install too much crap.

 

[beefkabob]

Software can have bugs or poor designs. Software volume control can be done correctly or incorrectly. Then there's all the driver settings, updates, background tasks, and so on. In order to not worry about that crap, I've decided not to use a computer. Let the hardware designer handle the software too.

 

[MediumRare]

You'll have to tell more about your setup too - what DAC you are using for instance and what interface (USB/coax/optical).

MacBook with Audirvana via USB to a Musical Fidelity V90 to McIntosh MA6900 to B&W Nautilus 804 & Velodyne 18" sub.

 

[Fluffy]

This all sounds to me like much ado about nothing.

I use only my computer to play music because everything is stored there and it's completely reliable. I use Winamp for many years now, and compared to Tidal desktop app, Deezer app, playback straight from Audacity or Adobe Audition, I don't notice any difference. As long as it runs smooth without data errors (and playing the same file of course), it all sounds the same. By default, I ran everything through the windows mixer, and I configured the Schiit modi 3 DAC to play at 44.1khz, which is the sample rate of all the music I listen to.

The current computer is a beefy Windows 10 editing workstation with i7 7700k inside. It can process all the DSP in the world without breaking a sweat. My previous cheap Lenovo laptop worked fine with playing music, but during intensive real time effects processing in Audition I could clearly hear the pops and glitches as it was failing to process them in real time. That’s the only instance in which I actually heard any form of digital sound degrading quality.

There is no such thing with the current machine. The only trouble comes once in a blue moon when either the Schiit Modi or the Focusrite Scarlet 2i2 decide to suddenly disconnect, and then I have to pull the USB out and back in again, and everything works. But this is a general problem with USB connections, and no optimizing software can make a computer completely fail of glitch proof (whoever invents that will make a ton of money…).

So in essence, I'm completely baffled by claims that the software used to play music can make a difference, or that there is some kind of system-wide optimization that can make digital sound better. You just need to make sure nothing is obviously fucking with your signal (like windows sound enhancements or unwarranted resampling), and everything should be fine. All of those Fidelizer-type apps sound like audiofoolery to me. Just get a decent computer, that's all.

 

[Berwhale]

I gotta say, this thread got suspiciously subjective compared to the rest of this site. Can anybody here actually produce evidence of differences between players?

And preferably excluding the effects of resampling, that are dependent on the quality of algorithms and such. Just a plain example of two players playing the same 44.1khz/16bit file without any DSP running, sounding different.

It may be possible to compare the output of players by capturing the USB packets generated by them using something like...

https://desowin.org/usbpcap/

I've only used Wireshark for basic network packet capture and analysis. I'll have a play with it over the week-end and see if I can listen in on the conversation between MusicBee and my Topping D50s.

 

[tw99]

Reports of "huge" differences between software players (that are properly configured to be bit perfect) should be treated with the usual ASR response: Show us the blind test results...

 

[ernestcarl]

I’ve used both JRiver and Foobar2000 for the longest time... unless you are using plugins to alter sound, there is no audible difference. But since I use surround processing “plugins” in both, so there is a difference.

 

[Vapor9]

I can certainly say, on my Mac, that Audirvana is an improvement over iTunes. I still use iTunes to organize and run Audirvana in integrated mode. I also think Audirvana is better than BitPerfect, but the improvement is very subtle.

 

[Julf]

I also think Audirvana is better than BitPerfect, but the improvement is very subtle.

Show us the blind test results...

 

[Vapor9]

You and I both know setting up a truly valid experiment like that would be a huge undertaking. But, would you at least believe that Audirvana is better than iTunes? If not, I suggest not wasting your money on anything other than Best Buy AV receivers.

 

[Julf]

You and I both know setting up a truly valid experiment like that would be a huge undertaking. But, would you at least believe that Audirvana is better than iTunes? If not, I suggest not wasting your money on anything other than Best Buy AV receivers.

I would not believe it without evidence, just because someone says so.