iTunes power-up: Audirvana vs BitPerfect

[pen expers]

I would like to continue using iTunes. And I'm undecided between using A + in iTunes-integrated mode (but how bad is the skin? Is it possible change it?) Or BitPerfect .. what do you recommend? My setup is Macbook Pro, Dragonfly Red and He-400i. I'm testing A + and I noticed that the sound is already much clearer and fuller, with more fat volumes, even without using the DAC.

 

[hoopsmccann6]

I would like to continue using iTunes. And I'm undecided between using A + in iTunes-integrated mode (but how bad is the skin? Is it possible change it?) Or BitPerfect .. what do you recommend? My setup is Macbook Pro, Dragonfly Red and He-400i. I'm testing A + and I noticed that the sound is already much clearer and fuller, with more fat volumes, even without using the DAC.

[doublepost=1540043620][/doublepost]A great question. I used Audirvana for years. Stopped after direct mode was no longer available due to changes in OS permissions. At that point I no longer noticed a great deal of difference between iTunes and A+ 2.0.Maybe I should look into this again...

 

[artnoi]

I myself use BitPerfect to get the sample rate correct for my 44.1kHz files (by default macOS audio engine CoreAudio upsamples it to 96kHz before output)

From this point, I dont think playback software has any implication on sound quality - if the audio stream is bit-perfect now, then where did the sound difference come from?

 

[hoopsmccann6]

I myself use BitPerfect to get the sample rate correct for my 44.1kHz files (by default macOS audio engine CoreAudio upsamples it to 96kHz before output)

From this point, I dont think playback software has any implication on sound quality - if the audio stream is bit-perfect now, then where did the sound difference come from?

[doublepost=1541080025][/doublepost]I’m no audio engineer here. The way I understand it is was direct mode allowed CoreAudio to be bypassed by a different rendering engine - iZotope. This component uses different algorithms to turn the same bits - 1&0s - into audio waves that are different in form that what is produced by Apple CoreAudio. It is is similar to using different equalizer settings?

 

[artnoi]

[doublepost=1541080025][/doublepost]I’m no audio engineer here. The way I understand it is was direct mode allowed CoreAudio to be bypassed by a different rendering engine - iZotope. This component uses different algorithms to turn the same bits - 1&0s - into audio waves that are different in form that what is produced by Apple CoreAudio. It is is similar to using different equalizer settings?

The coversion duty from 0s and 1s to analog waveform is performed by the DAC, which are Cirrus Logic chips on most Macs, not CoreAudio running on Intel CPU. So once the 0s and 1s are perfectly identical, two audio sources should sound the same, or the software/hardware is malfunctioning.