"Pure Music" software discussion thread

Hi to all.

I want to start this new thread to share the experiences with the
Pure Music software from Channel D.​


:cop: Please don´t pollute this thread with statements like "Voodoo" ect. :cop:

What i would like to have is a factual discussionabout this Mac software.
----------------------------------------------​



I for myself use this SW now for about 2 weeks and to be honest, i am absolute surprised.

My iTunes files are all in ALAC and i thought there could be no differences between iTunes and other bit perfect playback solutions.
My sound tests between iTunes and Pure Music V1.65a shows, that i was wrong.

With listening for a short time in standard 44.1KHz modus, i now used the upsample modus with 96KHz/16bit (max. resolution for my Teralink X2 and my TDA1541A DAC).
The playback in this modus is absolute awesom in every way. No comparison to the iTunes playback.

So besides my findings, i am very interested to your opinion.


Best regards,
Oliver
 
I have been using Pure music for a couple of months now. They and Amarra have free trials, so you can check out any differences yourself. I don't know of others that play like this through itunes.

I can make a lot of comments. they may come slowly while I am at work.

1. Definitly both make a positive difference. Astounding really, but you don't realize how poor itunes is until you try one of these programs. Amarra may be a little better sounding, but I didn't try that long because Pure music has a ton of features that Amarra doesn't, unless you perhaps get the $695 version. The "junior" and "mini" versions are so limited, you may as well buy Pure Music for $165 or so.

2. There are definitly bugs in the interface. you have lots of set up options and sometimes a small mistake will make something happen like not moving to the next track or something. I have multiple instances where there is a glitch in how the itunes interface works and I gets pulsating bursts of incomplete music. Always fixed with a reboot.

3. The sound improvement is definitly worth minor inconveniences like that above and the learning curve. There are many, many featurse and options and you can add modules or use the supplied ones to digitally modify, equalize or even cross overs. you can upsample, down sample and play native high sample rates. All good, if a little confusing. I am a fan of front end digital room treatment/equalization and this does that well. It has a limitation/oversite in saving equalization files, so you can lose data, but it sounds great and is very flexible. Audio hijack Pro has a better interface for this, but doesn't have the sound quality. It distorts a lot, this doesn't.

Overall, I highly recommend it! Amarra if you are a pro, but it is too expensive for me. Pure Music makes about the same difference as going from a lousy cheap DAC to an excellent high end DAC and you should do both.

For me, money well spent, but I hope there are user interface improvements, stability improvements and more options in the future.
 
I am planning to buy PureVinyl this week, but neeed to vertify it runs (they ask you that before you order). My primary purpose is to capture LPs, the sonic benefits i find intriging. I have to use the XO capabilities as well. I have an Edirol FA-66 Firewire ADC/DAC (4 channels 24/192).

I own/owned an OS 9 version of Mac-the-Scope, and have met Robert. 1 guy working on a complex piece of software. My experience is that he just keeps working away at it.

I'll post updates as i gain experience.

dave
 
I think you will enjoy it.
i thought itunes was pretty good, but I guess, not so much.
Although i mentioned some issues with Pure Music, they are minor compared with the benefits and and you get an awful lot for your dime. i get the impression that it will continue to evolve.

I have been using a RED Wine Isabellina (early model), a NOS battery powered DAC with USB input. Sound is very nice, although Vinnie at RWA has been making dramatic changes to it and improvements.
Recently, i finished a TPA setup. Buffalo II with Legato abd at the moment am using the TPA USB to I2S/SPDIF as I2S input to the Buffalo II. Sound is awesome, but I really haven't played with it much yet. I am waiting on one of Jkeny's new modified M2 hiface USB to I2S, so that should be fun and allow higher bitrates and sampling. Both the TPA USB module and the Isabellina are limited to 44.1 Khz sampling.
I haven't had an opportunity to play with the crossovers in pure music. I don't have a multiband DAC and only just now have several USB inputs that are possible. I an sure channel matching will be a hassle, but I have some "experimental" speakers and I really would like to see how the crossover stuff can help me design a better crossover.
 
I have been using a RED Wine Isabellina (early model), a NOS battery powered DAC with USB input. Sound is very nice, although Vinnie at RWA has been making dramatic changes to it and improvements.
Recently, i finished a TPA setup. Buffalo II with Legato abd at the moment am using the TPA USB to I2S/SPDIF as I2S input to the Buffalo II. Sound is awesome, but I really haven't played with it much yet. I am waiting on one of Jkeny's new modified M2 hiface USB to I2S, so that should be fun and allow higher bitrates and sampling. Both the TPA USB module and the Isabellina are limited to 44.1 Khz sampling.

You should really try out one of the MI Firewire DACs... probably possible to arrange to borrow/rent one from a local musical instrument store.

dave
 
Well i got my 1st piece of vinyl into the computer. Listening to the recording as we speak... took a bit of poking & fiddling to get it working, and i'm sure that there are some things to learn.

One thing i really want to try (need some cable adaptors/build some cables) is the digital RIAA.

I can now comfortably take advantage of the 15% discount.

dave
 
Hi there.

Pure Music and Amarra are just piggy backing on what's been discussed and available under Windows and Linux for years.

Over years especially DAC manufactureres and Apple users where claiming how great and bitperfect iTunes was performing.
Until Amarra showed up ( last year) with an insane pricetag >1300$ for a bit of system tweaking and piggy backing on iTunes. ( Great to have Apple customers around who pay what's being asked for. ;) )
Can you imagine that people bought that plugin at such a pricetag.
Amara was first in Appleland of course. The pricetag dropped heavily in shortest time as soon as Pure Music showed up. I never read complaints such as "rip off". ( Perhaps a typical Apple customer attitude to never feel being ripped off :D )
However Amarra showed that iTunes was not bit perfect and beside that
was not sounding that well.

That must have been a shock for the audiophile Apple community, who believed that they were running the best OS ever (in audiophile terms) :D


It's a known fact and been discussed a hundred times that optimizations on the OS side will have a positive impact in sound-quality on the majority of audio interfaces. ( I started with it 4 years ago in the "Linux audio the way to go thread" over here. - there you'll find a lot of optimizations listed, which now went into those Apple players ( ramplayback,asf.asf.)

The underlying rule behind those optimizations is: "less is more".

The less stuff you got running on the PC the lower the impact on the
data stream will be.

And that's exactly why you'll NEVER manage to get best sound from your Apple PC.


Your might also have look at alternative FOC OSX implementations:

Audirvana

or

AyreWave


See also XXhighend, cplay and meanwhile even J.River caught up for Windows based implementations.


I for myself pushed Linux to its limits. (headless realtime-kernel system based on ecasound respectively SB Touch Tuning which is also based on Linux )


Cheers
 

scott wurcer

Disabled Account
2004-01-26 3:03 pm
Belmont MA
One thing i really want to try (need some cable adaptors/build some cables) is the digital RIAA.


dave

Did you read their AES whitepaper? Very interesting, I thought. Bob Orban had posted the IIR filters for RIAA a few years ago but didn't go up to 192K so I computed a few for one of the open source sites. It was amazing how close a few coefficients get. I'm interested in a comparison.

Soundcheck - ;)
 
I know I shouldnt bother engaging here, but soundcheck, for someone who professes to know so much, you really should catch up, before coming in here and spouting nonsense :scratch1:, itunes maybe not bit perfect, but the mac OS IS and has always been, also if you really want to hobble your mac you can run windows or linux on it natively in parallel to OSX can you do that? its the only computer that will run everything. there are however other free bitperfect players that run on both the OSX kernel and linux/cocoa/wine, but lack other functionality of puremusic

do you really think that protools, which was mac only for over a decade, would have continued if it wasnt bitperfect?

I suggest you go back to your fantasy land where you can post your anti apple gripes without fearing a reality intrusion

even without this fact, I would happily go without to run mac os, but happily I can have my cake and eat it too :cloud9:
 
Last edited:
I know I shouldnt bother engaging here, but soundcheck, for someone who professes to know so much, you really should catch up, before coming in here and spouting nonsense :scratch1:, itunes maybe not bit perfect, but the mac OS IS and has always been, also if you really want to hobble your mac you can run windows or linux on it natively in parallel to OSX can you do that? its the only computer that will run everything. there are however other free bitperfect players that run on both the OSX kernel and linux/cocoa/wine, but lack other functionality of puremusic

do you really think that protools, which was mac only for over a decade, would have continued if it wasnt bitperfect?

I suggest you go back to your fantasy land where you can post your anti apple gripes without fearing a reality intrusion

even without this fact, I would happily go without to run mac os, but happily I can have my cake and eat it too :cloud9:


I've been talking about iTunes not been bitperfect according to Sonic
Studio (Amarra). You can look it up on the Amarra Pages.

I'm not talking about Pro-Audio stuff here!

I never talked about HW either.

I posted links to OSX stuff which is free of charge and generates bitperfect output.


Enjoy.
 
Strange thing about ITunes...
When I was updated for new wersion few days ago,
(I dont know to say what idea i was driven into that?)
because the older version works fine,
I discovered that something is wrong...
.
I play the "test" song from Chesky records,
this one with voice pronouncing:
left channel....Right channel...in phasee...out of phase
AND
left ch was ok?
right channel plaed from booth channels
in phase was at only one
and out of phase was sometnig not normal..?
.
First I have a notion that is something wrong with my DAC and system,
And just before to have a look into the chassis
I put on the another player VLC
with totally same set-up not even put the power off or something,
everything was normal.
The space an, stage and detail was back on the road...
.
Bearing in mind that crap with locking IPhone to ITunes,
and PC component causing chaos and black screens (NVidia 8600 overheating)
I am deeply disappointed...MBP and ITunes
.
And still crying over my old macbook G4, rest in peace,
wife-squash-beer-over-the-keyboard-by-accident
.
:eek:
cheers
 
I have been using Pure Music for a while now. I highly recommend it. At times I almost felt like Rob was working for me as my personal programmer. Once I received two updates in one day. He has taken and made real many suggestions from end users. My favorite is the ability to tag the absolute polarity of your music and have the program invert each song as necessary.

As to the sound, "pure" is a good description and it is variable. Always better than iTunes even though iTunes can play bit perfect audio with the right settings, and different from Amarra even when bit perfect. By variable I mean you can alter it. Play with memory mode loading the track into RAM for playback, which sounds different than off of the hard drive, both bit perfect. You can remotely control polarity and at least with time aligned speakers it sounds different. Start changing bits and volume outputting 24 or 32 bit to preserve as much of the resolution as possible. You can up-sample and that changes the sound. You can change the filter and the noise shaped dither and that changes the sound. You can add plug-ins crossovers delays, it is wild.

I prefer bit perfect memory play into a hi Face (which you would think would eliminate differences in bit perfect streams) into a Dual Mono Buffalo 2 which handles the volume internally most of the time.

After the very slight loss that comes with any altering of the bits you can do quite a bit without further perceptible loss.

Lately I have been playing with a Fabfilter linear phase plug in to correct the bass output on some Quads up-sampled to 88.2 or 192 with high order noise shaped dither. Noise shaping has a profound impact on the sound. In fact it is likely the disruption of the dither that is encoded into CDs that happens with any further processing that creates the slight loss of the first step of attenuation.

The only downside is that the program can become confused if you jump around a lot, sometimes indicating that it is in pause when it is actually playing . There is a reset button that relaunches Pure Music reinitiating its link to iTunes if this happens. Oh and don't change interfaces or settings in the Audio Midi control panel while it is loaded, but that holds true for iTunes all by itself as well.
 
Guys, have any of you actually captured the digital out from a Mac to compare the various softwares to see if they are actually bit-perfect? Any of you actually tried to identify the various players blind? Or are you just assuming that because you think you hear a difference that there is one.

How many of you are using the optical out, who uses firewire, who uses USb, have you compared these outputs against each other to see which most closely matches the source file? because without this all you have is an opinion loaded with sighted bias and the rest of the discussion is pretty pointless.

Any of the outputs can be bit-perfect. In fact i'd propose that they all are if you follow the most basic settings advice sample rate same as source and word length to 24 bit.

Where they might differ is in the amount of jitter, and susceptibility to noise, as well as the quality of the DAC attached to the other end of the wire.

Please do some tests, you'll be surprised and educated with the results.
 
Ii have compared the digital audio data of firewire audiowire and usb interfaces driven from iTunes, Pure Music, Amarra, Digital Performer, Pro Tools, and Peak. All are bit perfect with the proper settings. What I have not compared and what might reveal more about what is going on is to capture the actual USB or Firewire or Audiowire stream with a fast scope. I hear identifiable differences even ABX tested changing only the clock, or only the software delivering the data to the same interface asynchronously so there must be differences. Since the code is recoverable the differences must be in the time domain or to put it another way the differences are in the analog nature of the digital delivery. This would include the secondary effects of packeting, framing, bit order, transition threshold shift, and ground bounce to name just a few.

Also remember that word clocking used to mean something different before delta sigma DACs. First we had wow then flutter then slew rate then jitter. All are expressions of timing instability on different scales. Maybe now we need bit clocks.