I've compared this to all the free and paid alternatives. That includes Amarra, audirvana, Clementine, Play, Fidelia and Pure Music. Some of these are very much more expensive, so $33 is very reasonable indeed. The sound quality through my high quality system (top of the line Audio-GD DAC & amp units and BeyerDynamic DT880) is noticeably or significantly better than the alternatives. Where it beats most of the alternatives however is that it is rock stable, unlike any flavour of Amarra.
It does what I need it to do - play music from my Mac that sounds musical, detailed, non-fatiguing, and without crashing. Yes it's a relatively basic GUI, but it's functional, and it's the results which matter. It lets me enjoy the music, in whatever format it might be in, more than any other player I've compared it to. At the end of the day, that's what it's about. And the cost is nothing compared to the cost of my Mac, hi-fi gear, and high quality music collection.
These are ridiculous comments, which appear to be typical of you Echorob (checked your history). Yes I know plenty about audio, but you haven't said anything which demonstrates that you do. You have simply stated a view, and you're entitled to that, however you have not provided anything to back up your statements. Why is Vox better? Just because it's free? What music do you listen to? What sort of equipment?
Sorry but IMHO Vox is a nice but simple player designed to minimise memory use, and does not come close audio wise. Don't get me started on the bloated app that iTunes has become. If you're happy listening to iTunes quality music or mp3's using these players, then good for you.
For those of us with 24bit 96kHz/192kHz high quality music libraries and high quality audio gear, the differences are apparent and appreciated. Also considering most of the alternatives I mentioned are way more expensive, the $33 asked is not a total rip off. Amarra is a complete rip off though, as it's grossly over priced for what it offers and is extremely unstable. I listen predominantly to jazz and orchestral / classical, and I can hear a very worthwhile improvement in the sound because of the underlying design.
If you knew anything about audio and how Mac's handle audio, you'd understand why these features (not offered by Vox or iTunes) make a big difference:
"For audiophile users desiring more control over their audio, Decibel can take exclusive control of the output device (using hog mode) and send audio in the device's native format. Additionally, Decibel can automatically adjust the output device's sample rate to that of the playing track, preventing audio quality degradation associated with software sample rate conversion. Finally, Decibel can load and play files entirely in memory, eliminating audio glitching associated with disk access."
So are you going to come back now and say that we're just imagining this? That there is no merit in higher bit-rate recordings or audio gear? If you can't hear a difference or have basic needs, then stick with Vox etc. Products like Decibel are developed for a specific niche market of audiophiles who understand and appreciate the difference. If you're not in that demographic, it is unfair to come here and make comments like these with no specific details to back them up.
These are my final comments, and I'm not going to get into an argument with ignorant people like Echorob.
There are currently no troubleshooting comments by this member.
Please login or create a new MacUpdate Member account to use this feature
+1
NetBeans
+3
Decibel
Ozron reviewed on 10 Apr 2011
It does what I need it to do - play music from my Mac that sounds musical, detailed, non-fatiguing, and without crashing. Yes it's a relatively basic GUI, but it's functional, and it's the results which matter. It lets me enjoy the music, in whatever format it might be in, more than any other player I've compared it to. At the end of the day, that's what it's about. And the cost is nothing compared to the cost of my Mac, hi-fi gear, and high quality music collection.
+1
+8
Sorry but IMHO Vox is a nice but simple player designed to minimise memory use, and does not come close audio wise. Don't get me started on the bloated app that iTunes has become. If you're happy listening to iTunes quality music or mp3's using these players, then good for you.
For those of us with 24bit 96kHz/192kHz high quality music libraries and high quality audio gear, the differences are apparent and appreciated. Also considering most of the alternatives I mentioned are way more expensive, the $33 asked is not a total rip off. Amarra is a complete rip off though, as it's grossly over priced for what it offers and is extremely unstable. I listen predominantly to jazz and orchestral / classical, and I can hear a very worthwhile improvement in the sound because of the underlying design.
If you knew anything about audio and how Mac's handle audio, you'd understand why these features (not offered by Vox or iTunes) make a big difference:
"For audiophile users desiring more control over their audio, Decibel can take exclusive control of the output device (using hog mode) and send audio in the device's native format. Additionally, Decibel can automatically adjust the output device's sample rate to that of the playing track, preventing audio quality degradation associated with software sample rate conversion. Finally, Decibel can load and play files entirely in memory, eliminating audio glitching associated with disk access."
So are you going to come back now and say that we're just imagining this? That there is no merit in higher bit-rate recordings or audio gear? If you can't hear a difference or have basic needs, then stick with Vox etc. Products like Decibel are developed for a specific niche market of audiophiles who understand and appreciate the difference. If you're not in that demographic, it is unfair to come here and make comments like these with no specific details to back them up.
These are my final comments, and I'm not going to get into an argument with ignorant people like Echorob.