in Search
Untitled Page

ARCHIVED FORUM -- April 2007 to March 2012
READ ONLY FORUM

This is the first Archived Forum which was active between 17th April 2007 and 1st March February 2012

 

Latest post 10-12-2010 11:05 AM by tournedos. 22 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (23 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 01-24-2009 7:10 AM

    BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    Hey guys,

     

    As many of you already know, I got a mac mini as a media server (music).

    I have been haunted during my setup last night by a bad sync cable, and therefore I've been forced to use my BS9000 as a "control" module in running the Beolab 5's from the mac mini... Well that's another story...

     

    So this thread is going to be a BS9000 CD VS Mac mini apple lossless thread.

    It's not going to be a apple or Beo burning thread I hope.

     

    I'm hoping to get your inputs on using separate media servers, it don't have to be apples, and it don't have to be related to the Beolab 5's.

     

    So I haven't really done a thorough test yet, this is pretty much just a startup. But I must say the mac mini seems to be a good transporter.

    I did one "VS" test though... Apple lossless on the digital coax VS same track from the BS9000 using powerlink cables ie analog signal. And the Apple wins hands down. -Of course! I'm not sure if there are users out there that have their Beolab 5's connected to their music source using only powerlink cables, but I sure hope not. The difference between the coaxial digital input and that of the powerlink cables are even bigger than I could imagine.

    I remember that my Beo shop told me when I bought the BS9000, that don't worry even if you end up using the BS9000 with Beolab 5's connected via powerlink you will get everything possible out of the Beolab 5's. What an misstatement that was.

     

    Anyway this thread will continue with listening experiences BS9000 digital coaxial VS Mac Mini toslink - converter - digital coaxial.

    There should be no differences to be heard, but placebo might play a role here. Big Smile

    To be continued... 

     

     

    -Andreas

     

    BLab5, BLab5000, BLab8000, BV10, BS9000, BS3, Beo5, Beo4, BLink1000, BLink5000, BLink7000, A2, A8, Form2

     

     

     

  • 01-28-2009 8:26 AM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    OK, let's continue this thread with some more info.

     

    I've had the Mac mini for about a week now, and have been using Mac mini and BS9000 parallel since last weeks friday.

    After extensive A/B comparisons, where I've had the mac mini and the BS9000 to play the same song, at some half a minute apart, so that I can listen to the same part of the music, first mac mini and then BS9000 by only unplugging-replugging back-and -forth between the Mini and BS9000...

     

    ... my conclusion is that there are no differences in audio quality.

    Just to refresh, the Mac mini is running apple lossless via iTunes, digital optical out, using Soundproofs excellent audio setup recommendations. The optical signal is converted to coaxial via a relatively inexpensive toslink/coaxial adapter. After this straight into the Beolab 5's.

     

    I can't detect any difference in micro detailing nor dynamics. The sound from the Mac mini is simply stunning. Well beyond my expectations. 

     

    For 500 euros, I can't imagine more "bang" for your buck. I can highly recommend the Mac mini especially for someone who has an iPhone or iPod touch, as you'll get a superb "two-way" remote. Also great if you have other mac's around the house, you'll get the streaming possibility as-well. For instance while working or surfing on my portable, I don't use my iPhone as a remote, but use my portable as a "remote" I get access to my whole music collection with just a push on the trackpad!

     

    I've also been using the mac mini as a DVD player these last few days. I don't have a surround setup, and I've been using a pair of CX50 connected to my TV, since it's strictly a plasma "panel" without any inbuilt speakers. Now with the mini I get a easy way to get my Beolab 5's connected for movies. I've had the DVD player in OS X set to stereo output, again according to Soundproofs recommendation, and I'm really happy with the sound from DVD's. It sounds great. 

     

    So what did I get for 500 euro?

    I got a superb little computer, that looks awesome, it really holds it place next to the BS9000. It's made of aluminum so I don't have to be ashamed of it. I have it connected to my TV via DVI, and the picture is ofcourse as good as a pre- HD era plasma panel gets... It's only got a 80 gig HD, it's not enough, but I have it hooked up to a 500GB USB HD, that cost 59.90 euro. This one I have hidden away. I got a great, and by far better DVD player than the cheapo Philips DVD player I used before. Yes, it was only a cheap one with scart out only. Even on my pre HD screen the Mac mini projects a superiour image than what I had from the Philips. 

    The most important part is ofcourse the fact that I did get a very good digital music player. It holds most of my CD's right now, and easy to upgrade storage-wise. It plays music with a quality as good as the BS9000. It's a Mac! You can't compete with that. For a mac user it's nothing new, no new machine to learn, I simply know exactly how it works. iTunes! Yes, the best music player/shopper on the market if you ask me. It's  almost bulletproof. 

    I got a fully working computer, so if I feel like it I can take my wireless keyboard/mouse and surf the web, buy music, mail, youtube, whatever. It's all there. And I get to do it on a 42" screen. It's pretty cool. 

     

    In short, I'm extremely happy with it. It has got unbeatable price/quality.

     

    There's sexier digital music players/servers available, but smarter? -Not if you ask me.

    The mac mini is simply: "insanely great!"

    -Andreas

     

    BLab5, BLab5000, BLab8000, BV10, BS9000, BS3, Beo5, Beo4, BLink1000, BLink5000, BLink7000, A2, A8, Form2

     

     

     

  • 01-28-2009 8:30 AM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

     

    Double post, Sorry.

     

    -Andreas

     

    BLab5, BLab5000, BLab8000, BV10, BS9000, BS3, Beo5, Beo4, BLink1000, BLink5000, BLink7000, A2, A8, Form2

     

     

     

  • 01-28-2009 10:26 AM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    It can not be compared besides sound. One is a timeless classic, an icon with clever mechanics, the other a computer.

    If you don't care about having to use a keyboard and mouse in your living room I think the Mac Mini is great for what it costs. Is it perfect? In my opinion not. I had a Imac for a while, controlled through Beo4. I did not want a moue or a keyboard but every now and then one does need it, pop ups came advising of new software updates, it would on exception not select y own wireless network quick enough. Today, using the touch as a remote for my ATV is a bit sluggish when loading coverart as I have so many CDs and Itunes has a bug, it looses coverart here and there every now and then. So again, far away from perfection.

     

    The BS9000 is a bit bitchy herself, I have to say that. On very long CDs (longer then 75 minutes) it sometimes stops playing in the middle of the last sing. I guess the CD mechanism needs checking.

    For me, I am still looking for perfection. Waiting to hear more about BS5 and echeck it out at my dealer once it arrives in US.

     

    BS9000, BS2300, BC2, BL2500, BL3, Bl2, BS1, BV8, BC4, A8

  • 01-28-2009 10:35 AM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    Seeking perfection, then the Beosound 5 might not be your cup of tea. Smile

    Using a mouse and keyboard is ofcourse only if I was to use it as a "regular" computer, which I don't. Only as a media server. But still I appreciate the option of doing so if I please. 

    Mine connects instantly to the wireless. The iPhone can be a bit slow trough remote. But clicking the option "to stay connected" speeds things up.

    I'm not trying to do a VS in the way you described. I only used the BS9000 as a comparison sound-wise, and in this way the two are comparable, since ultimately they are now both used as a music player. One is a CD/Radio and the other as a computer, but that doesn't matter as far as sound quality go.

    Changing tracks and records via iPhone or the iTunes "remote" on your mac is pretty nice, and handy. 

    I'm not going to get rid of the BS9000, I absolutely love it, but the mac mini is great for fast-access. And the sound is as good as the BS9000!

     

    -Andreas

     

    BLab5, BLab5000, BLab8000, BV10, BS9000, BS3, Beo5, Beo4, BLink1000, BLink5000, BLink7000, A2, A8, Form2

     

     

     

  • 01-28-2009 11:04 AM In reply to

    • Sn00py
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on 09-18-2008
    • Australia
    • Posts 28
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    Just wondering on your second update if your connection is still the same?

    Macmini via Digital & BS9000 via Powerlink on the comparisons or both connected via Digital?

     

  • 01-28-2009 1:19 PM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    On the comparison I used the Digital coaxial. This is the cable I mention in post nr 2 that I'm switching back and forth between Mini and BS9000. Powerlink is a no go as far as Beolab 5's are concerned... 

    -Andreas

     

    BLab5, BLab5000, BLab8000, BV10, BS9000, BS3, Beo5, Beo4, BLink1000, BLink5000, BLink7000, A2, A8, Form2

     

     

     

  • 01-28-2009 1:27 PM In reply to

    • Alex
    • Top 25 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-16-2007
    • Bath & Cardiff, UK
    • Posts 2,990
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    I personally wouldn't say PowerLink is a 'no-go' with BeoLab 5s, it's just that connecting them to a bit-perfect output produces a notably better sound and means you don't have to rely on any of the circuitry in the source!

    Just one thing to check, make sure you're running your MacMini at 44.1 kHz/16 bit (in Audio MIDI Setup in the Applications/Utilities folder). if not, the MacMini will not produce a bit-perfect output (ie, the signal coming out of the digital connection will not be identical to the information from the CD).

     Weekly top artists:                   

  • 01-28-2009 1:34 PM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    I would think that in the second comparison, both sources were feeding the BL5s through the coax s/pdif. In theory and in practise, there should be no difference to the 16/44.1 digital output -- you'll find audiophile magazines going on about jitter, feedback loops and whatnot - but I really can't hear a difference. Over at Moultonlabs.com there's a post by Dave Moulton where he challenges people to distinguish between 12-bit and 16-bit, which flies in the face of everything as far as where the trends are going. The first B&O cd-players were/are 14-bit, and many say they are brilliant.

    One comment as to your description of differences between the toslink>coax output from the Mini and the Powerlink connection from the BS9000. It is essential that both be calibrated to the same sound pressure level (SPL) for a true comparison. I find that the digital signal comes through at 6dB higher than the analog, and when I boost the analog to match, I find that the weight and impression of the sound is closer, while not as precise and detailed as when I feed the speakers a digital signal directly. I can not understand why the BeoSystem 3 does not have digital OUT ...

    Pleased to read that you are satisfied with your Mini. I am very happy with mine, it's an excellent unit. Sometimes, when playing DVDs, I can hear the drive, but I have my Mini in a cabinet, and just close the door. As I'm controlling it through Bluetooth, that doesn't create any trouble. (The Edge diNovo keyboards are brilliant, both the full-sized one and the mini-version they've made).

    I have run comparisons between very expensive CD-transports and the Mini, for people who are extremely critical of sound. The founder and owner of 2L records (Grammy nominees and Stereophile darlings) was in my listening room, listening to his own productions in 24/96kHz, delivered by the Mini to the speakers. And as he has recorded and mixed the music, he was in an excellent position to judge the playback, to say the least. The Mini is "a miracle of rare device" - I have seen entire Home Theatre setups that are run with a Mini. When I download and play back HD-resolution video from the Mini, the result I get on my screen is excellent.

    Hope you get a functioning sync cable soon - you'll notice that your bass will become more precise.

  • 01-28-2009 1:37 PM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    I agree with Alex as far as "Powerlink being a no-go." Try to match the sound levels before comparing - it's incredible what a few dB will add to the soundstage and detailing. I still feel that the digital feed to the BL5s is superior to analog, but maybe not as radically different as your initial test may indicate. (Could it also be that your Bass/Treble settings on the BS9000 had a part in the impression? Set them to neutral.)

    However, there's definitely a reason why B&O designed the BL5s so that the digital signal would override any other inputs, if detected!

  • 01-28-2009 2:51 PM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    Alex:

    I personally wouldn't say PowerLink is a 'no-go' with BeoLab 5s, it's just that connecting them to a bit-perfect output produces a notably better sound and means you don't have to rely on any of the circuitry in the source!

    Just one thing to check, make sure you're running your MacMini at 44.1 kHz/16 bit (in Audio MIDI Setup in the Applications/Utilities folder). if not, the MacMini will not produce a bit-perfect output (ie, the signal coming out of the digital connection will not be identical to the information from the CD).

    Alex, I can partly agree with you about the powerlink, in some cases it's the only available option, but to me it makes no sense to have a 18.000 euro speaker hooked up trough Powerlink instead of SPDIF. The difference is after all unbelievable! 

     

    Thanks for the heads up about the bits, but as I said I had help from Soundproof, and he did not miss this part, and made sure I get it right. So the output is 44.1 / 16

    -Andreas

     

    BLab5, BLab5000, BLab8000, BV10, BS9000, BS3, Beo5, Beo4, BLink1000, BLink5000, BLink7000, A2, A8, Form2

     

     

     

  • 01-28-2009 2:56 PM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    Soundproof, I tried to mach the volume, of course I couldn't get it exact, but pretty close. I always have the treble / bass set to neutral. 

    The sound difference is comparable to putting a dense cloth in front of the speakers when having the PL connected compared to the digital input.

    -Andreas

     

    BLab5, BLab5000, BLab8000, BV10, BS9000, BS3, Beo5, Beo4, BLink1000, BLink5000, BLink7000, A2, A8, Form2

     

     

     

  • 01-28-2009 3:27 PM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    I do agree with you that there is a difference between analog and digital feed to the speakers, definitely. After all, I do all my music listening to the digital feed connection! This is the brilliance of active speakers with their own on-board processing - you can actually go straight from the digital file to the speaker, without a lot of boxes in between. Just consider an analog setup: first the source, say a CD>that signal is converted by the DAC in the CD-player>the signal then goes in analog form to a pre-amp>and then goes to the amplifier>which then sends it to the speakers.

    With your setup now you have a direct feed from Mini>speakers with on-board dedicated processing. Period.

    Using the BeoSound 9000 and analog, you go from the CD-player>on-board DAC>Powerlink>Speakers. No question as to what's preferable. But as you mention, when you use the coax out from the BS9000, then there is no discernible difference -- then both signals are seen as identical and are processed as such by the BL5s.

  • 01-28-2009 3:53 PM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    Soundproof, exactly, couldn't agree more.

    And just to clarify to others, the Mac mini should not be seen as a substitute to my BS9000. This one I'm going to save. The mini is just a faster more convenient way of listening to my large music collection, and a good DVD player.

    I'm hoping to add a Beovision 5 (because it's the most beautiful TV ever in my opinion) to my setup this summer, and with a Beo TV I'm sure I'll add a pair of rear speakers and enjoy movies trough the BV5.

    Since the Mini is such an inexpensive solution to a media server, it a no brainer not to have it. I mean I had cables worth 5 times this with my old High-end system! Big Smile 

    -Andreas

     

    BLab5, BLab5000, BLab8000, BV10, BS9000, BS3, Beo5, Beo4, BLink1000, BLink5000, BLink7000, A2, A8, Form2

     

     

     

  • 01-29-2009 6:43 AM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    Will there be in the future more speakers from B&O with a digital connextion and not only in the high-end class?

  • 01-29-2009 7:18 AM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    koning:

    Will there be in the future more speakers from B&O with a digital connextion and not only in the high-end class?

    I've been thinking about the same thing, hopefully we will se more and more speakers using the same technology as the Beolab 5's.

    Does the 9's have digital inputs BTW?

    -Andreas

     

    BLab5, BLab5000, BLab8000, BV10, BS9000, BS3, Beo5, Beo4, BLink1000, BLink5000, BLink7000, A2, A8, Form2

     

     

     

  • 01-29-2009 7:21 AM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    Nop!Sad

  • 01-29-2009 8:09 AM In reply to

    • BeoNut1
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on 08-19-2007
    • Mobile, AL (USA)
    • Posts 226
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    Soundproof: "I can not understand why the BeoSystem 3 does not have digital OUT ..."

     

    My sentiments exactly.  If the BS3 had digital out, this common trend that we're seeing here (trying to use a computer in concert with other B&O audio pieces or simply using a computer alone) would be easily doable and with volume control.  I realize that this could seemingly be seen as B&O enabling their competitors (Apple?) over their own equipment.  But, IMHO, this would actually have the opposite effect and make B&O the de-facto high-end hardware for Apple A/V stuff.  With their PUCs already allowing control of the Apple TV, this just makes so much sense for B&O to do.

    Please, someone at B&O, take note of these threads.  Part of your company's restructuring should entail embracing Apple.  Also, please put a digital out on the upcoming Beosystem 3 upgrade as well as a digital coaxial input in to your other speakers.

    Mark

    P.S.  This thread and a couple other recent threads (particularly the Beolab / ALT / phantom center thread) have been incredibly informative.  Thank you guys.

    Mark D
  • 10-12-2010 12:40 AM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    Install Pure Music software into the Mac mini and you will transform your mini into a transport that is beyond reproach though make sure you install enough RAM into the mini, I am running my Imac with 16Gb of RAM and set the Pure Music to use 1.5GB of buffer RAM under Pure memory player mode. The results and differences are beyond words. Try setting the Beolab 5s to max volume and use the sophisticated software's volume control, it uses a 32bit dithering instead of the usual 24bit in the Beolab5, play with the settings till you find one that suits your taste. I find no upsampling to be the most accurate and satisfying, when the processing is done correctly upsampling will only add artifice.

  • 10-12-2010 3:47 AM In reply to

    • Alex
    • Top 25 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-16-2007
    • Bath & Cardiff, UK
    • Posts 2,990
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    wonderfulelectric:

    Install Pure Music software into the Mac mini and you will transform your mini into a transport that is beyond reproach though make sure you install enough RAM into the mini, I am running my Imac with 16Gb of RAM and set the Pure Music to use 1.5GB of buffer RAM under Pure memory player mode. The results and differences are beyond words. Try setting the Beolab 5s to max volume and use the sophisticated software's volume control, it uses a 32bit dithering instead of the usual 24bit in the Beolab5, play with the settings till you find one that suits your taste. I find no upsampling to be the most accurate and satisfying, when the processing is done correctly upsampling will only add artifice.

    The volume control in the BeoLab 5s isn't digital - it's analogue and comes after the DAC/DSP and before the amplifiers so going for a digital volume control would be a step backwards.

     

    I would also argue that 32bit dithering with BeoLab 5s is a little meaningless when you're going to be bottlenecking the signal back to 24bit depth later on in the chain, unless of course you're using it because you like the sound of noise shaping (which is a trick many mastering engineers use to make digital sound a little more 'analog').

     

    Just my 2c.

     Weekly top artists:                   

  • 10-12-2010 4:37 AM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    I'm with Alex here when it comes to 32 vs 24. Go with the native resolution for the BL5s. There isn't any source material available in 32-bit anyway.

    But Pure Music is heartily recommended by me. I have it set up from my MacMini through a digital router to the BL5s, and I do hear a noticeable difference between playback detail through PM compared to straight from the integrated iTunes/QuickTime. I like what I hear from PM better.

    BTW - I connected my BL5s to a Beomaster 7000 through Powerlink, the BL5s are getting their sound signal from the MacMini, through the path described above. As the BL5s give priority to an S/PDIF signal, when I press CD on my Beo4, the Beomaster can be used to control the volume of the speakers, and on/off - while the signal they receive is routed straight to them via S/PDIF. Best of both worlds as I get a precise control of volume and integration, while giving the speakers the best signal. When I press Radio, Tape or other options, the Beomaster is used to route those signals to the speakers through PL.

    But I now have excellent iTunes/Pure Music playback from my NAS, as well as Spotify playback from the mini to the speakers, both through the S/PDIF IN on the BL5s.

    Speakers in Option 0.

     

  • 10-12-2010 9:33 AM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    No idea how the processing is done but the output will be native. There are no adding of bits done when you switch the upsampling off. Anyway any music enthusiast owning itunes owe it to themselves to at least give the software a try. Listening nearfield my computer desktop system with beolab 3s is in every parameter better than my audiophile setup that costs a hell lot more. I have a new found respect for B&O's new line of speakers and also for the advent of asynchronous DAC technology.

    Also bypassing an analogue volume control with a digital volume control that has a higher res than the playback material will be immediately superior.However, since the volume control is in the signal path of the Beolab 5s anyway, I guess there wouldn't be any difference.

  • 10-12-2010 11:05 AM In reply to

    Re: BS9000 VS Mac Mini on Beolab 5

    wonderfulelectric:

    Also bypassing an analogue volume control with a digital volume control that has a higher res than the playback material will be immediately superior.However, since the volume control is in the signal path of the Beolab 5s anyway, I guess there wouldn't be any difference.

    How is that? Digital volume control will necessitate dithering, no matter how much more resolution you use in the intermediate step. Otherwise you will end up with quantization artifacts = noise/distortion.

    I can't see how that would automatically be better than an analogue volume control after D/A, which in itself doesn't alter the actual content in any way.

    -mika

Page 1 of 1 (23 items)