Which personal confuser for ultra high end audio, MAC, PC, notebook, tablet or desktop?


Hello all!

Existing circumstances dictate the OS must be either Windows, or MAC, only.

My daily “lots of use” desktop pc is an 32 bit XP OS Dell that was used by the Spanish Inquisition.

I’ve made minor upgrades to RAM and HDD only.

I need a new personal confuser. I’m gonna get one quite soon. I need to know going forward which platform and configuration will serve a digital sourced front end best in 2017.

That is, of course, if there is still any significant disparity between MAC and PC OS with regard to present software, or hardware limitations or other concerns.

My barely used 4 year old windows 7 Dell 64bit box never has run Office 2010 right but does enable PCM file playback via Lynx AES Exp SC and JRiver & Foobar 2K and iTunes infrequently.

I’ve only had exp with Windows machines. However, I own Apple iPad Air II and iPhone 6 S. but I’m a pretty quick study so adapting to a new OS ought not be a big deal.

I do not have a working laptop and one would be a real aid for day to day situations as well as ripping and playing files, streaming audio playing videos, and so forth.

This latest ‘new’ machine will be a daily use computer for office oriented affairs as well. Email. Correspondence. Archiving documents. Data collection. Contacts.

I’m leaning towards a MAC, but not sure which way. IMac or Ibook? Both appear as semi portable and the Imac can sport a 4 or 5K display. The display isn’t a big deal for me bit the RAM and CPU needed to support the far greater resolutions of a 4 – 5K display would be nice IMO. Computer Horse power is always a plus.

The only issue I see with the iMac, is the thing itself. It’s a big display and looks like a problem waiting to happen when wiring it up or into the LAN and audio system.

I have a Synology Disc Station NAS. The plan is to acquire a versatile DAC for DSD and Tidal playback.

Am willing to add whatever else thereafter to achieve the intended goal mentioned above. Apps, additional hardware, etc.

Your experiences and Thoughts would be most welcome.

blindjim

Showing 1 response by almarg

Blindjim, it's good to see you back here lately.  Your posts are always witty and enjoyable.

Regarding the possibility of ethernet cables making an audibly significant  difference, see the following threads:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/high-end-ethernet-cables-real-deal-or-snake-oil

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/most-important-unloved-cable

An excerpt from one of my posts in the first of those threads:
...any cable that is conducting high speed digital signals, such as an ethernet cable, and that is located in physical proximity to the audio system (e.g., in the same room), can radiate or couple RFI into the audio system. And in addition, noise conducted into the destination component via the cable could to some degree (depending on the specific design) conceivably couple around the ethernet interface circuitry and into other circuitry within that component that is more directly involved in processing the audio. Including circuitry that may be sensitive to noise-induced jitter.

None of this necessarily means, however, that an ethernet cable costing hundreds or thousands of dollars would be any more beneficial than an upgrade to a very modestly priced cable. You may wish to consider experimenting with inexpensive shielded ethernet cables, as member Bryoncunningham described doing in this thread, with significant sonic benefit resulting. (I consider him to be a particularly astute and perceptive listener, btw, and one who is very thorough in his approaches to evaluating tweaks and optimizing his system. Unfortunately, though, he hasn’t been posting here in recent times). See the posts in that thread dated on and around 2-16-12. Inexpensive ethernet cables are commonly unshielded, but good quality shielded cables are also readily available at low prices.
And from the second of those threads:
As an electrical engineer having extensive experience designing high speed digital, analog, A/D converter, and D/A converter circuits (not for audio), I don’t find the reported differences to be either surprising or mysterious. And I consider them to be well within the bounds of established science and engineering.

Most likely what is happening is that differences in the characteristics of the cables, such as bandwidth, shielding, and even how the pairs of conductors that carry the differential signals are twisted, are affecting the amplitude and spectral characteristics of electrical noise and/or RFI that finds its way via unintended pathways to unintended circuit points "downstream" of the ethernet interface in the receiving device. "Unintended circuit points" may include the D/A circuit itself, resulting in jitter, and/or analog circuit points further downstream in the component or system, where audible frequencies may be affected by noise that is at RF frequencies via effects such as intermodulation or AM demodulation.

"Unintended pathways" may include, among other possibilities, grounds within the receiving device, parasitic capacitances, coupling that may occur into AC power wiring, and the air.

What can be expected regarding such effects, however, is that they will be highly system dependent, and will not have a great deal of predictability.
As you'll see in the second thread, in addition to the member I referred to above a number of other widely respected and highly experienced members confirmed that very inexpensive upgrades of their ethernet cables provided significant sonic benefit.

Best regards,
-- Al