Why Mac Mini Over Slim Systems Products?


Here are my thoughts. Please let me know if they make sense:

1) Using a Mac Mini for a music server is superior to slim systems duet or squeezebox if you are interested in playing high resolution files (I am).

2) Mac Mini and the Transporter both do high resolution, but Mac Mini would likely provide more universal access to things out there on the web.

3) Now with the ability to use the itouch as a remote control, the Mac Mini has just as much remote functionality as the slim systems stuff. You will still need a screen and keyboard for startup though.

4) It is better to use the USB out of the Mac Mini than the optical mini plug (I don't know why this is true, it may not be true, I've just seen it several times).

IF all these statements are true, then I want to go the Mac Mini route. I have a spare monitor and keyboard. Now I would just need to figure out the DAC question. Please advise re the above. Thanks, Peter
peter_s
It would seem to me that using the USB output from the computer and using a USB DAC that uses Asynchronous USB mode would be the optimal setup. I know there are not yet many DACs on the market that use asynchronous USB communication, but they would seem to lower jitter to a minimum without the need for an additional jitter reduction device.

I'm only familiar with Wavelength and UltraFi USB DACs that uses asynchronous mode, but I'm fairly certain there are a few more. I've heard the Async UltraFi DAC and it was very good using a Mac w/iTunes as the transport.

Enjoy,

TIC
Check out computeraudiophile.com. Great website-very sophisticated and informative. They do reviews on everything from DACs to different storage
solutions. Also have reviews on canned music servers.
The site also walks you through the whole setup, whether it be Mac or PC based.
By the way, Bryston just came out with a USB DAC.
The Mac Mini will give you longer longevity than a Slim device. As you pointed out, having a fully functional computer will give you far more options that a 'network appliance'. Along with all the various software options you have to choose from.

USB as an interface is good. However, I find the Firewire interface far more intriguing. RME has a line of Firewire digital audio interfaces (both AD and DA conversion). Specifically the unit I am using, the Firewire 400 model, you can choose between power supplies: wallwart or Firewire interface to power the unit. If you choose Firewire, you will be off the grid if you are using a laptop. At this point, you are miles ahead in terms of audible noise from the power supply.

I started down this path for other reasons, but the RME equipment sounds so good, I don't mind using it in my big rig for digital. Before I owned the RME Firewire 400, I was using the Apogee Digital Ensemble. I did a/b comparisons of the two and the RME with the Firewire selected as the power source really is in a completely different league than the Apogee Digital Ensemble hands down.

I use the RME Firewire primarily for recording my albums over to digital at 192kHz sampling rates. I also use the Firewire with Logic Pro software. It doubles as an excellent headphone amp too.

http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_fireface_400.php
I'll start with a ditto....

I did a vista based mini-pc from Aopen (same footprint as a mac mini - basically a laptop computer in a desktop case). Ran the digital output through the mini toslink (van den hul - nice cable) to a Bel Canto Dac3.

All my rips are either full resolution or ALAC ripped with EAC.

Sound was great (into krell/wilson).

Control was great.

The PC was on the network, and as i sit at another computer in the room, i can take control of the music server and make it do whatever i want.. Including taking advantage of internet radio broadcasts in HD.

I think a dedicated device for a music server, other than a computer (Mac or PC) is short sighted and destined to be outdated faster than the computer.