• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

C52 disappearing from Mac Mini when volume goes beyond 34%

iTunes sells tracks above 24/96? The Mini is capable of playing hi-rez files but I was speaking about iTunes music.

Thanks again,
Ron-C
 
ron-c said:
iTunes sells tracks above 24/96? The Mini is capable of playing hi-rez files but I was speaking about iTunes music.

Thanks again,
Ron-C
Click to expand...
Ron - ha- iTunes STORE - doesn't sell 24bit files, I am referring to apple's media playback software, also known as, iTunes.

although, Apple does master specifically for iTunes using 24-bit files, https://www.apple.com/itunes/mastered-for-itunes/

http://theproaudiofiles.com/mastered-for-itunes/

http://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2012/02/24/147379760/what-mastered-for-itunes-really-means

Once again, many can't tell the difference between lossy and lossless.

http://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/how-well-can-you-hear-audio-quality

http://www.npr.org/sections/thereco...ou-did-slightly-better-than-guessing-randomly

I encourage all to discover for themselves .

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/91-au...01-test-your-ability-hear-high-res-audio.html
 
Last edited:
o0OBillO0o said:
My response is gonna side track the thread, but it's in the interest of the C52 and Mac Mini working together. In which all you need is a Vinyl LP Turntable and CD Quality digital audio.

Not kidding. Take a 24bit/192 KHz file and convert to 16 bit file. Conduct many A/B tests.

I have attached my links for all to read or watch, draw you own conclusions.

The Difference Between 24-bit & 16-bit Audio is Inaudible Noise
http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
https://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml
http://www.sonicscoop.com/2013/08/2...t-you-knew-about-bit-depth-is-probably-wrong/
http://www.head-fi.org/t/415361/24bit-vs-16bit-the-myth-exploded
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_bit_depth
Click to expand...

Yeah well, cool picture, cool story......not interested in some internet expert's "tests" quite honestly. I do a lot of multi-track recording in my everyday job as an audio engineer, so I have a lot of experience listening to different sample and bit rates, and on high end audio equipment, and this, using my ears.
And no, do not take a 24/192 and down-sample it, that is not the way to demonstrate the difference, the tracks need to be created in the bit-rate and sample-rate to be used as a comparison.
If you record 32 tracks at 16/44.1 there is a significant difference when you record the same multi-track at 24/96, it is not just slightly detectable, it is very obvious.
I'm not telling you what you can hear, I am telling you and the forum what I can hear and sharing it on here so people can make their own minds up and get a different angle so people are more informed...
I get really tired of everything being a "myth", "de-bunking" and so on, usually these things are not done very scientifically and involve the up-sampling and down-sampling of the same tracks to use as comparisons, and that is where all the arguments start, because that is not a very good way to demonstrate the difference.
I often have to bounce a 24/96 multi-track mix down to 16/44.1, when I do and hear the same mix in 24/96, the difference is not as obvious, but is still there.
Digital audio is so good now in every respect, and progress into high bit rates and sample frequencies has really opened things up, I hardly ever listen to analogue an more with the progress that has been made in the last few years......
My 2 cents......
 
ron-c said:
iTunes sells tracks above 24/96? The Mini is capable of playing hi-rez files but I was speaking about iTunes music.

Thanks again,
Ron-C
Click to expand...

My apologies Ron, I thought you were talking about the iTunes media player. Not that I use it, as I prefer J-River....
 
kevzep said:
Yeah well, cool picture, cool story......not interested in some internet expert's "tests" quite honestly. I do a lot of multi-track recording in my everyday job as an audio engineer, so I have a lot of experience listening to different sample and bit rates, and on high end audio equipment, and this, using my ears.
And no, do not take a 24/192 and down-sample it, that is not the way to demonstrate the difference, the tracks need to be created in the bit-rate and sample-rate to be used as a comparison.
If you record 32 tracks at 16/44.1 there is a significant difference when you record the same multi-track at 24/96, it is not just slightly detectable, it is very obvious.
I'm not telling you what you can hear, I am telling you and the forum what I can hear and sharing it on here so people can make their own minds up and get a different angle so people are more informed...
I get really tired of everything being a "myth", "de-bunking" and so on, usually these things are not done very scientifically and involve the up-sampling and down-sampling of the same tracks to use as comparisons, and that is where all the arguments start, because that is not a very good way to demonstrate the difference.
I often have to bounce a 24/96 multi-track mix down to 16/44.1, when I do and hear the same mix in 24/96, the difference is not as obvious, but is still there.
Digital audio is so good now in every respect, and progress into high bit rates and sample frequencies has really opened things up, I hardly ever listen to analogue an more with the progress that has been made in the last few years......
My 2 cents......
Click to expand...

kezep, I am gonna stop reading at audio engineer. You know the difference, I don't need to tell you this. It's important to have high levels of range to account for the quantization of different filters and so on. This is why a DAW does 32/64bit processing, right?

BUT at the consumer level, it makes not a hair of difference, this is also referenced in the evidence in the links I provided. You may find your material to be sufficient at hight bit depths. However, the music listening world enjoys music drastically lower depths-- this is based on facts that many cannot hear this.

The C52 by McIntosh is the best representation of a single box pre-amp. The engineers go so far to answer the fears of all those doubt "audiophiles" that they are not getting as close to the music as possible. I hope others- who read this, understand that music listening is simple and should not be filled with doubt.

Further, I am curious about what is causing this issue with the volume control. The best solution, in my mind, is to use the optical output on the mac mini AND use CD Quality material. Users of the C52 won't miss a thing, because they are enjoying the pride of ownership, build quality, and sound quality of what McIntosh makes. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I think we are saying the same thing with regards to consumer level in a roundabout way....

Yes, I too and very curious as to what is causing this issue with the C52 as well........the DAC part of the pre-amp will have nothing to do with the control interface.....it seems very strange...
 
Ok. Moving on.. I have someone from my local audio shop coming to the house in a week or so to investigate. I hope they'll get to the bottom of this. From what I gather, this should work. Software, media, etc aside. Meanwhile, I've been enjoying my turntable plenty lately. I hate computers sometimes.
 
schlachet said:
Ok. Moving on.. I have someone from my local audio shop coming to the house in a week or so to investigate. I hope they'll get to the bottom of this. From what I gather, this should work. Software, media, etc aside. Meanwhile, I've been enjoying my turntable plenty lately. I hate computers sometimes.
Click to expand...
Have you tried the optical or Coaxial inputs? Would be interested to see if the same thing happens then?
 
There are a few things I thought to try. Namely switching the link between the pre and power amp from balanced to unbalanced. I may try that, along with switching to optical. Not that I'd want to remain on optical, it it might help narrow down the problem component.
 
schlachet said:
There are a few things I thought to try. Namely switching the link between the pre and power amp from balanced to unbalanced. I may try that, along with switching to optical. Not that I'd want to remain on optical, it it might help narrow down the problem component.
Click to expand...

Changing the analogue outputs from bal > unbal won't have anything to do with it as they are completely analogue, changing the input from USB to either coaxial or optical may tell you something about the fault, the fault is in the digital domain so you need to work in that area....
Not suggesting you stick with optical, but just trying a few things might help narrow down the issue....
 
Well, that sounds dumb enough - that it's something I would do ... <G>

Thanx for posting back on the solution ... oft overlooked here, which leaves some of us scratching our heads ...
 
think i had the yellow and black switched.

the result?
turntable (mc phono input on c52) - no trouble at all, even at high volume
dac c52 - worked fine until volume surpassed a point at which the dac dropped off the device list on my mac mini (but NOT on all laptops in the house!)
receiver / bypass - immediate, full blast brrrrrrr noise.

i did notice the sub was acting weird but didn't think too much of it. i was so focused on the interaction between the c52 and power amp, and then frustrated until i had someone come figure it out.

ah, a fresh pair of eyes.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom