![]() It all depends on what you like this Mac to do. I agree that the IMac is the cheapest route to go with when you compare the price, specification and you got a screen too. Of course MBP offers maximum portability but highest cost. ![]() MacStore is having offering refurbished iMac 21.5inch with 4G RAM and 1TB HDD at 1588. If it works ok, am gonna buy it and give it my impressions :)Ä«etween a Macmini, Macbook Pro and iMac, which one would you choose to be the music server? The only thing holding me back on MacMini is the higher cost plus the need to get other accessories to get it complete. Have downloaded the demo but waiting to try out iTunes plain first, then install PureMusic for a comparison later this week. I'm glad that Pure Music didn't make that decision for the listener rather it is giving them endless options to choose from. It offers a few different methods of this, "Maximum Fidelity" and "NOS type classic." This caters to just about every listener out there, I say this with confidence as I know people that enjoy digital upsampling and those that despise it. Now, if one wants to "upsample" the music, you have that option too. Pure Music keeps it real it's a bit-by-bit perfect representation of the file itself. Yeah, the GUI says they're off but I can hear some interesting things on playback that bother me. ![]() Gone is the veil that iTunes seems to place on it's output, the vast filters and EQ's that I can't seem to just turn off. I can also say that support of the product has been top notch! I almost immediately get a response back to my questions. That has been resolved in the latest version from the folks at Channel D. In the beginning it had some issues where it was a bit quirky, playback would stop all of a sudden, or it wouldn't go to the next track. So how about the sound? I can say that I prefer to run Pure Music 100% of the time now.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |