jamgolf

I wanted to share some information regarding high quality audio content to enjoy on your Burmester audio system if you have it in your 991.

To really appreciate the system I wanted to get some good quality albums. A couple of sources that I found are:
HDtracks.com and linnrecords.com

I purchased & downloaded some super high-quality albums from Hi-Res Store within HDtracks. Some 352/24 and some 192/24 tracks. I copied them to a USB stick but 991 Burmester system was unable to play them

So I used SOX (free) to down-sample the content to 44.1/24
(http://sox.sourceforge.net)

I used this command to batch-process the conversion (on Mac):
for i in *.wav; do sox "$i" -b 24 -t wavpcm "${i%.*}"-new.wav rate 44100; done

Burmester plays these 44.1/24 .wav flles beautifully and the sound quality, clarity and richness is just at a different level from anything else that I have experienced

So - even though I spent more money on the 352/24 & 192/24 content, which I was'nt able to play directly, I think down sampling from such high quality resulted in still very rich quality sound experience. I wil be buying more WAV tracks from HDtracks.

For a fast USB stick I bought Corsair 128GB Flash Voyager GTX. I am very happy with its read/write speeds as well.

Hope this info will be helpful to someone else wanting to enjoy their Burmester.

Cheers!

chuck911

Since you appreciate the improvement you're getting from quality encoding, here are a couple more things you'll probably enjoy. The first is to get (or download) the XLO Reference Recordings Test and Burn-in CD. This CD has tracks on it that can be used to demagnetize your system. As implausible as this may sound its actually soundly based and really works. This CD includes several tracks, a variety of music with one thing in common, they are exceptionally well-done recordings. The track of Michael Ruff's Poor Boy for example, recorded at Sheffield Labs direct to 2-track by Doug Sax and Claire Marlo will have you feeling you really are there with them in the studio. A true desert-island recording.

The second, anything you can find recorded or mastered by Doug Sax at Sheffield or Reference Recordings is guaranteed to stand out from regular run of the mill recordings in exactly the same way your HD downloads stand out from lower bitrate versions. The sound is more natural, liquid, effortlessly dynamic and palpably "there". If you can find Janice Ian's Breaking Silence, recorded with all tube gear, put that on and prepare to be amazed. Unlike a lot of audiophile recordings these are actually good music, otherwise I'd never recommend them.

jamgolf

Thanks for the advice Chuck.
I'll check out XLO Reference Recordings CD and also some Doug Sax, Michael Ruff and Janice Ian tracks.

MJBird993

I was thinking about this just yesterday as I was stuck in traffic. My base stereo system sounds great when the car isn't moving and it isn't fighting road noise, tire noise, wind noise and engine noise. It lacks a bit when at speed and the volume has to go up to compensate. I was very disappointed in the Bose system in my previous 911s, which sounded pretty decent at speed but poor when the car wasn't moving, at which time the subwoofer was overpowering. That's why I didn't get it in this car. The Burmester was a tough choice - I couldn't hear one in a 911 and the system that I listened to in a Cayenne was nice, but not $5300 nice.

How does the Burmester stack up in those regards - specifically the differences between sitting at a light or zipping down the road at 70 MPH? Do you find that you need to tweak the settings for instance, or does it even matter when going that fast?

Keadog

I have no idea what OP is saying, but I'm struggling with stereo choice in my "never ending build". We have BOSE in my wife's A6 and JBL in my Tundra (both OE). We each have Sirius and my chronic tinitus means my high frequency hearing is kaput.
So, is there ANY reason for someone like me to consider Burmester over BOSE? We have a rather large classical music collection on CD, but most are from the early to mid '90s. We haven't purchased a CD in years and click "buy" at the Apple store if there happens to be a new song we like.
I could tell how crappy the base stereo was, so I'm at least getting the BOSE.

Bacura

I had the Bose in my 997.2 and I have the Burmester in my 911/50. The Burmester is definitely better. I think it sounds amazing whereas I thought the Bose was pretty good. It's a lot of money so it's not for everyone. And yes, sometimes I listen to the exhaust....just not in rush-hour traffic in a large urban centre. Just priorize what you need vs can afford. I passed on the GT3 because I wanted a sunroof and a good stereo.

VOLTCONTROL

Next to audio quality an sich, in nearly every musical genre there are a couple of exceptionally well recorded and mastered albums to be found. Feel free to treat yourself to an afternoon at a specialist music shop/record store and talk to the guys behind the counter about music.

I certainly have a plan for this weekend now. :music:

jamgolf

I feel most people will find listening to MP3s on Burmester to be an underwhelming experience. They would expect to be blown away (given its price/reputation) but they would not be overly impressed - sans the placebo effect.

While car shopping I was carrying around a USB stick with a few albums and tried it on base, Bose and Burmester systems. Honestly I felt all three of them were not that good, I was especially not impressed with the Burmester given its price.

I bought a CPO 4S which had a Burmester. Now I am glad it has it, because its only after the fact that I have made an effort to play better quality tracks on it. To me, its sound quality is in a different league, but only given the right quality content.

jamgolf

Sorry, if my post lacks clarity and I somehow confused you.

I meant to say that Burmester system is worth it only with good quality tracks.
Otherwise the differences would be negligible, IMHO.

You might find that among your collection of classical CDs there are some that were produced from studio masters and will sound much better than rest. Even your iTunes tracks will have some that will sound way better than the others, depending on their source and encoding.

I have found most of my MP3s and most of my CDs, unfortunately to be of the lower quality.

jamgolf

I had a similar underwhelming experience when I tried playing MP3s.
I suspect that might have been a factor of what you were playing.

I was playing some tracks while parked in my garage (with engine off) and it honestly felt I was at a concert.
At modest highway and city speeds it still sounds pristine, with the sound of the engine and some road noise mixed in - but still very very rich, crisp and enjoyable.

kiya

Some of you guys listen to music based on it's audio recording quality?
I've been into both home and automobile audiophile systems for over fifteen years and never have i picked up a CD or record because of how good the sound quality is.

Keadog

Oh no, I'm sure it was clear to someone who understands the details better. I think I understand that we will have little if any media that will allow the system to live up to its potential. That's important to understand and it makes me think I'll be fine with the BOSE, especially since my hearing is so far gone (trap shooting, hunting and lots of loud rock concerts in the late '60s/early '70s).
Plus, we listen to a lot of podcasts and books on MP3 when we take road trips - not exactly concert hall stuff.
This has been very helpful to me...

chuck911

The difference between Burmester and Bose is the difference between hearing the music and hearing the music system. There are a lot of misconceptions on this score, but the real goal of a hi-fi system is to get out of the way. To not be there. To pass the music through to the listener without imposing any of its own sonic signature. This is what Burmester and other high-end systems seek to achieve. Bose on the other hand seeks to produce a sound they feel people want to hear. Whole different ball game.

One result is that most people hearing Bose will find nothing objectionable. The sound has after all been tailored to what most people like. The casual listener, someone who is happy enjoying pleasing background noises will almost always be happy with Bose. This covers a LOT of people!

But sometimes people want more. Sometimes even people who were initially happy with their Bose systems, because Bose was more pleasing, they start listening more, and noticing more. Like, to a certain extent, everything played on Bose sounds the same. This is what always happens with a system designed to impose its own sound on the music. It may take different people minutes, or months, to notice, but once they do the result is always the same: boredom. Disinterest. A sense of feeling cheated.

A true high-fidelity system like Burmester delivers the goods, but presents a different challenge. Because this system imposes little and passes the signal cleanly, it allows you to hear quite accurately all the crap that's in the recording. And frankly, most recordings are crap. If they weren't crap from the get-go, they certainly become crap after having been compressed to MP3, or worse, dynamically compressed in the studio or for broadcast.

This is the reason why there are threads like this one where people gush over Burmester revealing seemingly trivial things like bit rates while there are no threads from people eagerly seeking out and enjoying quality revealed by their Bose system.

Unfortunately, regardless of the system or how good it is, it goes in a car that, the moment it starts up and goes rumbling down the road, is making its own brand of music. Like Battle of the Bands all playing at once.

Oh well.

jamgolf

I think, given your favorite track/artist/album and a choice of two audio sources, one a very high quality and one modest quality, your choice would be the former - especially when playing it on Burmester.

Obviously one would choose whatever genre music one likes to listen to

jamgolf

I admire your passionate argument.
Well said