High-end network music player - Page 10

In the manual it states that the analog balanced outputs have fixed attenuation...is this referring to the volume control, or something else? I'd like to use the balanced analog outs directly into my amp, but obviously I need to be able to control the volume.

Transporter User Guide

How are you getting there? You could also just select the playlist and hit "shuffle"...


Admittedly, I have not spent that much time with the Internet Radio stuff, but I will see what I can find out...

Yes, you can run balanced outs directly to your amp and use the volume control.

On the single-ended outputs, there is a set of selectable attenuation settings (inside the chassis) to be used with amps that do not have input gain control...in those cases, you might need to change the attenuation setting to level-match the Transporter's output to the amp's expected input level (eg. -10db, -20db, or -30db...the default is 0db). See page 24 of the manual for a more detailed explanation. Apparently, balanced inputs on amps do not require this, so SD did not add the attenuation selector switch to the balanced output.

Phil, for a while it seemed that even my random mix settings were in a rut in that they would start over in the previous order each time I turned on the player. I went to my server settings and I tweaked it like crazy and got to where I could get true random mixing. It would gather a set of ten songs and play them while adding to the ten.

Sounds strange, but it worked, not as well as your suggestion to simply get to the appropriate play list and hit shuffle. This is much easier.

On the internet, I am still a bit challenged. First, I have instructed the server to just go to my favorite internet provider but I still have to go to browse--by location--North America--California--San Francisco--then scroll down to my station. This is ten steps, each requiring me to scroll to the right 'spot'.

I have to do this again when I want to listen to East Coast late-night broadcasting at an earlier West Coast time--which is a great way to avoid many commercials and most chatter.

Does MusicGiants still have the very austere language in their EULA or has that changed with this new arrangement? That is the only reason I don't use their service and stick with my own losslessly ripped CDs. Their DRM policies are the most restrictive I've read.

A few weeks ago I rolled some NOS tubes into my McIntosh 2102 amps (bridged, mono) and a few days ago they finished 'burn-in' and my Transporter never sounded better.

I found a way to get my favorite streaming audio station into my playlists so that i no longer need to jump through five prompts to listen to my favorite station.

Don't put the vista machine down, nor the Xbox either .Read here my latest discovery:

CULTURAMAX

A long way back in the thread, someone wished there was a way to re-rip tracks in a better format (e.g., apple lossless) but preserve the tags for the file already ripped in a lesser format (e.g., 128 kbps mp3). Someone said they thought JRiver would consult its internal database and, if it found the track, would apply the existing tags to the re-rip. Can anyone confirm this?

(Looking to update much of my collection from 193-256 kbps mp3 to Apple lossless in the most painless way. 17000 tracks).

anyone heard the new release of the slim devices duet? its basically a display-less sb3 but comes with a sweet looking display remote like an ipod.

Elsewhere here at AVSFORUM there is a new thread. Go to the search engine and try 'squeezebox'

Hey, I was over at AUDIOGON.com and someone posted some settings for SQUEEZEBOX which prompted me to re-evaluate, and I discovered an update for my software. If you have not bothered of late:

Server>Basic>Behavior>Update

I don't know what it did, but it does sound better.....?

yup, firmware 84. there is quite a bit of discussion about that on audiocircle. majority claim a huge sonic improvement with the new firmware, but alas there is NO technical data to support the argument so you get the naysays popping their head in and calling everyone golden ears. but i agree, i hear an improvement quite a bit. who cares what others think, as long as im happy!!

Hi

I am extremely interested to read people impressions on High End music servers. Not only in terms of User Graphical Interfaces, definitely an important area but in terms of sound quality.

I am not interested in entering into the tired "bits are bits" arguments, rather the impression however subjective that it might be, of people who have compared one of these high End music servers, including the Qsonix to high quality transports. I must say I am beginning to be taken over by the extraordinary convenience promised by these units units. I have not acquired one but iTunes on my laptop is really spoiling me already.. so/...

Hi

Lately there have been several discussions on “Music Servers”... The definition of such items is not too clear to me... Audiophiles, myself included have characteristically been very cool toward the concept... Science is moving forward, Processing power, Storage cost are plummeting and now it is clear that the world is moving toward downloads... Better-than-CD is available online, no physical support needed, no BluRay Audio or HDAudio disc needed just your HDD and an Internet connection to have access to these.. The convenience is extraordinary.. Seeing a CD as a half-Megabyte to simplify the maths, a TB HDD will keep a 2,000 CD-collection in a book-sized contraption, including cover, lyrics, notes, comments and critics or about 41 years of listening to music 24 hours/day straight... Cost of such a device between 150 and $2,000 (if you include RAID, network connection, etc) A NAS, that is one of these Disk that is networkable would allow, with the proper (minimal) IT skills, streaming everywhere in your house or even through the world ..
The subject of Audio Quality is serious, yet, there seem to have solutions for this... Some questions linger. Are they. (Music Servers) all the same? Which reverts to an old question of do All Digital Transports sound the same? One for which my answer based on unscientific evaluation is NO, then again I also thought cables were “easily” distinguishable from each other... Since we only have “0” and “1” does it make a difference what else they do? Are high bit rate really necessary? As many have asserted, my point on this is Yes they are, more bit, higher sampling Better to me, both intuitively and scientifically, the matter of perception remains unclear though... mpeg, for example makes the assumption that we do not need (The purists such as myself beg to differ) or even capable (the Jury is still out on this) to hear what is rejected, colossal assumptions backed by the popularity of the i Pod and other mp3 players .. Straight comparison between CD and lower than 320 bits proves that mp3 is not as good as CD even for teen or tin ears... 320 Kb is harder to prove with the most perceptive hearing differences but not “dramatic” ones..

Then there is the Digital to Analog Conversion and the User Interface which to me is where the war should be waged... For Marketing purposes we will see all kind of claims about jitter and bit for bit resolution or other buzzword the marketers will try to find for this relatively new category of appliance. but making of the bits and pieces real music and finding a simple and ergonomical way to deliver these to the customer is to me what these should be about.

What are your opinions, experiences, Have you build Do we need just a PC or an appliance i-e a component build for the purpose; or would any PC do? What about the User Interface, the form factor, the noise generated by the appliance, the reliability of the system. Ids your system truly PC-based Your PC a card or the built-in sound module, appliance-based ones... What DAC are you using why Firewire and not USB, Why not Ethernet to be done with it? How would we describe a High End Music Servers.? What would make these worthy for an Audiophile seeking the Best ? Many questions but to me a fascinating subject

I really welcome a vigorous discussion on this matter that is my next step and yours to, very soon.


P.S. Interestingly , I posted last on this thread.. I would prefer to remove the "Netwrok" from the thread tile but since it is not mine. I am not able to .. What do you think new thread or continue with this one?

I'm using Sonos throughout the house and also at the store and just love it. It works, it's stable, it's cost effective and has tons of pluses aside from just being functional. Not high-end, but a nice DAC solves that in my T785.

John
What would you consider High End in a music Server? Do you care about higher sample rates the 2/92 and above?

I use an AppleTV connected to a Lexicon MC-12. The jitter issues will be the same as for CD transports. The MC-12 has dual-PLLs, so I don't really worry about jitter, but there is a bunch of good work towards reducing jitter issues with networked playback with less heroic and expensive means, like TC Electronic's DICE II chip:

http://www.tcelectronic.com/media/fr..._clocks_tc.pdf

I imagine with a good enough DAC (eg. Benchmark DAC1), media servers will sound pretty good all around.

The user interface for AppleTV is OK if you're using it on a TV, but becomes wonderful if you use an iPod Touch or iPhone with the Apple Remote application --- it feels just like an iPod. AppleTV is effectively silent. AppleTV has its own storage, so it can run without a backing server. It can also stream if it runs out of space.

I will be building a Windows Home Server to start archiving my CD collection (ripped with dbpoweramp, which has a convenient WHS plug-in), and to serve to more devices in the house. With any of the lossless encoders like FLAC or ALC, you'll get roughly 50 percent compression, too.

I don't think it's worth the trouble to build a PC that can be used in the same room as your audio system --- put it somewhere else where you won't hear it, and use networked streaming devices to serve music from it. Right now, the only reason to put a PC in your listening room is to listen to 192/24, as there is no streamer that can support that rate. There are a few 96/24 streamers like Transporter and Popcorn Hour.

Also, take a look at CES this week --- there will be a lot of media servers coming out.

A big question for me is how to listen to multichannel content, of which there are some being sold online now (eg. Linn Records). Right now, the only approach I know is to burn a DVD-A. There are a bunch of streamers coming out at CES with 1080p HDMI outputs, and therefore have sufficient bandwidth to do multichannel PCM. Whether or not they actually support it in software is another question altogether.

--Andre

Glad to see some of the audiophiles starting to realize what us rippers and streamers figured out a long time ago, welcome!

For my own setup I use a ReadyNAS Pro in RAID6. I use RAID6 for redundancy, to keep my data as safe as possible and for the massive amounts of storage available to me. The built-in streaming for SlimDevices (Logitech) products is icing on the cake with this NAS. Of course I still back it up, but it is redundant & reliable storage. It also incorporates a few "fail-safe" (if you will) features, informing me if any drives are overheating or failing. To me there is no such thing as a "high-end music server", it has to do much more with the interface. Let me explain.

All of my CDs have been ripped by me using either EAC is secure mode + the AccurateRip plugin, or else using dbpoweramp. Either way I know that the FLAC files produced by these rips represent 100% accurate bit-for-bit rips from my CDs, something no transport in the world, regardless of price, can truthfully claim. A one-time on the fly read of an optical disc simply cannot be as accurate as multiple reads that are compared to each other and to online databases to ensure accuracy.

My ReadyNAS Pro does a superb job of streaming this data over ethernet to my various devices. Any CAT5, 5e or CAT6 cabling will do, there is no difference as long as the cable is not damaged. If the receiving device does not get the correct data, it is simply sent again. At the other end there are numerous devices available to "transcode" the ethernet stream into a digital audio signal that you can then send to the DAC + Amp of your choice using your preferences for cabling, speakers, etc... A big name super expensive media server will not send the ethernet data any more accurately (or audibly differentl) than a home built NAS made from spare parts as long as it has a properly functioning network card and cabling. Period!

Now, the super high-end media streamer may have a really cool or easy to use interface or superb support and customer service from the manufacturer that make it stand out as a desireable component, but I personally really love the simple functionality of my SlimDevice SB3s and my Transporter. The Sonos is another popular product. I also know that the DAC inside the Transporter is truly state of the art and it has been very favorably reviewed by various "audiophile" publications, and it can decode 24/96 FLAC files! To me there would be little to gain from using an outboard DAC, but I'm certain there are inumerable audiophiles who would dispute this. I am totally satisfied with the sound the Transporter puts out, but folks have even modified them by adding tubes, etc...go figure... To each their own I guess.

So my "audio chain" goes something like this:

CDs ripped accurately and compressed into FLAC* format > Stored and streamed via ReadyNAS > Dell gigabit switch > Transporter > amp > speakers, Viola' (see photo below for my 'audio' setup)

(* = some purists will tell you that WAV is more accurate, it is simply uncompressed lossless music vs. FLAC which is compressed lossless. The big problem is you cannot tag WAV files. Each of my FLAC files are still 100% lossless, they just take up less storage space than WAV and they are all tagged not only with all of the relevant data and liner notes, but also an embedded photo of the CD cover. None of this very convenient data affects the audio quality in any way.)

My setup (FLAC files stored and served by my ReadyNAS Pro to my Squeezeboxes and Transporter) allows me immediate access to any track, disc, playlist, genre, artist (you get the idea) in my entire collection, not to mention all of the streaming options available via the internet. I truly have 100% accurate CD sound from any CD in my collection available immediately at the click of a button, nice! Imagine being able to listen to any music in your entire collection without ever having to get out of your chair to change a CD, and you can have this convenience available throughout your home, garage, patio, etc.

p.s. this represents my outlook on streamed media, not any sort of attack so constructive comments and differing opinions are always welcome, keep the flames to yourself please.



PHOTO: ReadyNAS Pro, D-Link gigabit firewall/router, Motorola cable modem, Dell PowerConnect 2416 Gigabit switch, Linksys G WIFI (running modded FW), all connected to an APC UPS and kept safely and out of the way in a cool basement storage room.

My office setup is really great and I listen to it constantly. I use a SlimDevices (Logitech) SB3 (connected via ethernet) > digital coax into a Benchmark DAC1 USB > balanced interconnects > Paradigm Active Studio Reference 20s.

I couldn't be happier with this setup. This way I don't get any annoying PC sounds through my speakers as I would if I streamed directly from my PC via USB to the DAC1.

This is quite cool.. I will look into these and I do agree with some of the comments.. Interface is key... IMHO as well.
Wired Ethernet is preferred even on "regular" CAT 5... CAT 5 can carry Gigabit ... No need to upgrade to CAT 6 or to buy a straightwire Gold plated Ethernet Cat 6e cable.. Yes it does exist , there is probably a Monster equivalent.. Ethernet is preferable to wireless.. more reliable transmission, much more available bandwidth even CAT 5 is able (on short distancessay le) to transport Gigabit something WiFi in all its present incarnation is unable to do... WiFi REAL not the Air Data rates whichis these days 54 Mb/s.. the real throughput is usually less than 20 Mb/s by the way and is a shared medium, meaning if you have several devices running they all have AT BEST "only" 20 Mb/s available on that medium... Wired Ethernet in comparison on even a regular switch establishes a constant bandwidth pipe between to communicating devices.
Why RAID 6? RAID 1 would be as good IMHO,as well as less costly, all you need is disc mirroring you do not really have the write or read issues in this application, just curious? Things are changing.. I would not have believed that higher qualitu music reproduction would come.. seeing this mp3 wave... Now HDTV and above C quality at sensible price... This is great news.. Now I need to see really better interfaces.. Qsonix is currently pointing in the right direction...

Not only that but WIFI = dropped data, doesn't happen over wired ethernet. I personally use all 5e or 6 cable so that HD streaming is not limited at all. Also possible multi-HD streams.


I have six 750GB HDDs in my NAS. With RAID6 I can lose 2 of the HDDs and not lose any data. I can also "hot swap" drives, meaning that if one is overheating or starting to produce ATA errors (i.e. failing), I can pull out the bad drive and slip in a new one (with no data loss) and the redundant RAID array is automatically rebuilt by the NAS. Finally, as bigger and bigger HDDs are produced, I can just swap out say six 2TB HDDs (one at a time), let the NAS rebuild the array and end up with a redundant 12TB RAID volume (minus of course the drive space required for parity).

ReadyNAS Pro:

Not sure. I suspect that the Meridian/Sooloos merger will yield some advancement. The Transporter seems pretty cool. But most 'high-end' servers seem to be largely software based rather than really killer all in one hardware. It would be cool to have high rez capability, but unfortunately, 99.9% of all music isn't available in that kind of technology. It would also be great to be able to have surround music on a drive (I believe it is possible with DTS CDs, FWIW, as I've been able to copy them). And of course, the ability to store DVD videos. But I'm good with Sonos as is, given the limited amount of non-redbook stuff I actually care about. I'm patient. What I'd really like is the ability to 're-master' a lot of my CDs so that they sound good on high-end speakers. Like Rush - so compressed it makes any good speaker sound like crap.

Just so you know, Sonos can do as many as 32 simultaneous streams with no loss or drops, all wirelessly, as they deviate from the regular wireless standard. I've had a lot of people give up on other wi-fi based units for that reason, yet have great success with Sonos. Not the endall/beall, but it does work.

John

WiFi is ONE wireless standards, there are several others. One of the main reason why WIFI drops packets is that is QoS mechanisms are poor to non-existent and I am being charitable... The Sonos might use the same band but a different standard (Not WiFi)that allows it to be more robust, even this depends on the RF environment but I get your point... I also find your point on Rush right on spot.. Compressed like there were no tomorrow. What were they thinking?

It's wifi, but appears to be a more robust implementation.
http://mimo-mesh.com/en/overview.html

I agree, but specifically I meant the ability to stream not only audio but also HD video to more than one location. I've never heard anyone complain about having to much bandwidth. ;-) Also, for the price difference between 5 and 6, the few extra bucks are worth it. Keep in mind that my total network size is not exactly huge (and I make my own ethernet cables from bulk).