Which operating system?

I would love a MAC - but cash is the issue, will Linux support, dare I say it, MP3?

Hi

It doesn't matter if you take care to esnure the OS is not interfering with the audio (resampling/mixing etc).

OSX is worst followed by MS and finally Linux. All OS mainipulation as far as I am aware can be bypassed etc by using the appropriate driver in MS or application is OSX.

Simon

If you really want a home electronics project, Computer Audiophile has instructions for the "CAPS" server here: http://www.computeraudiophile....cket-Server-CAPS-v20  Good discussion about the best way to implement the output.

I built a VortexBox server from an old PC in 15 minutes. Download, burn CD, stick it in old computer...voila. Its all set and ready to rip, stream and play music. Its Linux, but you'd never know that and don't need to fuss with it - it runs from a web interface. http://vortexbox.org/

Windows 7.  Then if you decide to go the streaming route you simply move the computer into another room and attach it to the network, use something like Assett as a program to stream and off you go.

You can install whatever you like on the Windows machine also, iTunes, JRiver, Kinsky, etc..

OSX. The rest is just a poor copy.

Windows 8, it's even a further improvement on Windows 7 regarding sound quality when using an external USB-SPDIF converter.

I built mine completely fannless ( there is not a single moving part inside it now  &nbsp) using a mini-ITX board and a fannless case from HD-Plex

+1 

What's Windows? Is it that thing I have to use at work that comes up with a box saying
"MS something-or-other has stopped responding, sorry for any inconvenience?".

I don't believe they are in the least bit sorry. 

Listening to music should be fun, not work. 

The best way I know of to get music to a Naim streamer is a Vortexbox - I think the next version may have the built in coffee maker too .... will your PC have a sound-card with optical out?   

I have a Asus motherboard with SP-DIF output, at the moment it is feeding the DAC on my Pioneer PDR609 - although the Pioneer can only take a 48/24 signal maximum.

I am using windows 7 with mediamonkey at the moment. I am have another ASUS motherboard with SP-DIF out, and was going to set it as a dedicated streamer. with addition of a standalone DAC

> it just works and streams. No fuss, bother or lifestyle-ware it just works without drawing attention to itself

Hi Simon - that is a great description of the Vortexbox, just to add the Vortexbox software is free.

I think you have to pay for WHS, but not sure if this is the case. 

Hi djh1697 

The Vortexbox is perfect especially if you go the UPnP/DLNA route

My view is I don't think you can beat Linux/Unix when it comes to server software. 

However, with Vortexbox it so well done that you don't even need to know what its OS is or what it does, it is Apple like in its simplicity and ability to get the job done.

TBH - Simon and Hook's suggestions will work just as well, I just think Vortexbox sounds much cooler than Windows Home Server.  

One strategy would be to give Vortexbox a go (it's free) and in the unlikely event you weren't happy with it then you could buy WHS

All the best, Guy

Regarding sound quality, there isn' t a better or worse operating system, all of them can be tweaked for, lets say, optimum playback. I would prefer to say just for bit perfect, but this isn't enough since there are other issues to take into account such as priorities, running tasks and resources which seem to play a disturbant role in audio playback beyond the bit perfect rule. So maybe the best operating system is just trying to avoid the use of it and going for a streamer as Hook suggested. My experience is limited to Windows, but I really think a dedicated PC with a bit of customization in both the hardware and software can be an excellent transport. I also suggest some reading at computer audiophile forum but in my opinion CAPS 2 music server is a bit expensive.

I'm not too sure about "all of them are able to be tweaked for optimum playback"

I know Linux has realtime kernels available, usually used on distro's aimed specifically at audio/video related tasks.

OSx is based upon the BSD implementation of Unix now, so it's a Unix clone too, as is Linux. There are many, many similarities with OSx and Linux since Apple moved to an x86 architecture and BSD, so there may also be a realtime kernel available for OSx too.

As far as I know, Windows doesn't offer a realtime kernel at all?

The software may be as shiny as you like, but if the operating system doesn't support realtime mode, audio/video tasks will be affected, at least in comparison with a realtime system

Realtime kernels are certainly a preferable option where jitter and latency are of any great importance - mainly serious audio recording/editing/playback.

The much simplified idea here is that it allows direct interaction with the OS.

There is a so-called "soft realtime" offering which is probably the sole choice with Windows.

It's a poor second best.

It's at least worth looking into, imho

> but in my opinion CAPS 2 music server is a bit expensive.

In my view it is complete waste of effort unless you just want to have a go for the hell of it

In which case, you'd me much better off with Vortexbox this runs on Fedora Linux

If you want you can use the Planet CCRMA Real Time Kernel if you feel Instant Karma's gonna get you.....  I've not tried it, but some say yes, some say no .... all right, all right all right, it certainly won't worsen the sound. 

I'm still thinking though if you stream the bits from it over Ethernet to a DAC then does the OS make any odds. 

I don't use Windows 'cos I don't like it, but I can't see why WHS would sound any worse/better. 

If I were building a player to connect to a DAC through S/PDIF then that's different - Vortexbox every time possibly with some Karma. 

Reality: I understand Windows is not a real-time OS but I AFAIK Mac OS X and common Linux distributions aren't real time either. So I don't share your opinion of windows being "a poor second best" .

Real-time operating systems benefit from less multitasking between applications and services but performance also depends on many factors such as memory, CPU speed, and the program design and I guess this is one reason behind the SQ differences among different playback software in both Windows or OS X.

I also think real-time kernels might be preferable for an audio server but I would like to know exactly why, I mean how the jitter in the processing task domain can induce jitter or any other "disturbance" in the digital audio signal?

It is always the same with computer audio, bits are not only bits!

It was so-called "soft realtime" to which I was referring as "a poor second best" - in the context of a comparison to proper hard realtime.

I hope it didn't read differently to how I had intended.

It is a very similar issue to RAID devices - using so-called "software" RAID is a poor second best to properly supported RAID.

That's just how it is.

When you compare Windows with "common" OSx or Linux offerings as all lacking realtime kernel support, yes, you are correct.

But then you are also comparing *desktop* OS systems not aimed at the task in hand.

Dedicated options do exist, using realtime kernels, for audio/video related work. This was the suggestion being made by most posters in the thread, I would say.

Horses for courses

Usually, when dealing with higher end equipment, one is looking for optimal performance.

The suggestions of alternatives that may help to achieve that goal are simply there for consideration.

When it comes to software, there are many choices on every platform

Out of interest, I'd love to hear from Naim on their platform of choice for their servers/streamers and Qute range? I'm wondering if it's an in-house bare metal build, or have they used something adaptable which may be expanded upon in the near future, perhaps?

Any official word on that?

> I don't share your opinion of windows being "a poor second best"

Agreed it's no higher than third or fourth 

I can't hear any difference I just like the Vortexbox which is Linux and no money goes to you know who, which means more cash to spend on the latest Apple products. 

> and I guess this is one reason behind the SQ differences among different playback software in both Windows or OS X.

There isn't any difference in the bitstream - all players that produce bit perfect output are the same or they don't produce bit perfect output. 

I agree a computer can pollute the electronics and change the sound, but it is not the player that does this. I say this because I've captured the output of several players and compared with the Vortexbox and they are the same, in fact the same as from a CD transport. I'm still sceptical enough to believe identical bitstreams sound the same. 

> Out of interest, I'd love to hear from Naim on their platform of choice for their servers/streamers and Qute range? 

There is embedded Windows in there somewhere - the HDX definitely uses embedded Windows and my Qute has a web server in it that is definitely Windows based. Music streamed over Ethernet seems to sound better in the Qute than music fed from a computer through S/PDIF, but the bitstreams are identical (as captured out of the S/PDIF out into a Yamaha HD/CD recorder). So something else is at play: perhaps the noise from my Apple Music Server or its dodgy switch mode PSU.

I can't see how making my Vortexbox kernel real-time would change much. Putting the ferrite rings simon suggested on the Ethernet cable do have a beneficial effect, which I assume is down to eliminating RFI.  

Guido, you have checked for yourself that the same bitstreams can sound different, why not the data processing needed for producing those bitstreams could it being also "polluting" the signal in some way?