Uniti and Apple Lossless
Posted by: POV005 on 13 January 2011
Hi!
Finally my 30 year old stereo receiver has been switched out for something new, a Naim Uniti :-) It simply rocks !
Just a comment to various other threads: Some have "complained" that their Uniti would only accept Apple Lossless from the USB/Ipod (or n-link for older versions), but my new Uniti streams Apple Lossless files without problems. When streaming a Apple Lossless file the Uniti writes "44.1 kHz WAV" in the display.
So, at least for me it makes sence to rip in this format as it can be played in the living room as well as on my Ipod.
For info I will invest in a decent NAS, but for now I use a xp-laptop with Asset UPnP. It copes with 24/96 as well (wireless / wireless)
Rgds. Poul
Finally my 30 year old stereo receiver has been switched out for something new, a Naim Uniti :-) It simply rocks !
Just a comment to various other threads: Some have "complained" that their Uniti would only accept Apple Lossless from the USB/Ipod (or n-link for older versions), but my new Uniti streams Apple Lossless files without problems. When streaming a Apple Lossless file the Uniti writes "44.1 kHz WAV" in the display.
So, at least for me it makes sence to rip in this format as it can be played in the living room as well as on my Ipod.
For info I will invest in a decent NAS, but for now I use a xp-laptop with Asset UPnP. It copes with 24/96 as well (wireless / wireless)
Rgds. Poul
Posted on: 13 January 2011 by Tog
Hi Poul
Looks like your UPnP server is doing all the hard work with your alac files, presumably transcoding them to wav on the fly.
Tog
Looks like your UPnP server is doing all the hard work with your alac files, presumably transcoding them to wav on the fly.
Tog
Posted on: 14 January 2011 by POV005
Yep! But that feature is quite neat as the Uniti cannot do the trick :-)
The Asset UPnP software is quite common among users of this forum ?
Could it be a new feature of the Asset ?
Poul
The Asset UPnP software is quite common among users of this forum ?
Could it be a new feature of the Asset ?
Poul
Posted on: 14 January 2011 by Tog
quote:Originally posted by POV005:
Yep! But that feature is quite neat as the Uniti cannot do the trick :-)
The Asset UPnP software is quite common among users of this forum ?
Could it be a new feature of the Asset ?
Poul
I'm no expert on Asset but alac isn't that popular a codec with Naimites many of whom use either Windoze or HDX/Serve wav or flac. EyeConnect on the mac has been able to transcode aiff (another weakness in the Uniti - but soon to be sorted I'm told). If Asset can transcode alac - great.
Tog
Posted on: 14 January 2011 by balma01
So, supposing to have a upnp server that is able to transcode ALAC files and to stream them to a Uniti, Is it better (from a listener prospective) to rip in FLAC format or in ALAC format?
Posted on: 14 January 2011 by POV005
@ Balma01: From a theoretical point og view it should not matter. Both FLAC and Apple lossless are..... lossless! They compress the original signal for storage purposes, but the decoding process takes it back to the original. They should be exactly similar. But only Apples Lossless will play on an Ipod, not FLAC.
Poul
Poul
Posted on: 14 January 2011 by okli
quote:Originally posted by POV005:
Yep! But that feature is quite neat as the Uniti cannot do the trick :-)
The Asset UPnP software is quite common among users of this forum ?
Could it be a new feature of the Asset ?
Poul
Not so new as I know - you can setup the handling of different file formats in the setup menu. You can set "as is", which shouldn't transcode given format at all or set some transcoding options to LPCM, WAV, etc. Be careful of some "behind the scenes" transcoding - I was very unpleasantly surprised when Asset transcoded my 24/96 FLACs to LPCM 16/96, even if I set no transcoding for FLAC :-( I requested to remove this "feature", but not sure if this will be done...
Posted on: 14 January 2011 by likesmusic
There are other issues too .. if you like Apple lossless and use iTunes to rip, the artwork is hard to recover should you wish at some later date to convert to another format. However, if you use dBpoweramp to rip to Apple Lossless and into iTunes, when you later convert those files, the artwork comes with them.
Asset UPnPs 'behind the scenes' transcoding is an undocumented "feature" - there's more to it that just the Audio Format Streaming options - look in the General Settings box for a "Settings override" and try "Edit Override Values" for the behind the scenes stuff. All very messy.
Asset UPnPs 'behind the scenes' transcoding is an undocumented "feature" - there's more to it that just the Audio Format Streaming options - look in the General Settings box for a "Settings override" and try "Edit Override Values" for the behind the scenes stuff. All very messy.
Posted on: 14 January 2011 by Tog
quote:Originally posted by POV005:
@ Balma01: From a theoretical point og view it should not matter. Both FLAC and Apple lossless are..... lossless! They compress the original signal for storage purposes, but the decoding process takes it back to the original. They should be exactly similar. But only Apples Lossless will play on an Ipod, not FLAC.
Poul
Although - the comparative quality of any codec is a highly controversial topic as you will no doubt experience if you hang around these forums, the issue is not quality but corporate licencing. Flac is free and open source; alac is an intellectual property owned by Apple. As a result there are fewer implementations of alac in audiophile streamers.
Tog
Posted on: 25 January 2011 by POV005
Well...... untill I get a NAS up and running I will rip in Apple Lossless. When a large NAS i connected to my system I can easily keep both a FLAC (for Uniti streaming) and an AAC file in iTunes for Ipod usage.
Yes! The more I browse this forum I see that things are more complex when you dig into matters.....It was somehow easier with vinyl and CDs! But we want streaming from large libraries, graphic remote control, convenience from the sofa and HiDef sound. :-)
Yes! The more I browse this forum I see that things are more complex when you dig into matters.....It was somehow easier with vinyl and CDs! But we want streaming from large libraries, graphic remote control, convenience from the sofa and HiDef sound. :-)
Posted on: 25 January 2011 by Frank Abela
If the NAS is big enough, you may as well not bother with any compression. Although the storage mechanism is lossless, the decoding process invariably affects the outcome. It's been suggested that this may be due to resources on the decoder but the fact is that most people who compare a lossless encoded stream to an uncompressed stream find that the uncompressed stream is a little better.
Regards,
Frank.
All opinions are my own and do not reflect the opinion of any organisations I work for, except where this is stated explicitly.
Posted on: 25 January 2011 by Tog
Don't want to start on the "your codec is the same/better as my codec" argument but the issue is at best highly controversial and unproven either way. Some people think flac sounds worse than wav but then some people eat margarine !
One has conversion routines that hardly tax modern systems the other requires slightly more bandwidth to stream.
Tog
One has conversion routines that hardly tax modern systems the other requires slightly more bandwidth to stream.
Tog
Posted on: 25 January 2011 by likesmusic
If your renderer is upset by the (computationally trivial) task of decoding flac then a) heaven help it when it gets a hi-res track, and b) arrange your server to transcode to whatever format you believe sounds best, while preserving the tagging and convenience advantages offered by storing in FLAC or apple lossless. Or does anyone believes that the effects of transcoding on the server can be heard ...??!! And why is a small amount of FLAC conversion processing a Bad Thing, whereas nearly doubling the network traffic the renderer has to process of no consequence?
Posted on: 25 January 2011 by manicm
Look, I don't really rate ALAC, I know 'lossless' is 'lossless' but ALAC just sounds inferior than other lossless formats.
It takes up more space, but if you want to be surprised try AIFF.
It takes up more space, but if you want to be surprised try AIFF.
Posted on: 25 January 2011 by DavidDever
"And why is a small amount of FLAC conversion processing a Bad Thing, whereas nearly doubling the network traffic the renderer has to process of no consequence?"
These are two separate issues–if the network traffic doubles, it might be possible that (depending on the decoding) the maths overheads increase linearly (push in/push out) or greater than linearly (e.g., when decoding a look-ahead compressed file format). It's not simple fast-slow-stop from a computational perspective–and, in embedded devices, every processing cycle counts against power supply capacity, and, therefore, sound quality.
These are two separate issues–if the network traffic doubles, it might be possible that (depending on the decoding) the maths overheads increase linearly (push in/push out) or greater than linearly (e.g., when decoding a look-ahead compressed file format). It's not simple fast-slow-stop from a computational perspective–and, in embedded devices, every processing cycle counts against power supply capacity, and, therefore, sound quality.
Posted on: 25 January 2011 by Tog
Yes but "have you tried reversing the polarity?"
Streaming flac sounds fine to me but then I have cloth ears.
Tog
Streaming flac sounds fine to me but then I have cloth ears.
Tog
Posted on: 25 January 2011 by likesmusic
"and, in embedded devices, every processing cycle counts against power supply capacity, and, therefore, sound quality."
I don't believe that is necessarily the case, or your conclusion necessarily follows. In any case, why not fix it?
I don't believe that is necessarily the case, or your conclusion necessarily follows. In any case, why not fix it?
Posted on: 25 January 2011 by POV005
Just to complete this circle.........
As I wrote in top of this thread: My server SW, the Asset UPnP, reads the Apple Lossless, decodes on the fly, the streamed signal is 16 bit 44.1 kHz WAV. So in that case the DAC does not need to "decode" any compression, just make an analog signal from the bit-stream.
I also have some FLAC 16/44.1 and 24/96 - they all sound brilliant.
I cannot imagine that the decoding process takes any significant power consumption that anyone is able to hear. Only reason for that should be errors in the decompression, but hey - even seriously low powered portable deviced can do it, som why not a NAS or a fine thing like the Uniti ??
As I wrote in top of this thread: My server SW, the Asset UPnP, reads the Apple Lossless, decodes on the fly, the streamed signal is 16 bit 44.1 kHz WAV. So in that case the DAC does not need to "decode" any compression, just make an analog signal from the bit-stream.
I also have some FLAC 16/44.1 and 24/96 - they all sound brilliant.
I cannot imagine that the decoding process takes any significant power consumption that anyone is able to hear. Only reason for that should be errors in the decompression, but hey - even seriously low powered portable deviced can do it, som why not a NAS or a fine thing like the Uniti ??
Posted on: 01 March 2011 by JeanChris
Hi,
I use my Uniti with a Mac Mini configured to run both SqueezeCenter & Asset UPnP.
Asset UPnP is running on Mac OS X through Crossover Mac : stable and efficient.
I rip all my CD with Max & manage the files with iTunes. Because I use sometimes an iPod, I choose to use only ALAC for my LossLess Codec.
Both SqueezeCenter & Asset UPnP are configured to transcode it on the fly to WAV and it is perfect.
I use my Uniti with a Mac Mini configured to run both SqueezeCenter & Asset UPnP.
Asset UPnP is running on Mac OS X through Crossover Mac : stable and efficient.
I rip all my CD with Max & manage the files with iTunes. Because I use sometimes an iPod, I choose to use only ALAC for my LossLess Codec.
Both SqueezeCenter & Asset UPnP are configured to transcode it on the fly to WAV and it is perfect.