Reflection: this forum is now in the 21st century

Posted by: daddycool on 03 May 2008

Reflective mode on:

I must admit that reading the forum over the past week has been very interesting, perhaps even more interesting than ever before.

In my view this forum is now in the 21st century and let me explain why I feel that way.

Before we were discussing spinning CDs (CD5x vs. CD5) and vinyl records (What cartridge for my Rega deck?). There were amp choices (72/hi/250 vs. new 202/Napsc/200) and speaker choices (Spendor vs. Neat, Naim speakers or not).

Of course we had members discussing Squeezeboxes and DACs, but I always felt that was looked upon as some nice extra, much in the way Naim owners also have Tivoli radios in the kitchen.

Then came NaimNet, but after the n-Vi, I gathered this was looked upon as some other distant niche. I guess there are not many custom install customers on the forum, as custom install takes away the fun of the selecting and installing yourself hobby this forum is about. It wasn't clear right away what impact NaimNet would have on stereo business as usual.

And then came the HDX and opened Pandoras Box. All of a sudden it was now clear that Naim was going beyond vinyl and CD. I found it very interesting to see what reactions this provoked and I woudl like to share my following comments:

1. The HDX is really a new generation source much in the same way as the CD players. Actaully, my parents are in the market for a new system and I would advice them this bulletproof solution. The price is comparable to the CDX2 upwards sources, and with the HDX I see no point for my parents to bother with CDs anymore.

2. As a Mac user I am sad that Naim has chosesn NetStream and DigiFi solutions, because it locks them in to propriety WIndows solutions and file formats. A combination of .wav + mp3 for the tags is not my Mac way of doing things.
NetStream brings a Windows interface. There are disproportionally many Mac owners among the Naim owners I read in market reserach posted here last year.
Furthermore I am a big supporter of open file formats and open source software, so I would have preferred FLAC and Linux. That said, I understand that Naim has chosen these partners to get their new product lines of the ground, and MS isn't going to roll over and die. And there is the next point:

3. The HDX is about a systems approach to a listening experience, a black box, not about operating systems, file formats etc. And here we see a clash with those Naim owners that want to "produce" the music themselves (create their equivalent of a CD and LP) by ripping and storing the music themselves. These users are calling for a Naim DAC, much in the way Naim had brought us Stagelines and Headlines. We can fiddles with the turntables and phones, and Naim gives us a box we can use to connect it to our Naim system.

4. In conclusion, I think Naim has two target markets here. The fire-and-forget customers who simply want to replace CD players with a HD solution. And the customers who want solutions for their computer based music collections.

So much more to say but I'll leave it at that. I am looking forward to your views. Interesting times ahead. (Me I am looking forward to both a HD5x and a DACline)

Computer has met stereo big time, this forum is now in the 21st century Smile Reflective mode off.
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by paremus
Agreed.

Personally, I really hoping HDX's musical capabilities (with 555PS) match / exceed the CDS3. The forum discussion would then get really interesting Smile
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by gary1 (US)
Food for thought:
1. Why do any additional HD anything since at some point the storage drives will fail and need replacement. I do undertand Naim's desire to control all aspects of the music handling to ensure quality of the palyback. I don't think this is the only way to handle it, however, as other companies are taking a different route. We will seee who does a better job at the end of the day. I would like an all in one instead of the NAS/PC/Mac into my Naim system, but I'd like to see it FLASH drive based--no spinning parts to fail!!
2. See my post on "HDX online" regarding the external DAC issue and the release of Naim Music this summer.
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by u5227470736789439
Dear Gary1,

All replay systems fail - bar none. Stylus failure, CD mechanism failure, scratches or cracked Analogue Discs, rotted CDs, Tape stretch, oxidisation, and drop-out, and now apparently the spectre of HD failure. That is why the HDs will be doubled up and backed up. The chance of two HDs failing at the same time is significantly less than a spoiled tape, or disc, or broken down replay device.

The really wise person may also take the "ripped recordings" to another HD in another place as well for a truly "belt and braces" approach, but the doubling of the HDs seems a step change towards greater security of the archive.

How can that be anything other than a move in the right direction?

George
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by u5227470736789439
*
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by gary1 (US)
GFFJ: I mentioned the above with FLASH drive because it is out there and is under development. I've also had some individuals in the business comment that the playback that they've heard from flash drive is superior to that from Hard drive with the added bonus of eliminating moving parts which are more apt to fail than others. Also depending upon how its developed a flash drive can be made to pop in and out so you can then save to the drive and take the drive with you and is also easy to replace if it fails.
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by matt303
quote:
Originally posted by daddycool:

NetStream brings a Windows interface. There are disproportionally many Mac owners among the Naim owners I read in market reserach posted here last year.
Furthermore I am a big supporter of open file formats and open source software, so I would have preferred FLAC and Linux. That said, I understand that Naim has chosen these partners to get their new product lines of the ground, and MS isn't going to roll over and die. And there is the next point:


I agree with you about the interface issues it does feel like Naim are coming in to the music server area from the standpoint of supplying all in one solutions that will handle ripping, storing and playback without needing to resort to none Naim equipment. Maybe this is try to win over current Naim devotees to these new products. Linn on the other hand seem to have a much more pragmatic view that computers and NAS solutions can look after the ripping and storage and it's their job to supply products to make accessing your music enjoyable. The Linn idea fits in better with my experience of using music stored on a computer in multiple ways either listening to it on the computer in the office, converted to mp3 on an iPod or streamed to my HiFi (SB3 + DAC). One thing I think both Linn and Naim need to address is the experience of using the UI on their devices, I understand both of them require software to be installed on the controlling device which limits the number of devices that can be used. Where as Squeezecenter uses a web interface and can be used by any device with a browser than meets certain requirements which given the number of cheap low power laptops hitting the market and devices like Apples iPod touch gives a lot of flexibility. Products like these (Naimnet, Linn DS, etc) will really sink or swim on the quality of their software and the users experience of using that software, I imagine it is a new area of development for most HiFi manufacturers.
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by u5227470736789439
Dear Gary1,

I am quite sure that the end of the road to improved playback, is by no means in sight! One day there will be some solid state memory storage that will be stable and reliable for a lifetime! It is not here yet as far as I know, but it will come.

I suspect that all state of the art replay electronics, must depend on the current best option. In five years time, I would be surprised if these options have not changed.

George
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by gone
quote:
Originally posted by gary1:
... but I'd like to see it FLASH drive based--no spinning parts to fail!!

But don't forget that flash memory also has a limited (albeit very large) number of read/write cycles....
Cheers
John
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by David Dever
quote:
2. As a Mac user I am sad that Naim has chosesn NetStream and DigiFi solutions, because it locks them in to propriety Windows solutions and file formats. A combination of .wav + mp3 for the tags is not my Mac way of doing things.
NetStream brings a Windows interface. There are disproportionally many Mac owners among the Naim owners I read in market reserach posted here last year.
Furthermore I am a big supporter of open file formats and open source software, so I would have preferred FLAC and Linux. That said, I understand that Naim has chosen these partners to get their new product lines of the ground, and MS isn't going to roll over and die. And there is the next point:


As a long-time Mac (and PC) user and configurator, I have to take issue with these remarks, as follows:

1. StreamNet, as an underlying technology for NaimNet and DigiLinX, has its specific sonic and functional advantages over existing technology–certainly, as said before, Naim (or any other StreamNet licensee) would not bother paying extra for functionality that would be freely available somewhere else (and that's just common sense).

2. The NetStreams interface (as well as the interfaces for the NS-series NaimNet servers AND the HDX) run as a Flash movie inside a browser–whatever platforms Adobe supports (Mac / Win / Linux / SunOS / etc.) with Flash Player. (I am using a Linux-based Nokia web tablet to control the office system behind me as I type this.)

3. Apple Lossless is not an "open" format to the extent that FLAC is, though it has its advantages for Apple streaming protocols–and it is based on existing, proprietary technology developed by the German music software company Emagic, which Apple bought back in July 2002. (BTW, Emagic used to support PC, Atari, and Mac, and dropped support for the OTHER platforms when Apple bought them.)

4. WAV (and broadcast BWV which has time-stamping) is now the dominant audio file format for content creation on the Mac, full-stop. Anyone using AIFF or SDII formats on the Mac is probably saddled with legacy, out-of-date software which will have limited shelf-life.

5. VMware Fusion + a cheap license for WinXP, installed on an Intel Mac, is so easy to use within the context of normal "Mac" operation, that there is now NO excuse for platform whining. NONE. Zero. Get both, keep your Mac, simplify your life. (You could also run Linux in a VM with its own IP address.)
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by michael1702
quote:
Originally posted by David Dever:
5. VMware Fusion + a cheap license for WinXP, installed on an Intel Mac, is so easy to use within the context of normal "Mac" operation, that there is now NO excuse for platform whining. NONE. Zero.

there is one: using a 12" powerbook. (-:
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by daddycool
1. @ David Denver, thank you for comprehensive reply (sharp but accurate as ever), just the sort of discussion I hoped would follow (except for the whining bit).

2. @ all, with this thread I intended to go beyond discussions on wether or not to use flash memeory, I think that has been covered in the other threads extensively.

How do you all see the fact that, as a forum, we are now discussing extensively music format(s) beyond vinyl and CD as a valid source?

What do you think about that Naim has made these moves and how do you feel they are doing? Is everyone clear on the way traditional Naim stereo, n-VI. NaimNet and HD products will make sense as a product package?

Just curious, just keeping an open mind, I welcome your input.
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by David Dever
My guess is that a 13" MacBook probably costs less than 2GB RAM for the 12" PowerBook....
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by Warren
Agreed.

Whilst in reflective mode it occuers to me that though some seem bothered by the introduction of music servers there would be far more to be worried about for the future of Naim if they weren't embracing this market.

My hope is to get a very high quality music server in a year or so and I doubt I'd have gone down the Naim route if I wasn't expecting them to have one waiting for me.
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by joe90
The kind of people that the servers (NS01,2,3 HDX) etc are aimed at are NOT:

1) computer gurus who even know what a flash drive/SB/streamer even is

2) going to quibble over price

3) are going to put up with not being able to play a song at any time

4) going to tweak it

Keep this in mind when questioning the product's features/abilities...
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by u5227470736789439
Dear Joe,

I completely agree.

The people who buy an HDX type machine are after simplicity of operation, with the storage issue addressed, and the typical Naim quality of music replay. For those more interested in PCs, they will find a solution involving lots of separate boxes for their storage and the DAC etc, and will work round the inevitable operational difficulties. These are the same people who will grumble at the HDX price, and actually deny that their solution is exceeded in quality by a properly developed entire package, where the problems of component interaction are solved, and issues like adequate power supply, and matched output are solved.

Of course they may be right in a minority of cases, if they are very clever.

I, for one, neither profess that specialist knowledge, nor, secondly, have the slightest interest in spending the necessary amount of time to learn if it is possible. I would rather simply enjoy the music! Time is too short and has a far higher price, or at least it does in the second half of the "mortal coil."

George
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by joe90
quote:
I would rather simply enjoy the music!


Yes I think this point is the one all too often missed.

It's a bit like being obsessed with wine without ever imbibing...
Posted on: 03 May 2008 by Warren
quote:
The people who buy an HDX type machine are after simplicity of operation, with the storage issue addressed, and the typical Naim quality of music replay. For those more interested in PCs, they will find a solution involving lots of separate boxes for their storage and the DAC etc, and will work round the inevitable operational difficulties. These are the same people who will grumble at the HDX price, and actually deny that their solution is exceeded in quality by a properly developed entire package, where the problems of component interaction are solved, and issues like adequate power supply, and matched output are solved.

Of course they may be right in a minority of cases, if they are very clever.

I, for one, neither profess that specialist knowledge, nor, secondly, have the slightest interest in spending the necessary amount of time to learn if it is possible. I would rather simply enjoy the music! Time is too short and has a far higher price, or at least it does in the second half of the "mortal coil."

George

George, isn't there a huge chunk of middle ground here?

The HDX supports music ripped to computers so caters for both those who want total simplicity and those who for one reason or another don't make much use of the internal storage. (We can argue endlessly about whether that makes a sonic difference but only listening will decide).

For many serious potential purchaser won't the real question be where it fits into the Naim hierachy? i.e. does it match up to a CDX2 or CDS3 etc. rather than how does it sound compared to a squueezebox or Beresford DAC or whatever?

'enjoy the music' - absolutely.
Posted on: 04 May 2008 by themrock
I think Naim should provide a Musik-Server made for the SN internal DAC.
It should only have:
1 really big Harddisk, no internal CD, no internal DAC only 1 Digital-Koax-Output to connect it with the SN internal DAC, which have to make all the decoding work.
A software which provides the most common standards like wav, flac, apple and mp3 etc.
A big onscreen display and a remote control with an integrated display like the Logitech dual remote control.

Ready is the perfect musik-server for the future, no compromises to the analog world and it would (has) to be much cheaper than the HDX.
Posted on: 04 May 2008 by abbydog
quote:
The HDX is really a new generation source much in the same way as the CD players.


How so? Choice of music software appears to be ripped CDs or poor-quality downloads.
Posted on: 04 May 2008 by Adam Meredith
quote:
Originally posted by themrock:
I think ...


What appears true is that - whatever you make, someone can 're-make' it to suit their specific requirements.

Difficult, then, to be a manufacturer.
Posted on: 04 May 2008 by daddycool
quote:
Originally posted by abbydog:
quote:
The HDX is really a new generation source much in the same way as the CD players.


How so? Choice of music software appears to be ripped CDs or poor-quality downloads.


It plays/serves a collection of music, carrier-less, rather than one carrier at the time.
Posted on: 04 May 2008 by daddycool
quote:
Originally posted by Adam Meredith:
What appears true is that - whatever you make, someone can 're-make' it to suit their specific requirements.

Difficult, then, to be a manufacturer.


Yes, like my desired Nait 5i-2 with (four) DIN inputs only Smile

I guess that's why manufacturers do market research and customer satisfaction surveys.
Or run a forum....

Can't satisfy them all but get a large group right to stay in business.
Posted on: 04 May 2008 by Chris Kelly
To some extent I think that where one stands on this is dependent on age, willingness/desire to immerse oneself in new technologies and learn a new technical vocabulary and how great one's investment is in the current technolgy, whether analogue, digital or both.

For my part, at 57 and with what by any measure is a high-end replay system for CDs, there is no motivation or interest in a computer-based storage and replay system. I do not find selecting and loading a CD into my 555 the slightest bit onerous. If, as may well happen one day, my 555 develops a fault I can get it repaired. I shall still own the physical medium on which the music is stored. If one day Naim release a CD replay system superior to a 555 I have the choice to purchase that. The limitation for me will always be that the Redbook standard limits the level of fidelity to the original music which can be stored on a CD. I can live with that.

I am not a Luddite per se. I rip CDs to my Mac to load onto an iPod. I have worked in the IT industry for 30 years. The excitement we are seeing around the new technology reminds me of the interminable arguments/discussions in the HiFi press in the late 80's and early 90s of the merits 1bit versus 16bit DACs, the joys of a 2 box DAC/Transport approach etc.

In the end, for me it comes down to this. I would much rather, for the most part, spend my time listening to the music than fiddling with my toys.
Posted on: 04 May 2008 by abbydog
quote:
It plays/serves a collection of music, carrier-less, rather than one carrier at the time.


Sorry, I may be being deliberately thick here but I don't understand this. Ripping CDs appears equivalent to time shifting, ditto streaming/downloads. And since I can only listen to one piece of music at a time, how does carrier-less help?
Posted on: 04 May 2008 by abbydog
quote:
The excitement we are seeing around the new technology


Isn't this actually old technology? BTW Chris, very much agree with your last point!