[qute]itunes + as a pre amp

I think to be most practical you would do away with the Airport Express and the DacMagic and just use the Qute (with the external power amp if you wish). Also the Qute is going to stream the tracks from wherever they are held on you Mac and you would be using the Qute's interface to control that. I don't know if you can use itunes to control and 'push' them to the Qute.

Ideally get yourself a Network Attached Storage device, put a copy of your music on it then you wouldn't even have turn on your Mac.

AFAIK, the UnitiQute wont play ALAC or AIFF file formats (that iTunes gets on best with) so you'll need to convert them to FLAC for use with the UnitiQute.

quote:

Originally posted by Eloise:
AFAIK, the UnitiQute wont play ALAC or AIFF file formats (that iTunes gets on best with) so you'll need to convert them to FLAC for use with the UnitiQute.

What is ALAC ? Do you mean Flac?

My music is in MP3 320 kbps, it's good enough for me and i won't hear the difference. My goal is to replace the pass labs for an NAP250-2 to have enough power. My TV-decoder/DVD can connected digital.

For "pushing" the music to the qute, do you need extra software? And does NAIM have this software? Or do i need Twonky or something like that?

Is those qute app already available? What's possible with it? Does it stand here on the internet/site?

quote:

My music is in MP3 320 kbps

Whoa.... All that money for gear and you use MP3s???? Why not just a standard iPod Dock and a pair of cheap powered monitors?

Seriously.

last message is one option. but you could start again with lossless on the cute

quote:

Originally posted by pcstockton:

quote:

My music is in MP3 320 kbps

Whoa.... All that money for gear and you use MP3s???? Why not just a standard iPod Dock and a pair of cheap powered monitors?

Seriously.

Seriously, do you hear big difference?

OK, i will try some track in apple lossless. But will it be read/found by the qute?

I also have Lame decoder and EAC

But my airport express, isn't it the border or limit for the quality of the sound?


Goal: store some music in lossless on a separate HDD/NAS. The qute will found that HDD/NAS in my WIFI by plug player?? ( plug player OR an app on my iMac and iPod Touch?? )

Will this work?

First off, you can connect the AirPort Express via a Mini TOSLink to TOSLink cable direct to one of the digital inputs of the UnitiQute. In this way the system will work identical to your existing setup; i.e. control via iTunes. All you would need to do is disconnect the DACMagic and plug it into the UnitiQute. However this is missing the major part of the functionality of the UnitiQute.

The UnitiQute is what is known as UPnP AV (often just written as UPnP) complient. To utilise this you'll need a UPnP server on your computer. Several are available for your iMac including EyeConnect (sorry was going to make a list but can't think of others at the moment). Once you install the UPnP server, your UnitiQute should see it and be able to read the music from the server (so long as the UnitiQute supports the file format). The alternative to using a UPnP server on your iMac is to get a dedicated NAS type device which has a UPnP server - I'll leave it to other's to make suggestions though Twonky and Asset are the most recommended UPnP servers on other (non-Mac) platforms. Many Linn DS (these are similar in concept to the UnitiQute) use the RipNAS devices which include both ripping and the UPnP server. Or, as Naim would prefer you to use the UnitiQute, the UnitiServe is a full function ripper / player and UPnP server.

As others have commented, though I won't be quite so astonished about you using MP3s, ideally you should rip your CDs in a lossless or uncompressed format. The most widely supported lossless compressed format for this is FLAC though iTunes and Apple support the Apple Lossless (also refered to as ALAC) format. For uncompressed formats you have WAV: which doesn't support metadata in most applications; or AIFF: which supports metadata but has less universal support. The problem is that the UnitiQute supports FLAC and WAV files, whereas iTunes supports ALAC and AIFF files (it does play back WAV files but support for them is limited IMO).

Hope this helps you a little and that if brings out more questions to help you get the best from your setup.

Eloise

Thx Eloise for the explanation.

Most of it i understand and now it is totally clear for me.

As you see this, will the qute + NAP250-2 be mine "thing" instead of a nDAC with a NAP250-2 ?

Mostly listen to (internet)radio + streaming files. And sometimes vinyl from my XERXES20 + Sonneteer Sedley.

I got bigger speakers so amplification will be necessary. ( at 200Hz ~ 4 Ohm, the rest > 6 Ohm )

See a picture of my setup. CD-player is already gone. There is a XERXES20 now. The pass labs will be sold and replaced by a NAP250-2. No pre amp at the moment. My set


I was thinking of 282/HC2/nDAC/250-2 OR unitiqute + 250-2

quote:

Originally posted by Robbert:
Thx Eloise for the explanation.

Most of it i understand and now it is totally clear for me.

As you see this, will the qute + NAP250-2 be mine "thing" instead of a nDAC with a NAP250-2 ?

Mostly listen to (internet)radio + streaming files. And sometimes vinyl from my XERXES20 + Sonneteer Sedley.

I got bigger speakers so amplification will be necessary. ( at 200Hz ~ 4 Ohm, the rest > 6 Ohm )

See a picture of my setup. CD-player is already gone. There is a XERXES20 now. The pass labs will be sold and replaced by a NAP250-2. No pre amp at the moment. My set


I was thinking of 282/HC2/nDAC/250-2 OR unitiqute + 250-2

In terms of both cost and quality I would think you would see a big difference between nDAC/282/HC/250-2 and the UnitiQute/250-2 ... however with the nDAC/282 you'll have no audio except via USB memory sticks unless you add an additional device - be that streamers (UnitiQute / Linn DS / Squeezebox Touch / etc) or computer (MacMini / Windows PC / etc) or CD transport.

Eloise

Small question.

Is the qute nearly the same as the uniti? Exept the CD-tray and the 20 watt extra power?

DAC, DAB/tuner, streaming, iPod, will be the same.

quote:

Originally posted by Robbert:
Small question.

Is the qute nearly the same as the uniti? Exept the CD-tray and the 20 watt extra power?

DAC, DAB/tuner, streaming, iPod, will be the same.

Is it nearly the same? I got the possibility to buy a uniti.

Thx

quote:

Originally posted by Robbert:

quote:

Originally posted by Robbert:
Small question.

Is the qute nearly the same as the uniti? Exept the CD-tray and the 20 watt extra power?

DAC, DAB/tuner, streaming, iPod, will be the same.

Is it nearly the same? I got the possibility to buy a uniti.

Thx

The UnitiQute has the ability to access the iPod digitally where as (at least the original) NaimUnitis require a special cable and only access the analogue output of the iPod - there have been veiled references this maybe upgradable functionality. Apart from that the functionality is the same - I would suspect that the "digital" boards are very similar in both NainUniti and UnitiQute.

Eloise

quote:

Seriously, do you hear big difference?

Yes, a HUGE difference. Especially on your level of kit.

I cannot discern a difference between WAV, FLAC, ALAC etc.... But I can hear a 320 vs a FLAC every time.

This is a best upgrade you can do, and its free. Source first.... and that means the files themselves.

-Patrick

I disagree with the huge difference remark Mp3's at 320KBs are not that bad the difference is slight,huge no.

WAV is CD quality so is FLAC MP3 320 is not to far behind

I can here a difference between MP3 320 and CD easily - my car stereo stores CDs as MP3 320s and there is a noticeable drop in quality when playing the stored music from the original CD. When the car is moving and the engine noise comes in to play then the difference is of no consequence - but I can hear a difference when stationary and, BTW, I don't drive a Bentley with a Naim system.

quote:

Originally posted by manticore:
I disagree with the huge difference remark Mp3's at 320KBs are not that bad the difference is slight,huge no.

WAV is CD quality so is FLAC MP3 320 is not to far behind

We will have to agree to disagree in a BIG way.

I dont hear many of the "minor" differences between things like FLAC and WAV or FLAC level 1 versus level 5, ASIO vs WASAPI etc...

But this is one area I can. I guess I am just sensitive.

I would agree that with earbuds and an iPod, or through my cassette adapter from iPhone in the car, I do not hear a significant difference between V0 (best VBR), and lossless. But on any system beyond that MP3s are like fingernails on a chalkboard to me. Harsh, digitized, fuzzy, crackly trebles, sibilance galore, no depth, no life.

This was apparent to me WELL before buying Naim gear, when I had Energy speakers and Adcom pre/power.

More power to you if you cannot hear a difference. I am quite surprised though.

I couldn't hear a difference between my olive era NAPSC and the NAPSC2. Im sure others might be able to. But I was pleased that I wasn't chomping at the bit to upgrade it.

We all have different ears and thresholds. But as I said above, I am very surprised you cannot hear any difference.

-Patrick

PS - I like to listen on Random/Shuffle to my entire library. There are a few old rips still on my drive in MP3 (before I knew better). Almost every time one starts playing, I am forced to turn my head and check the codec. 95% of the time it is an MP3 (which I usually delete, then try to dig up the original CD). Keith Jarrett Koln Concert was the last offender. I ripped that in iTunes to 256 about 5-6 years ago.

The other 5% of the time it is simply a result of the loudness wars (Page's Zep remasters) or a shitty recording/mastering (Stadium Arcadium).

I would like to reply on the question of MP3
Quality and other such formats.

Firsty I can detect a difference between MP3 320 and Wav (My own personal choice) yes there is a difference but not as wide and mighty as the Grand Canyon.

Moving onto some more diffrences I can rip CD's
through my exellent Sound card 24bit quality RIPS but the difference is well to be honest nil to my ears.

Finally DVDA V SCAD DVDA wins everytime my recording of Rumors Fleetwood Mac Is the best production on any format I,ve ever heared but to others they may not agree my point is this
stuck to the side of our heads we have ears we all hear diffrently to some mps sound dreadfull
to others not so but yes there is a diffrence in quality.

quote:

DVDA wins everytime my recording of Rumors Fleetwood Mac

That was the problem with DVDA very little music I'd ever want to listen to - there is some decent stuff on SACD: Kinks, Moody Blues, Rolling Stones. There are a few tracks I have where MP3 is the only way I could get them, HMHB Peel Sessions for example: wonder if Geoff would ever consider putting them on SACD

We often have no choice with formats - we just do the best we can with them - I'm not going start listening to MOR post-Green/Kerwan Fleetwood Mac or Dire Straits or Frank Sinatra just because the recording quality is good (little bit of controversy creeping in there).

quote:

there is some decent stuff on SACD

Dead Can Dance (MFSL)
Genesis
CCR
The Band
Elton John
Peter Gabriel
also come to mind.

quote:

Originally posted by pcstockton:

quote:

there is some decent stuff on SACD

Dead Can Dance (MFSL)
Genesis
CCR
The Band
Elton John
Peter Gabriel
also come to mind.

- thanks Patrick: Got the CCR ones will investigate some of the others: Trespass on SACD would be nice

quote:

Trespass on SACD would be nice

should be easy enough to get a hold of. Guessing there are a few on ebay.

Metalica's Black album on DVDA is a blinder
as is Tubular bells and Machine Head by Deep Purple

Fleetwood Mac are not really my cup of tea but the DVDA production on Rumors which is a good album is outstanding.

But there is not a great deal of choice I agree.

Can you say:

uniti = qute only with a CD-player in it?

quote:

Originally posted by pcstockton:

quote:

My music is in MP3 320 kbps

Whoa.... All that money for gear and you use MP3s???? Why not just a standard iPod Dock and a pair of cheap powered monitors?

Seriously.

If I may add to this. Cheap powered monitors don't do that Naim PraT, lack rythm and aren't as powerful and fast.

Virtually all my music is MP3, while I can hear the deficiencies of compression, it somehow doesn't stop it from being enjoyable and entertaining - for me.

The first time I heard naim, I didn't know what it was, never heard of it before, and was using an Ipod as a source to do my demo - on AAC 192 files. The one thought during the demo was that I could clearly hear the damage to the music done by compression, but it's a lot of effort to re rip everything to lossless again.

However, on AAC, The musicality, the fun, the liveliness of the music was there... the PRAT, rythmic drive and live sound easily outweighed the damage done by compression, and for me made the drop in sound quality almost irrelevant compared to the gains made by the naim equipment. I walked away from the demo thinking this is the best music system I have ever heard, and the most fun ! It sounded just like a live performance, and the music had life, soul and energy. Which why all of us who are on this forum, ended up owning naim equipment

Of course CD is better, but for some, including myself, MP3 is an acceptable way of consuming music.

I'm not saying it's for everyone, and certainly a lot of money to enjoy MP3.

I look for fun/enjoyment in the music, and not absolute sound quality.

One small change is that I tend to play, and enjoy the original CD when I can, and it does sound very good. Having a naim does encourage you to use the best possible recording, and it's a gradual change in my listening habits.