Any advice on a new NAS please?

Posted by: patjb39 on 07 February 2011

Hi,

just bought a UnitiCute and have decided to invest in a NAS drive with an integral UPnP server.  Not only will this stream music to the Cute but it will also be used as a central repository for photos and laptop data backups.

The list of tested NAS drives is about a year old and I was wondering if anyone had any advice on which of the following two NAS drives would be best to tie in with the Cute:

Buffalo LinkStation Duo 4TB version (with 2 x 2TB disks in Raid 1)

Synology DS211J (also with either 2 x 1.5 or 2 TB disks in Raid 1).

If anyone has any experience of either models streaming to a UnitiCute I'd be very grateful to hear of it.

Thanks

Pat
Posted on: 07 February 2011 by garyi
Get a QNAP. If you check out smallnetbuilder there is plenty of detail on speed tests etc.

QNAP frequently hit the top marks. Very good devices.
Posted on: 07 February 2011 by DavidDever
QNAP and Synology are both very good for standalone, built-in UPnP services - the Synology DS211j is light, noise-free and reliable.
Posted on: 07 February 2011 by rhr
Another vote for QNAP. Great web interface, a good forum and the UK suppliers I used (experts in storage) were very good with support and choosing device and disks. I've also read that direct manufacturer support is good if you need it.



Hope it helps,

Rich
Posted on: 07 February 2011 by patjb39
Gents
thanks very much for the comments.  I hadn't thought of QNAP but having checked out the experts' website, the TS-219P + comes out at almost double the price.  Is a QNAP really worth the extra over the Synology?  I do like the idea of the experts building and testing it for me before it ships and at no extra cost.
Truthfully, I hadn't thought of spending that much on a NAS but I only want to buy it once (in the near future anyway), and having spent a small fortune on the Cute and it's loud speakers, I don't see the point in being stingy with it's back-office systems.  However, I don't want (nor can afford) to waste our hard earned cash on a device which doesn't reallly pull it's weight.
Just been listening to the Cute's radio.  I honestly didn't expect it to sound quite that different to  (better than) the 20yr system we're about to shunt out the door.

Once again, thanks for the suggestions/comments and if you've anything to add about the worthiness of the QNAP, please don't hold back.

cheers
Pat
Posted on: 07 February 2011 by rhr
Hi Pat,
I don't know how easy the other two are to configure, as a good web interface is definitely worth spending a little extra on.

I wouldn't have thought that twice the price is likely to buy you twice the reliability though (not talking about disk reliability here, but the reliability of the NAS itself).
It also looks like in the rankings the QNAP is a little faster than the Synology and a lot faster than the Buffalo.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com...n,com_nas/Itemid,190

The one think that I would recommend is not going cheap on the disks. Just google the brands and models and look at their 'mean time to failure'.

So there are a few things to weigh up or to have a look into.
Hope it helps,
Rich
Posted on: 07 February 2011 by Alamanka
I have a Qnap with two drives. It was more expensive than other brands, but it was on Naim recommended list, so I bought it for peace of mind. Qnap also has a forum, apparently some of their machine are also used by real IT professionals, not just home users. 

A lot of software is pre-installed on the machine. For instance, mine came with Twonky Media server already installed on it.

I am using about 5% of the available features on the Qnap, but I have been able to do exactly what I wanted: streaming and organizing music in a very simple way, defining folders with access rights for the diffferent people in the family, storing files. As indicated, the administration is really easy with the browser based interface.

So far, I am satisfied. It has worked without any issues.
In my case, when something works satisfactorily, the price paid is quickly forgotten.
Posted on: 07 February 2011 by garyi
RTo find out why it costs more check the specs, of interest is the processor and ram. If the qnap does not offer better in this respect then perhaps try one of the other brands.
Posted on: 07 February 2011 by Alamanka
Check also the software you get with it. Not just the hardware.

(Installing new software on Linux machines may or may not be your preferred hobby)
Posted on: 08 February 2011 by MontyMusic
I bought a QNAP TS-410 and have to say it works really well although it is quite noisy but this isn't a problem as it's in another room and is set to power down at night.... I needed lots of TB space which is the reason why I went for the 4 drive option
Posted on: 08 February 2011 by Peter_RN

Hello Pat

Another possible option might be a WHS box. Install Asset UPnP on it and you have a very reliable server for the Qute. Others are reporting good results with this set-up. I installed Asset on a PC to test functionality and it worked faultlessly.

I have a ReadyNAS but it is not without issues. Strangely, it will not send WAV files to the Qute via its built-in server, it’s as if they don’t exist. Occasionally albums become un-playable without any apparent reason.

Regards
Peter

Posted on: 08 February 2011 by Tog
Vortexbox - free Linux media server software - plays nicely with Uniti/Qute - rips, stores and streams flac and works Well with Macs or PCs



Either install onto old pc - or buy one of their NAS appliances.



Regular updates - can be administered via iPad or PC. Brilliant!



But ssh ...you didn't hear from me, I wasn't here!



Tog
Posted on: 08 February 2011 by garyi
ssh being the operative word.

Could not be arsed with vortexbox in the end. Put XP on it and gave it to my sister. To complicated, to geeky, to flaky.
Posted on: 09 February 2011 by patjb39

Gents
thank you all for your suggestions, now I'm even more confused than when I started. I hadn't even considered WHS but thinking about it, I'm much more familiar with supporting Windows than anything linux which I've never used.
I wouldn't want to run anything on an "old pc", basically I want it to have reliable hardware and low power consumption as it'll be on most of the time.
The only thing with a WHS is that I'd want to back it up a lot more frequently than a NAS drive.  There is just soooooo much more potential for "quirky" behaviour with Windows.....
I will have to spend this weekend costing out various options I think. 
Glad I didn't buy anything in a hurry last Sunday/Monday.  Pretty sure I would have regretted it.
If anyone else has any other suggestions to throw in, please feel free. 
Thanks
Pat

 

Posted on: 09 February 2011 by Frank Abela
Hmm, Amazon has the QNAP TS-210 at cheaper than the Synology. The QNAP has twice the memory (256MB) but a slower CPU (800Mhz to the Synology's 1.2Ghz) and the QNAP can 'only' go up to 2x2TB where the Syn can go to 2x3...

So much easier to just grab a disc and plonk it into a CD player.

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: 09 February 2011 by Milsa
WHS + Asset work just fine, don't be afraid of the typical Microsoft OS issues (prejudices or not, it doesn't matter). You'd set it up once and forget about it, just like me. Asset is built around Windows Media Player; that's why it runs only on Windows machines. Asset is not perfect but still seems to beat everything else.

Note that a new WHS version is due out in 2011 (if you can wait).
Posted on: 09 February 2011 by bartve
I have a Qnap ts-119 with a Samsung 1.5 Tb harddrive and it's (close to) perfect. I use Twonky on it (first as part of the firmware, recently as a separate 'plugin') and it serves my Uniti very well (and also is a fileserver for the whole family, a webserver, and many more). Sometimes I have to power-off/power-on the Uniti for it to find the Twonky server, but that clould also be something in my network config. But that's the only (minor) problem I've encountered. This week my Uniti is returning with the new 3.0 firmware (never knew I could miss a piece of hardware that much), and maybe that minor problem will be solved.
Qnap support is great, regular and easy to install updates of the firmware (no geeky stuff), and the configuration of the NAS is easy also, but you will have to put some effort into it to get it working the way you want it,

Bart
Posted on: 09 February 2011 by Tog
@Garyi







Sorry you found Vortexbox such a pain - if you install it on old hardware it usually does it's best to identify the myriad of possible bit and pieces you might have and is pretty good considering the obscure cards and chips we all have lurking in any kit more than a few years old. It will throw up messages about the network card on my current TogServe... Mutters to itself and comes up with the lovely message "network finally up" as if it's my fault - brilliant.







For me it's rock solid and on kit like VB's appliances where the hardware has been checked for

compatibility it is pretty hard to beat.







Tog
Posted on: 10 February 2011 by Rockingdoc
Another vote for QNAP 219P (with 2x2Tb Barracuda drives). Although I very much needed the help from forum members to get it to work for me, it now runs perfectly and silently. Nothing wrong with the NAS, just my computer illiteracy.
Posted on: 10 February 2011 by musfed
And another vote for the QNAP 219P. We've got with 2x1tb Western Digital Green harddrives and it works excellent. All of our >600 cd's are in lossless format loaded on the drive. And together with a Dvix Dvico we use it as our movie and series jukebox as well. Excellent machine.