NDX user experience
Posted by: Rich27 on 04 May 2011
I have had my NDX for a week now and apart from a few set up hiccups (mainly my lack of technical ability) the system is sounding better than ever! What a wonderful piece of kit (replaced a sonos/nDAC combo).
I am using the NDX wireless at the moment and this is stated by Naim to be sub-optimal. There is no way that I can run a network cable from my router to the lounge so would it be worth setting up some kind of wireless bridge to the NDX (e.g. Netgear WNCE2001)? At least this would be N not just limited to G (as I believe the NDX is) and would move the nasty wireless bits away from the NDX.
Thoughts appreciated as the only other option would be powerline plugs which I hear introduce all sorts of junk onto the mains.
By the way nStream app is pants, please make this worthy of a £3k piece of kit!
no offence Simon.
But this is why most people are still sticking with CD.
Put it in. Let it play. Hear music.
I couldn't disagree more. I find myself listening to more music then ever now. The ease of streaming music is awesome. Cheaper storage has now made high resolution streaming music a reality. With the right D/A, I challenge that CD's offer little in the way of better reproduction. While I am not sure I get the concept of "critical listening...", I believe even in this environment, the differences are less then that a good power supply or better speakers might add.
CD players = Buggy whips!
This is why most people are still sticking with CD.
Put it in. Let it play. Hear music.
I couldn't disagree more. I challenge that CDs offer little in the way of better reproduction.
So which is better?
Those choosing to stay with CD on a premium player (CDS3 or CD555), of course, will say a good CD players wins every time.
Those choosing to move to a streaming or computer audio environment, of course, proclaim it is better.
I think both are right as indeed are those who say get it out, plonk it on and cue it up and stick with vinyl and those who stick with analogue reel to reel.
The only concern I have about streaming is the 'glitches' some folk seem to have - I think this will be solved, but they must be as frustrating as when my CD player refused to play a CD I wanted to hear ... sometimes you just can't win.
All the best, Guy
I admit my serious music listening currently is CD via CDS3 and FM via Cyrus FMX (my TT needs repairing). However I do play with streaming and is fun, but for me the Naim and other vendor solutions are a long way from the naturalness, organic sound and detailed sound that my CDS3 gives me - it really is in a different league.
No offence Simon, but it looks like you have never come across KDS 
n-Stream performance is entirely dependent upon network and UPnP server performance–fast server + fast network = fast application, full stop. Caching is yesterday's news (pun intended), especially if the UPnP server uses relative addressing as regards file locations–this network must be clean and clear of network obstructions (such as laptops browsing this Forum 
).
My guess is that, in many cases, these "trials" have been carried out as self installs–am I correct?
n-Stream performance is entirely dependent upon network and UPnP server performance–fast server + fast network = fast application, full stop. Caching is yesterday's news (pun intended), especially if the UPnP server uses relative addressing as regards file locations–this network must be clean and clear of network obstructions (such as laptops browsing this Forum ).
My guess is that, in many cases, these "trials" have been carried out as self installs–am I correct?
Sorry DD, but you are talking out of your backside.
n-Stream will never be as fast as n-Serve and that's because it doesn't employ caching of the library tree (n-Serve effectively caches the library in it's database). It will never be as fast as n-Serve if it has to refresh, check and re-load the library at every screen. TJ couldn't / wouldn't answer my question as to how much of an improvement in browsing speed can we expect with the forthcoming n-Stream 2.1. Probably because every home and every network is different. You need to get with the real world rather than make the suggestions you are making, you sound like the ISP provider who says his 20 mB service will give you 20mB.
We all know that you are very technically savvy, but of my experience of most dealers over the years, they are not computer savvy enough to get the very best out of anyone's network. And to suggest that our homes must only have a network dedicated to our music systems in order to get one piece of software working with any sort of speed, is just plain ridiculous.
P.S. What does 'relative addressing' mean? Rather than blind us with your undoubted technical knowledge, and one-offs, it might be better if you explain yourself better.
Relative addressing refers to a relational music database storage model where, rather than feeding out files from an explicit, absolute filesystem location within the directory structure, the database uses pointers that reference the file relative to its present location, with its metadata, permitting the movement of the file from one location to another within the storage pool without crashing or having to re-scan the database. Some UPnP control points will cache absolute file resource locations, which causes problems if music is moved between updates–so you have to be aware of the possibility of tradeoffs.
And yes–I am absolutely suggesting a dedicated network, not just a switch (as posited in a recent Hi-Fi Choice review of the NDX)–set up by properly trained retailers who can implement (or supply staff capable to do so) a proper system to get music from one point to another. This insures that you CAN keep bandwidth sensible, independent of the manufacturer of the server OR the streamer OR the storage. Customer satisfaction is the whole point–not complexity: I didn't say one had to use a managed switch, for example, or, that self-install isn't possible IF you know what you're doing.
I am also suggesting dual-band (2.4 Ghz 802.11b/g/n + 5 GHz 802.11a/n) wireless-N or better for every installation that uses wireless control points. Anything else is pants and a waste of time–and you're sadly kidding yourself if you think that this issue doesn't come up in the custom integration space on a regular basis.
Experience in the field suggests that it's not just Naim retailers (or Linn retailers, for that matter, in the US) who are having problems with this requirement–it's an industry problem. It's going to require training and an understanding of the requirements to build real, functioning media service networks. It may also be a business opportunity for IT professionals.
I had a sobering moment with an "IT professional" at a retailer this past week, who had to be demonstrated why a specific approach to separating the networks in a retailer's shop (for which the retailer had paid good money) provided better throughput and overall bandwidth for BOTH networks than the cocked-up approach provided (at a fee) to this retailer. (Then we ate sushi, upon completion.)
Another (different retailer) salesperson told me he didn't recommend NAS devices for his Linn DS clients (computer only) because the network setup requirements scared many potential clients off–and he's sold quite a few Klimax units. As it turns out, the deeper you look, Linn DS clients also have issues, if you pay attention to the retailers' anecdotes from a brand-independent perspective.
It's quite simple–all one needs to do is walk in with a tested, pre-configured solution, sort out the client's needs according to prior music management practices on the part of the client, test and configure in place and move on. In fact–this could be done with a device as simple as an Apple Time Capsule.
So, before you get snarky–my backside has plenty of experience in this field (and others) with the aspects (from an industry perspective) of media streaming networks. It is not simple, but can be made so using good, standard, simple network engineering practices.
Maybe Naim made a mistake separating Serve and Stream into two apps?
Maybe all of their software resource should have gone into making one great app, with discovery, so that if you only owned a server, or only owned a network player, then certain areas were grayed out. I read Richard Lord's thread today about being frustrated with having to use two apps to control a Qute and a US, and it was educational. Now here with Allenb's post is another lesson: given two apps from the same vendor running on the same network, why would one run fast and the other run slow? ITSS! (It's The Software Stupid!) 
Hook
PS - And isn't volume control available on the one and not the other?
PPS - Thanks very much to all of you early adopters for shaking these products out. It has convinced me to wait for gen 2. But I would very much like to get to an all-Naim setup....someday.