Melco Ups The Game

KRM posted:

Hi Harry,

Thanks, but I knew that as I chatted with Alan Ainslie about it at the Bristol Show. However, our mutual friend remains unconvinced.

So as far as he's concerned it's Melco - The Game's Up.

Sorry, I couldn't resist that.

Harry posted:

KRM posted:

My dealer has taken against because it uses Twonky, so it will not be easy to get a demo.

Keith

Apparently you can put Minimserver straight onto it Keith. See further up the thread. So no need to touch Twonky and possibly something for the dealer to look into?

I am also running it right now with Minimserver so you are not bound to Twonky or their own version ...., while their own new version seems to be pretty good including Wav conversion of flac's on the fly...

Graham Clarke posted:

tonym posted:

Graham Clarke posted:

KRM posted:

The same review focuses on the USB connection, which it rates highly. It references a previous review by Andrew Everard (sometimes of this parish) who found the Ethernet connection sounded only marginally better than a NAS via a switch. Others have found significant improvements. 

When I tried an N1Z on my system I struggled to hear any difference (via the Ethernet connection).  Given I wanted to like the unit (so possible positive confirmation bias) I was surprised by this result. 

I'm not suggesting others haven't heard improvements, it's clear from the multiple comments that they have.  It just didn't do it for me.  At least that saved me £6K.

Given I also didn't like the sound of a second 555PS into an NDS maybe I'm just one of those pesky edge cases

It's so important to try stuff in your own system, isn't it? I didn't like the SL interconnect so I'm also a pesky edge case Graham! 

Oh, absolutely Tony.

The weird thing is that when I listened to an N1Z at UHES the difference was noticeable.  But not at my home.  Suspect it is something to do with the differing environments. 

My NAS and switch are on a different circuit from the dedicated one for my hifi and are a long way away from the rest of the kit.  Maybe those all make a difference?  I wonder how many with Melcos do not have a NAS/switch set up in that manner?

I never tried a Melco but my understanding is that you have to have your data stored on the device, not on a NAS,  to take advantage of the Melco sound quality wise. I wish I was wrong and that the Melcos would retrieve the data from the NAS and replay from memory (or from their allegedly optimized internal drives) . But this does not seem to be the way the Melcos work: files stored on a NAS are treated differently (and sound potentially differently) from files stored on the device. Best, nbpf

I think it can play music from NAS drives on the network, but sounds best when they're stored locally. Most models have big internal drives so there shouldn't be s problem with coping the NAS data to the internal drives. The NAS can then be used as a backup. Actual owners please correct me if I gave this wrong.

Keith

nbpf posted:

Graham Clarke posted:

tonym posted:

Graham Clarke posted:

KRM posted:

The same review focuses on the USB connection, which it rates highly. It references a previous review by Andrew Everard (sometimes of this parish) who found the Ethernet connection sounded only marginally better than a NAS via a switch. Others have found significant improvements. 

When I tried an N1Z on my system I struggled to hear any difference (via the Ethernet connection).  Given I wanted to like the unit (so possible positive confirmation bias) I was surprised by this result. 

I'm not suggesting others haven't heard improvements, it's clear from the multiple comments that they have.  It just didn't do it for me.  At least that saved me £6K.

Given I also didn't like the sound of a second 555PS into an NDS maybe I'm just one of those pesky edge cases

It's so important to try stuff in your own system, isn't it? I didn't like the SL interconnect so I'm also a pesky edge case Graham! 

Oh, absolutely Tony.

The weird thing is that when I listened to an N1Z at UHES the difference was noticeable.  But not at my home.  Suspect it is something to do with the differing environments. 

My NAS and switch are on a different circuit from the dedicated one for my hifi and are a long way away from the rest of the kit.  Maybe those all make a difference?  I wonder how many with Melcos do not have a NAS/switch set up in that manner?

I never tried a Melco but my understanding is that you have to have your data stored on the device, not on a NAS,  to take advantage of the Melco sound quality wise. I wish I was wrong and that the Melcos would retrieve the data from the NAS and replay from memory (or from their allegedly optimized internal drives) . But this does not seem to be the way the Melcos work: files stored on a NAS are treated differently (and sound potentially differently) from files stored on the device. Best, nbpf

You can do both. But as long as you are not running out of space it would be advised to put the music on the Melco. If you run out of space you could use the rest of your storage capacity. The Melco only is the best option but the nas data will still sound much better when run through the Melco.

KRM posted:

I think it can play music from NAS drives on the network, but sounds best when they're stored locally. Most models have big internal drives so there shouldn't be s problem with coping the NAS data to the internal drives. The NAS can then be used as a backup. Actual owners please correct me if I gave this wrong.

Keith

That is my understanding but, as I mentioned, I do not have first hand knowledge. For me the device would be interesting if it came with high quality SPDIF outputs, if it would grant super user access to the OS (e.g., to install MinimServer) and if it would make all data (no matter whether these are stored on a NAS, on a USB drive or on an external drive) first-class citizens by ensuring that they are processed in exactly the same way as the data stored on the internal drives.

Without these features the Melcos are (again, for me) a no go. I also find the lack of technical information and of precise hardware specifications unacceptable and, frankly, a bit ridiculous.

At least Naim has the opportunity to take advantage of these weaknesses and finally come up with a low-power server with user upgradeable SSD drives, open OS, a modular design optional high quality outputs.

Bert Schurink posted:

You can do both. But as long as you are not running out of space it would be advised to put the music on the Melco. If you run out of space you could use the rest of your storage capacity. The Melco only is the best option but the nas data will still sound much better when run through the Melco.

This. NBPF, rather than worrying about the technical specs of the device, why don't you try one and see? It's the only way.

nbpf posted:

Graham Clarke posted:

tonym posted:

Graham Clarke posted:

KRM posted:

The same review focuses on the USB connection, which it rates highly. It references a previous review by Andrew Everard (sometimes of this parish) who found the Ethernet connection sounded only marginally better than a NAS via a switch. Others have found significant improvements. 

When I tried an N1Z on my system I struggled to hear any difference (via the Ethernet connection).  Given I wanted to like the unit (so possible positive confirmation bias) I was surprised by this result. 

I'm not suggesting others haven't heard improvements, it's clear from the multiple comments that they have.  It just didn't do it for me.  At least that saved me £6K.

Given I also didn't like the sound of a second 555PS into an NDS maybe I'm just one of those pesky edge cases

It's so important to try stuff in your own system, isn't it? I didn't like the SL interconnect so I'm also a pesky edge case Graham! 

Oh, absolutely Tony.

The weird thing is that when I listened to an N1Z at UHES the difference was noticeable.  But not at my home.  Suspect it is something to do with the differing environments. 

My NAS and switch are on a different circuit from the dedicated one for my hifi and are a long way away from the rest of the kit.  Maybe those all make a difference?  I wonder how many with Melcos do not have a NAS/switch set up in that manner?

I never tried a Melco but my understanding is that you have to have your data stored on the device, not on a NAS,  to take advantage of the Melco sound quality wise. I wish I was wrong and that the Melcos would retrieve the data from the NAS and replay from memory (or from their allegedly optimized internal drives) . But this does not seem to be the way the Melcos work: files stored on a NAS are treated differently (and sound potentially differently) from files stored on the device. Best, nbpf

I tried playing music both direct from the Melco's SSDs and also by using the bridge mode where data from the NAS passes through the Melco.

Another challenge I would have had with it was that SSD storage is limited to 1TB (I wouldn't need RAID given I have at least 3 copies of all my music) however I have 2.5TB of music...

tonym posted:

Bert Schurink posted:

You can do both. But as long as you are not running out of space it would be advised to put the music on the Melco. If you run out of space you could use the rest of your storage capacity. The Melco only is the best option but the nas data will still sound much better when run through the Melco.

This. NBPF, rather than worrying about the technical specs of the device, why don't you try one and see? It's the only way.

I probably would try one if I had a system based on an NDS. But in my modest nDAC based system, a Melco would make little sense, I understand. As I mentioned, I might be missing something obvious, of course. Also, while I am certainly interested in sound quality, I am not making my choices on the basis of sound quality alone. From this perspective, and essentially because of the three reasons mentioned above (lack of high quality SPDIF outputs and customizability, unequal treatment of data on different media), I am not interested in the Melcos. In contrast, I would very much like to try a device with a good power supply, low-power CPU, open OS and galvanically isolated, high quality SPDIF outputs.

Out of interest how are dealers working a 'home demo' of their Melco units? My dealer has one BUT it holds all their music so certainley not available to take off site for a few days.

Some interesting things on this thread. Am i right in gleaning from this that far from being just a NSS it is also a renderer, feeding direct into a DAC? If so, I'd be interested to know how the Melco into a DAC sounds compared to Mac Mini running Audirvana (with isolator if DAC isnt galvanically isolated). Quite some difference in cost!

As for SSDs, I use them in my MM primarily for reliability  - they are also silent, though silence is less critical because with Audirvana the music is loaded into RAM before playing, so do disk access whilst playing. Wear levelling is largely irrelevant with winimal write actions, as with audio file storage, and inactive when playing if you're not saving something at the same time.

nbpf posted:

tonym posted:

Bert Schurink posted:

You can do both. But as long as you are not running out of space it would be advised to put the music on the Melco. If you run out of space you could use the rest of your storage capacity. The Melco only is the best option but the nas data will still sound much better when run through the Melco.

This. NBPF, rather than worrying about the technical specs of the device, why don't you try one and see? It's the only way.

I probably would try one if I had a system based on an NDS. But in my modest nDAC based system, a Melco would make little sense, I understand. As I mentioned, I might be missing something obvious, of course. Also, while I am certainly interested in sound quality, I am not making my choices on the basis of sound quality alone. From this perspective, and essentially because of the three reasons mentioned above (lack of high quality SPDIF outputs and customizability, unequal treatment of data on different media), I am not interested in the Melcos. In contrast, I would very much like to try a device with a good power supply, low-power CPU, open OS and galvanically isolated, high quality SPDIF outputs.

Before the latest upgrade, my DAC wouldn't recognise the Melco's USB output (the Chord uses a FPGA chip for its async. USB input) so up until now I've been using a USB to spdif convertor. It still sounded a whole lot better than my Mac Mini to USB.

Graham, there's a 6TB version now available but if I was in your shoes, having tried the Melco, I wouldn't be bothered trying it again.

Mr THX posted:

Out of interest how are dealers working a 'home demo' of their Melco units? My dealer has one BUT it holds all their music so certainley not available to take off site for a few days.

 

My dealer was happy to lend me theirs, complete with music, and permission to put my own stuff on there.

[quote] Some interesting things on this thread. Am i right in gleaning from this that far from being just a NSS it is also a renderer, feeding direct into a DAC? If so, I'd be interested to know how the Melco into a DAC sounds compared to Mac Mini running Audirvana (with isolator if DAC isnt galvanically isolated). Quite some difference in cost! [/quote]

Yes Innocent Bystander, it also renders. I've come from a Mac Mini optimised for audio, running both Audirvana+ and Ammara Symphony with iRC. The Melco straight into my DAC is considerably better sound quality-wise.

Mr THX posted:

Out of interest how are dealers working a 'home demo' of their Melco units? My dealer has one BUT it holds all their music so certainley not available to take off site for a few days.

 

My dealer was happy to lend me theirs, complete with music, and permission to put my own stuff on there.

Yes Innocent Bystander, it also renders. I've come from a Mac Mini optimised for audio, running both Audirvana+ and Ammara Symphony with iRC. The Melco straight into my DAC is considerably better sound quality-wise.

Nick from Suffolk posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Nick from Suffolk posted:

Looking at the picture of the inside of the Melco unit makes one appreciate the sheer simplicity of music reproduction via a turntable, arm and cartridge!

Hmm, but look at the electronics in a top flight phono preamp and its powersupply , and TT motor regulator... yes definitely not as busy as the Melco... But not a million miles away...

But you still need a DAC, pre-amp plus the attendant power supplies for the Melco. A good TT is still a million miles away in complexity and almost certainly sounds better!

Apologies for going off-topic.

The photo suggests the Melco has internal power supplies...  As for vinyl sounding better, possibly for material only recorded in analog, and possibly not for more recent material recorded digitally...

tonym posted:

Before the latest upgrade, my DAC wouldn't recognise the Melco's USB output (the Chord uses a FPGA chip for its async. USB input) so up until now I've been using a USB to spdif convertor. It still sounded a whole lot better than my Mac Mini to USB.

Thanks Tony, I had not considered the possibility of using the Melco to feed a DAC via USB! It would indeed be easy and very interesting to compare the Melco with my fit-PC3. Best, nbpf  

Great thread Tony. Some very interesting posts. I, like Graham couldn't gleam the the very best out of the Melco I had on dem. 

Mind you, maybe I was in a bad mood....maybe I need another dem 

Innocent Bystander posted:

Some interesting things on this thread. Am i right in gleaning from this that far from being just a NSS it is also a renderer, feeding direct into a DAC? If so, I'd be interested to know how the Melco into a DAC sounds compared to Mac Mini running Audirvana (with isolator if DAC isnt galvanically isolated). Quite some difference in cost!

As for SSDs, I use them in my MM primarily for reliability  - they are also silent, though silence is less critical because with Audirvana the music is loaded into RAM before playing, so do disk access whilst playing. Wear levelling is largely irrelevant with winimal write actions, as with audio file storage, and inactive when playing if you're not saving something at the same time.

I moved from a well optimised headless MM (SSD, Audivarna, optimised OS, Regen) feeding my DAC via USB to the Melco (just the base model N1A). The difference wasn't subtle. The Mac has been a great source for quite a few Mac 'n' Dac solutions i've had but the Melco takes things up to a completely new level. Well worth auditioning. 

James

Sounds like some lines can start to be drawn . . . direct connection via USB to a USB dac at one end, and connection to a home network at the other end.

james n posted:

I moved from a well optimised headless MM (SSD, Audivarna, optimised OS, Regen) feeding my DAC via USB to the Melco (just the base model N1A). The difference wasn't subtle. The Mac has been a great source for quite a few Mac 'n' Dac solutions i've had but the Melco takes things up to a completely new level. Well worth auditioning. 

James

Interesting! And nice to see that Melco offers high quality sources for pure DACs, too. This is what I would have expected Naim to do for their DACs. On the other hand, the lack of technical specifications on the Melco site is very annoying and statements like "Wide bandwidth Category 7 construction for low jitter" mildly disturbing. Best, nbpf

I'm sure the Melco played its part a little, but tonight everything sounds spot on, just hearing more, getting more, it sounds so good tonight (I have had a couple mind) that the system synergy is all balanced and awesome.

And without any SL cables or PSU, so close to what I wanted to hear from this build. Its taken a while, and yes the Melco is part of that overall sound, for one night only though I bet (why does it work like that at times) 

Anyway the V3.0 upgrade appears a winner. 272/250DR performing like a charm, speakers behaving themselves too. All good.