Moving from compact disk to hard disk -newbie questions

Posted by: Thomas Breding on 21 September 2010

My current system is CD5/HICAP2/HILINE/NAT05/282/NAPSC/200/FC2/ALLAE/HEADLINE(+ SqueezeBox for internet radio) and I have for a while been thinking about adding a new source.

A while ago I got offered a really good price on a CDS3 but as I felt like it might be time to move from CD to something else I instead started looking for other source options and moving from CD to "the next level".

And just when I started looking, along came the NDX making things even more complicated...

Computer environment:
I run a wifi network at home with iMac, MacBookPro and iPad. All my ripped music is now in iTunes in AAC-format.

Asking for input and advice from all you digi-wizards out there, I have some questions that you will probably find very basic. But my guess is that a lot of other Naim owners are asking the same questions:

Question nr 1:
If I got it right, my three basic source options from Naim are
1) HDX (pros: built in ripping, nice display, built in hard drive)
2) NDX (plays music from network via UPnP, internet radio, tuner option)
3) UnitiServe with DAC (built in ripping, built in hard drive, DAC gives options for other digital sources)

Did I get that part right? Any other pros or cons?

Question nr 2: Which of the above will give the best sound quality, BEFORE any upgrades?

Question nr 3: Will sound quality be better using one of the Naim ripping options than ripping on one of my Macs?

Question nr 4: I guess that no matter what alternative I choose, best thing is to add a NAS and potentially switch to a cable network?

Question nr 5: Is NDX the only option if I want to be able to change pre amp volume via the App on an iPad/iPhone?

Question nr 6: Which format should I use for re-ripping my CD´s? (I told you I was a newbie!)

Question nr 7: If I go for NDX and a NAS, will the NDX "find" the music or must I install something (some kind of UPnP software) on my Mac?

Probably forgotten some obvious questions, feel free to add. Hopefully this tread will turn into a "Digital Source for Dummies".

Thanks in advance!

/Thomas

Posted on: 23 September 2010 by Klout10

quote:
Originally posted by AllenB:
Is this going to made available on the server units (HDX / Serve) via the n-Stream app in the same / similar way?

I'd be intersested too, but I don't think the HDX has a remote out socket available

Regards,
Michel

Posted on: 23 September 2010 by Guido Fawkes

FLAC vs WAV

Has anybody noticed that CDs that come in a digipak invariably sound better than those that come in jewel case - just wondered.

Forgive me, but at the same resolution, FLAC and WAV are exactly the same in terms of the digital music stream - if FLAC sounds better than WAV then there is a fault in the player as the bits it gets from the two files and plays must be different or the extra work of decompressing FLAC is causing something else in the player to add a signature of its own - albeit one that gains favour with some listeners.

Naim players use WAV to avoid the overhead of decompressing - which seems sensible - why decompress if you don't have to - but I can't see how the act of decompressing improves the sound in other players. The only advantage I can see of FLAC is you can get more data on a disc.

Posted on: 23 September 2010 by Plinko

quote:
Originally posted by ROTF:
Don't have NAS or use UPnP. Only Ethernet is in my small home office.
Network is Juniper SRX Internet router with Apple Airport for wireless LAN.

In my Naim system, I use MacBook Pro with firewire drive/hiFace/Naim DAC/555PS.

In office, PowerMac/USB/Chordette Gem/Linn CMS/Kef Eggs with Sub (I know it could be better).

iTunes sharing lets me play music from one Mac on the other.
iTunes suits as list mode lets me see artist and album, which is all I need.

Late night listening is CDX2/Stax ear-speakers.

Thanks. Mac to Mac sharing...interesting.

Posted on: 23 September 2010 by Plinko

quote:
Originally posted by ROTF:
Naim players use WAV to avoid the overhead of decompressing - which seems sensible - why decompress if you don't have to - but I can't see how the act of decompressing improves the sound in other players. The only advantage I can see of FLAC is you can get more data on a disc.

while using uncompressed is sensible does using wav itself seem sensible? why not rip to AIFF and have embedded tagging so that files can be easily transcoded for portable use?

Posted on: 23 September 2010 by Guido Fawkes

If only - Amiga Interchange File Format - if Naim used a linux system and used AIFF in the HDX then I'd buy one tomorrow .... alas we cannot have all we wish for.

Posted on: 23 September 2010 by Frank Abela

quote:
Forgive me, but at the same resolution, FLAC and WAV are exactly the same in terms of the digital music stream - if FLAC sounds better than WAV then there is a fault in the player as the bits it gets from the two files and plays must be different or the extra work of decompressing FLAC is causing something else in the player to add a signature of its own - albeit one that gains favour with some listeners.

They're not the same. With one file you have an unpacking process, whereas with the other you don't. Jitter distortion is a distortion in the time domain of where the bits are in the data stream. They're the same bits, just in slightly different places. The analogue stream from those bits is a different shape because they're in different places and so you get different results.

How different depends on resolution and the work in the unpacking process of the FLAC file. Higher resolution files increase the numer of bits which lowers the effect of the jitter because there are more bits to play with at any point in the stream.