Vortexbox v Unitiserve

Runs ushare as the UPnP server - buggy and not anywhere to the standards of the built-in UPnP server in the UnitiServe, let alone Asset or Twonky.

The raid devices can come complete with Twonky which many use to serve their Unitis ...My point is that with the Unitiserve you get a box ( lovely though it is) a hard drive that is relatively small, and custom UpNp / ripper for £2000.. Which is nice The Vortex Box Raid has 2 x 2 terabyte drives / Twonky and the ability to act both as a NAS for your whole system but also accepts files that are already ripped for £600.

I know the Naim software/hardware will be gold plated but their are some advantages to working with open source software.

Tog

The UPnP server in the UnitiServe is worth it, but it's probably worth pointing out that it is a digital transport unto itself, not just a ripping / storage box.

Is the Vortexbox worth a look? Does it look like it's worth £600, or could an even cheaper, better functioning box be made (after all, it's only Linux)? What amount of time spent DIY is worth setting up the box correctly versus paying for an off-the-shelf solution?

Hi everyone i made some earlier posts about my 1TB Vortexbox and I have no major issues,it has a dvd drive for ripping music and movies and cost about 379USD way less than the Unitiserve at N. American prices.Check their site for details.
I have owned both a Uniti and now the Unitiqute and I find if anything the Naim products more buggy if anything by comparision.

How do you reckon?

I have more drops off the network from Naim units or the NStream app than from the Vortexbox.

I'm not disputing that the Unitiserve is a great product and that it has a good UnPn server with all manner of audiophile electronic tweaks. If you view it as a digital transport connected to a Naim Dac etc then the Vortexbox is way out of it's depth. However, if you are looking for a Nas to store and serve flac files to a Uniti or Qute then on paper the Serve looks rather expensive and somewhat limited.

The Serve may have very good ripping software but there are other good alternatives. Limiting users to only adding their files to external shares seems a bit shortsighted on the hd version. The SSD Serve makes far more logical sense but since you are using a NAS anyway it's £2300 for a UpNp server, SSD and bespoke Ripper.

Tog

I can't understand why anybody would knock the Vortexbox - it is one of the best value for money items around.

quote:

Does it look like it's worth £600,

Definitely - especially as it runs on Linux rather than Windoze.

quote:

Originally posted by powerbench1:
I have more drops off the network from Naim units or the NStream app than from the Vortexbox.

Units? Connected via Wi-Fi (no Ethernet)? Your wireless network might need a bit of TLC....

quote:

Originally posted by Tog:
I'm not disputing that the Unitiserve is a great product and that it has a good UnPn server with all manner of audiophile electronic tweaks. If you view it as a digital transport connected to a Naim Dac etc then the Vortexbox is way out of it's depth. However, if you are looking for a Nas to store and serve flac files to a Uniti or Qute then on paper the Serve looks rather expensive and somewhat limited.

The Serve may have very good ripping software but there are other good alternatives. Limiting users to only adding their files to external shares seems a bit shortsighted on the hd version. The SSD Serve makes far more logical sense but since you are using a NAS anyway it's £2300 for a UpNp server, SSD and bespoke Ripper.

Tog

Makes sense if you have FLAC ripping / tagging sorted somewhere else - my previous experience with this was at a retailer event with another manufacturer, who couldn't get ushare to scan his FLAC tags to save his life.

Much better VFM over here than £600 there, but then again it's not designed for looks!

Secure storage on the HD-based server units keeps idiots at bay by insuring that only data (rips) generated by the server is present - OS and DB are also sandboxed. Industrial / commercial implications should be obvious, probably less necessary for a smart user but still a way to maintain data integrity against intrusions or corrupted files.

How are you calculating VFM? Who are the idiots?


Are Naim really worried that some people may sometimes share their music? That's not very likely is it?

If we are able to afford the kit - are we too stupid to understand how to rip music, the potential legal problems in file-sharing or how to organise our files on a drive?

Bit paternalistic don't you think?

Tog

For what it's worth, I used to build industrial PCs ages ago for use in manufacturing environments. Paternalistic is a negative connotation for the commercial need to insure that an embedded device runs as it should, all the time. I'm sorry if that offends your sensibilities, but it is naive to assume that all users share the same level of expertise.

The server ramges were originally designed to function as 24-7 streaming music servers within a custom integrated commercial or residential environment, which means that they need to be bulletproof, especially from experienced users who, though possessing the skills to navigate the music storage filesystem, might also affect or intrude upon other aspects of the server's function, affecting stability and performance. That includes me, too!

Music sharing has nothing to do with it, as the Music Store located on the server has full read and copy access.

I stand by my original point, which is that I'm not convinced of the VortexBox as a viable, mainstream product.

HP MediaSmart units with Windows Home Server installed and Asset UPnP added-on seem far better in terms of ease of setup, cost (here in the US) and functionality.

Understood - it may well be that Vortexbox isn't the best solution but even a HP Media Server(even though that means using Doze) would be a lot less expensive that the Unitiserve which although very lovely isn't IMO particularly good vfm.

Cyrus fell into a similar trap years ago with their Linkserve but Linn's eyewateringly expensive streamers probably take prize for "perceived added vale"

Sonore have managed to make Vortexbox palatable as a mainstream audiophile product.

Tog

quote:

Sonore have managed to make Vortexbox palatable as a mainstream audiophile product.

At a price - these are not cheap (they are probably very good though). However, you can install Vortexbox on a fairly modest computer and get good results.

quote:

Originally posted by David Dever:
I stand by my original point, which is that I'm not convinced of the VortexBox as a viable, mainstream product.

HP MediaSmart units with Windows Home Server installed and Asset UPnP added-on seem far better in terms of ease of setup, cost (here in the US) and functionality.

Hi David,

Just curious have you ever owned or used a Vortexbox appliance not just talking about the software? I just find it interesting that people make judgements on devices on how they look on paper and have never used one. A Unitiserve costs approx 3000CDN plus taxes (15%) and a Votexbox appliance costs approx 400CDN. I find it hard to justify almost 4Gs for a box that does a little bit more than a 400 dollar one.

PS as i mentioned mentioned earlier I have more drops from both the Uniti and the Qute than I ever had any other device wired into my network. Not purposely knocking Naim gear,(which I do like) just stating the facts.

It's all relative. Cheap amps do the same job as Naim seperates. Price/performance is personal and 'same job' is also a matter of perspective.

Two seperate but linked issues emerging

1. The value for money difference between Vortexbox Appliance/Raid and Unitserve...

2. The difference in quality between the two.

I would argue that the VFM argument for the Vortexbox devices (if they work as well as I' hearing) is a very strong one. Particularly in the case of their flexibility for the end user.

The issue of quality is much harder because we are not talking about traditional hifi but digital servers. I agree totally that the difference between a Naim amp and a cheap amp will be huge but digital servers are largely software devices and draw their recent heritage from the computer not the hifi world.

My Imac currently spits out a digital UPnP stream to my NaimUnity merrily transcoding aiff to wav and aside from a rather awkward file organization the sound is brilliant. I would love to stream aiff (I know thats like admitting you like cheap beer)and love Naim kit so maybe I should get a Unitiserve with its bespoke UPnP etc etc.

Now I'm not convinced a different UPnP player will radically alter the sound of my music or that a better ripper will make a difference either. I do want to shift my music off the computer, retain control and organize my falc files in something other than itunes.

The Unitiserve will do most of that ...for a price ...a Vortexbox will do everything at a much more reasonable cost.

I am not replacing my Naim with something cheaper I'm trying to find the most cost effective way of serving my files to my Naim kit.

Is the ITB drive in The Unityserve made of platinum and does its UPnP software do something special to the digital stream?

Just thoughts...

Tog

quote:

as i mentioned mentioned earlier I have more drops from both the Uniti and the Qute than I ever had any other device wired into my network.

Are you using wireless to attach the units to the network? A wireless extender (bridge)? You didn't answer that before, and your network infrastructure may be a factor in your drop-outs, not necessarily the units themselves.

For what it's worth, I have spent some time with the VortexBox software, having paid for it (we test a wide variety of things over here to preempt sales & support questions relating to compatibility / configuration). Doesn't make it any bit better having done so....

quote:

I would love to stream aiff (I know thats like admitting you like cheap beer)

Nothing wrong with either, you couldn't get arrested (however, your cheap beer is much better than ours).

I use a UnitiServe-SSD at home so, no, I haven't seen any platinum dust leaking from the case.

For me the difference is this. I really want a unitiserve, and I am not at all intertested in the vortex thingy.

Therefore I should imagine I am naimes target market.

FWIW if my laptop breaks down I will head to the apple store an no where else. I learnt a long time ago that a computer is far more than ram/harddrive/usb ports.

I agree most heartily garyi - I won't have anything other than Macs in the house - which is why I'm even considering a UnitiServe since there is a dearth of really good UPnP servers for the mac that will read itunes libraries and transcode to the wav or flac that my NaimUniti so desires ...

I used to use an optical straight out of my macbook Pro with Cyrus kit but the Naim sounds much better via UPnP or even from an Ipod.

So is there a really good Mac UPnP other than Eyeconnect?

In the meantime Vortexbox Raid looks like it will offer me the flexibility to manage files that are already ripped / mirror flac with alac and stream with twonky ...oh and offer a degree of Raid based protection...and service my airport network.Yes it won't look like a Unitiserve but it may just work even better ..

tog

By far the most solid UPNP server I have used is tagged onto XBMC which is a full media server product and free.

I had a play with a uniti some time ago now and in that time XBMC did not fail me once, pausing and everything else worked fine.

I found AMS to be the next most reliable.

eye connect was very flaky, freqently stalling on the mac.
And by far the worse was twonky. However twonky built into my NAS seems very good, so who knows.

As I say probably a year ago now so things may have progressed.

And the very nicest software for control is Songbook, well worth a look. I used the desktop version but understand there is a ipod one as well. Unfortunately the developer twigged to the types of people looking at the software and has charged appropriatly!

quote:

Originally posted by David Dever:

quote:

as i mentioned mentioned earlier I have more drops from both the Uniti and the Qute than I ever had any other device wired into my network.

Are you using wireless to attach the units to the network? A wireless extender (bridge)? You didn't answer that before, and your network infrastructure may be a factor in your drop-outs, not necessarily the units themselves.

For what it's worth, I have spent some time with the VortexBox software, having paid for it (we test a wide variety of things over here to preempt sales & support questions relating to compatibility / configuration). Doesn't make it any bit better having done so....

I use a Linksys N Router and all my system is wired to it.

Err...I have one. It's great. It's easy. It works faultlessly. My netbook connected by HiFace/naim digital cable into DAC picks up the signal through wifi from the router into which the vortexbox is connected by ethernet cable. Box also serves as a traditional NAS.

Laptop/Netbook has many other practical uses too of course, not least is spotify, internet radio, countless music websites including myspace etc. and everything else that goes with it, for wide and varied music enjoyment. Apart from the other functions provided by computer we can not live without anymore!

It's the way to go (IMO) in terms of flexibility/applications based vfm and box counts...Naim, Linn et al are clearly fighting to build and preserve a major, quality presence in an exploding and exponentially expanding market. However I wonder if the 'so many options...' issues over the methods of digital music replay, while initially the temptation into the market for manufacturers and purchasers, could also be its undoing. I was having conversation along just these lines with other forum members today.

A simple black box solution, via a 'player' in the form of PC/mac with many other uses and applications, that many people already own anyway, into a quality HiFi DAC is going to suit a lot of people. And as tech advances overtake and update the files holding boxes, these can be easily and I suspect ever more cost effectively updated.

Like the photography threads state, 'invest in glass', the bodies come and go and get replaced but quality lenses live on. I see the files source like the camera body. The DAC is the glass.