STOP PRESS. NaimDAC v's ND5 XS: Dealer comments.

Files played back from my UnitiServe's harddisk sound better than the same files played back from a LaCie NAS through the UnitiServe. IMO, IME etc.

This is worth a read : Listening to Digital Storage (from HiFi Critic):

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/h...ening_to_storage.htm

Thanks but I am not going to read this because it is overly long and a cursory glance shows it only presents tentative conclusions

What I will say is I can download a FLAC of 40MB in 4 seconds from the internet. This may involve servers in other continents as well as flaky copper wire from the nearest telephone exchange plus everything in between. imagine all the RF interference etc! The results are bit perfect. This leaves me feeling bullish about my ability to repeat said feat over a couple of metres within my own living room!

If I may quote an excerpt though 'QNAP2 rendered the same song more tunefully'.

I suppose there was more of everything. The silent bits more silent etc. Now,  where's that bleach?

Marky Mark, i know what you mean, there is alot of so-called-facts flowing around this forum, thats why i got sick of it last time around..

There are some genuine knowledge and help regarding Naim to be found here, but you sure need to pull out the critic-goggles when reading, lucky for thoose who seek more than the common forum-truth there is a ting called google

As regards the 'forward' sound - is your NAS perfectly level, or is the front tilting forward?  In the same way that silver speaker cables may sound 'bright', placing the NAS on a wooden surface may result in a 'woody' sound and leaving plenty of space for air to circulate around it will result in an 'airy' sound.

It's all to do with quantum mechanical force-field shaping of the bits.  Don't let anyone tell you that all bits are equal!

It was all going so beautifully until the quantum bit which is just such BS  Obviously the bits could have three states namely 1, 0 or 1 and 0 in that case. Offers a more 3D sound I hear.....

Another experiment - write a binary number on a piece of paper with a biro, and then write the same number with a Mont Blanc fountain pen.  The number written in fountain pen will look more pleasing to the eye.

It's the same with digital audio data and the ears - more expensive cables will sound better.

yeah, whatever.

Here's the issue at hand: your analogy is flawed.

Ever used a cheap calling card to make a transatlantic call using VOIP? That's a better analogy. Sometimes you hear the other person, sometimes you don't. And it's not really duplex. You need to stop talking and then the other person can start talking. Same story, no. still using VOIP.

Ever programmed a RTOS? Do you know what that means? Google it.

Sure, the TCP/IP protocol guarantees that the bits will arrive perfectly at the other end, perfectly and in the right order. However, there are no time guarantees. And therein lies the issue.

If the NDX had a better cache, maybe a 20 second cache rather than a 1-2 second cache, it might not have mattered that much. If I unplug the network cable from a Squeezbox, it still plays music for about 20 seconds. The NDX, only about 1 second.

Sure, in a perfect world, it shouldn't matter. Wav vs. flac shouldn't matter. USB stick vs. network shouldn't matter. SP/DIF vs. network shouldn't matter either. This doesn't prove that using differnet disks matters, but does indicate that the argument that it shouldn't matter, so it doesn't, doesn't hold water.

Now I do find the article funny in talking about how the different hard disks sound different. It's kind of absurd to attribute sound to hard drive choices. It's just that the NDX can't handle the TCP/IP protocol that well. Sure, I can complain about that, or get on with my life and fix things around it.

Maybe it's as simple as the NDX network card having to work a little extra hard to make sense of the data coming in, sending back ACK or retry packages. Maybe it's the TCP/IP networking protocol settings on my PC being different from the Synology NAS.

On my end, I'm changing the Synology over to RAID 0. Maybe that helps. Once I'm done with that, I'll see if I can take a deeper look at the networking settings on the Synology NAS. It's Linux after all. There must be a config file somewhere I can tweak.

If you're not getting enough data throughput to the NDX, I'd expect that you'd hear dropouts and stutters, not a consistent change in tonal quality.  IME digital systems tend to work or they don't.

Regarding VOIP - are you running multiple Skype calls over your home network?

I'm interested in your findings on this. Please let us know, whether or not you find any differences.

Cheers, 

Jan

I'm not sure if it's that black and white.

Using wireless, for example: the NDX would do just fine streaming HiRes audio.

The ND5XS wouldn't play it for more than a minute or so without a break.

I have to agree, I spend a lot of time designing and sometimes debugging digital systems.. I really wish it was a case of they even work or don't. The gradual performance decline on some digital systems or networks can be a b*gger  to iron out.

Simon

But hard to believe there would be a consistent data transformation taking place which would produce a 'forward midrange' in tonal quality.

Yes - either it works (streams) or it doesn't (there's a break).  There isn't a 'middle' situation where it works partially e.g. only delivers low frequencies etc.

Noogle, I'll give you that 

Simon

I'm not saying it delivers only certain frequencies. Maybe there is an extra consistent load on the network card that the ND5XS can't handle, but the NDX can. And the system reaches steady state of increased work.

However, handling that extra load means extra work that leads to a change in what I hear, which I then interpret as forward midrange. In any case, I hear something that I don't like, and that something goes away when I stream from the PC.

There is no expectation bias per se.I would much prefer the Synology NAS to outperform the PC.

@Simon: Can you point me to any networking tools I could use that could sniff the traffic for additional collissions etc.? Something that I could use to get a handle on the difference in network traffic patterns?

As the NAIM saying goes, 'everything matters'.

Have you experience this yourself in a direct comparison or are you stating assumptions?

Shovoham, if you are using network switches you won't have collisions. If you use network hubs, quite rare now, then you will, and they have little collision detection lights that flicker. With hubs all the devices share the entire physical network at once.

As far as network tools go assuming you have some TCPIP knowledge then Wireshark is a great freeware sniffer that is used commonly in the industry.... But if you know nothing of networks it will be double Dutch to you. Also unless you can get your switch to port span or you temporarily swap out with a hub  you will only be able to monitor the network stack of the computer running Wireshark.

BTW TCPIP doesnt garentee that traffic is transferred in the right order or with out loss in itself.. Within TCPIP there are many protocols and specifically there are two transport mode protocols, TCP (which does its nest to maintain data integrity at the cost of performance) and UDP. TCP uses a concept of sessions and windowing and packet loss retry and re ordering within the windows, unless it can't be maintained and the session is closed. UDP is used in low latencytransfer and multicast, and the packets can be lost and be received out of sequence. Fortunately most music media network systems sacrifice latency (ie use a buffer) for integrity and use TCP. However IPtelephony for example uses UDP for low latency, but you need good quality networks for quality audio. With TCP you can paper over the cracks, and thats what we use in DLNA/UPNP.

Simon

Ok, back to the US vs. RipNAS or QNAP, are you saying the bits transferred by the US are timed more accurately?

To some it doesn't matter, not even to some owning an NDS/555PS/252/SC/300 or NDX/NDAC/555PS/552/300 system.

Funny world.

At the end of the day only your own ears can decide. If the US sounds better to you and it's worth the extra outlay to you, go for it. But don't go by theories that have been stated here or because something gets repeated over and over again by lots of people. Not even by what your dealer tells you. Listen and compare, that's all that counts. Unfortunately not everyone is following that advice, way too many people buy their gear based on what's being written here.

But, you pays your money and takes your choice. As long as you're happy, who cares?!

Experienced it myself. The NDX and the ND5XS were on the same spot. It didn't bother me much because I normally run hardwired in any case.

Interesting....

The US still remains more money that I wish to pay. I built my PC a few years ago for less than $1000. A hyperthreaded capable Quad Core processor with about 8 GB Ram etc. I can built a similar machine today for far less outlay.

I'm not saying that the bits coming in are timed better. The TCP/IP protocol doesn't work that way. It's probably just some TCP/IP params on the network card in the PC that are differently tuned and better for the usage pattern that the NDX expects, I suspect.

There was something around this in soundcheck's blog about how Linux fared poorly as a Logitech Media Server. I might go check that out too.

Are you referring to yourself?

Some discussion of protocols and products may over-complicate the basic engineering challenge and either put people off or push them into unnecessary measures.

In essence its just reading some data from disk into memory on a networked DAC or streamer. The type of thing rudimentary devices have been able to do for many years now.

If I use three simple markers of the volume and velocity 'challenge' relevant to my setup I might say:

1) FLAC file (a track of 5 mins length) = 40MB
2) Throughput on home network = 10MB per second
3) Network cards / hubs throughput = 10MB per second

Given the above, I might venture the following high-level solutions:

1) transfer entire file to DAC memory in 4 seconds then play in entirety
2) smooth stream over 5 mins at 0.13 MB per second (approx 1/80th of operating throughput) adding a bit on for buffering.

3) some hybrid of the above

It is not that hard when you think about it. As mentioned above, analogous to the challenge of hitting a large target 2 metres away with a couple of droplets from a water pistol (versus filling a far away bucket with said pistol as it may appear).

All the stuff about disk brands, checksum, tonal changes etc is embarrassing and unhelpful to those getting into streaming for the first time.

I empathise with any specific network problems people have but lets be honest, this is not like launching a satellite or moon lander. You don't need particularly special kit. indeed, the £25 Raspberry Pi might be adapted for streaming duties. Certainly it could hold the track above in memory.

Mark, home networks are not just about throughput, but also about control point synchronisation and discovery with upnp. In the ideal world home network products should be plug and play, but alas many consumer devices have shortcuts in to achieve a very low production cost. These shortcuts don't affect casual web or email traffic, but have got in the way of home audio using Apple AirPlay or Upnp as shown on the forums, hence why people appear to be interested and curious what others use and what not to use to be succesful.

Yes it might be we prefer this wasn't the case but in the real world it is and I think people have been generally very appreciative of members comments on this forum. It's easier to ignore and not read, but you can't ignore a fellow members expierience if they don't write about it.

Simon