How is airplay streaming different to UPnP or DNLA streaming

Hi Sloop -

Yes, AirPlay is proprietary and UPnP is an open standard.  They accomplish the same thing, getting music from one place to another, but they work very differently.  A UPnP player pulls music from a server, and is remote controlled by a "control point", whereas an Airplay-enabled device can push its audio stream to any other player that is Airplay enabled.  

There are only a few practical differences that come to mind.  First, I believe it still the case that all devices capable of receiving an Airplay stream are limited to 16/48, so higher resolution music has to be down sampled.  Second, most folks that use Airplay, as the name suggests, are sending streams from wireless devices (iPods, iPads), and so the stream can be subject to occasional WiFi dropouts.  In a lot of UPnP setups, only the control point is wireless, and the server and player share a wired connection, thus preventing most dropouts.

So, dropouts aside, audio quality really comes down the quality of the receiver.  An Apple AE, for example, has been measured pretty high for jitter. I am guessing that devices with built-in Wi-Fi that is AirPlay-enabled probably sound better.  Am sure that if they could ever come to a licensing agreement with Apple, an Airplay-enabled network player from Naim would sound great.

Lastly, UPnP and Airplay are not mutually exclusive.  I use my iPad both for nStream, as well as for running Spotify (which I can send to an Apple AE via AirPlay).

Hope this helps.

Hook

The primary difference is that with airplay you 'push' from the server (i.e. and ipad) to the client and upnp the client 'pulls' from the server.

I wouldn't get hung up about airplay its a bit naff, I think its a variant of DNLA.

Upnp/DNLA can also push to the client from the server like AirPlay, it's just Naim don't implement that variant of it from what I can see.

Simon

So likewise is squeezebox streaming another proprietary brand?

And  all are just methods of getting data from source to player and it is the player that will ultimately deal with recreating the music and all should be capable of sounding as good as the next with the same lossless file?

thanks

It may be notionally true in some instances, but I don't think it's quite as simple as that in reality, depending on how your system would be configured and the equipment used. For example, with Naim devices such as the Uniti series, then you can't separate the decoding of the streamed files from the DAC / Pre / Power side of things, so they all sound different. I'm sure Naim would also say the the NDS will give you better results than, say, a Canbridge Audio streamer.

I prefer Airplay because it just works. 

I think you have to choose a way ... My choice is Apple for the computer components and Naim for audio ... Hence an Apple/Naim system makes the perfect computer audio system for my needs. 

I just can't get on with UPnP 

With UPNP you can stream video, data, music, pictures etc...  And serve different media to different "zones".

...including to your device OFF network.

it works for one limited action.  Try sending different music to 3 different zones.....  NOT working.

Why would i want to do that? I just want to send music to the room i want to listen to it in ... The mirroring function with Airplay is very useful too. When i turn on a Mac or IOS device, Airplay is just a click away ... I find it very useful though it is not my primary method of listening to music.

With UPnP i have always had problems ... It still seems Windows orientated to me ... So that is probably why it doesn't work well in my environment. 

My Apple/Naim combo just works so well and makes all this streaming stuff really easy. 

I am not saying you do.  I was just addressing the differences between upnp and airplay. 

I personally LOVE having ALL of my music with me for the car, traveling, parties, etc... 

Also, it is nice to stream to the backyard when BBQing, while the lady is streaming something else to her PC in her office, and a friend is playing something else on the main Naim system. 

I must admit Apple AirPlay doesn't just work for me, with iTunes and AppleTV I have often issues, which requires an AppleTV restart or power cycle or trial and error on my iPad. When working its good, but it's not robust enough for me.

My experience of upnp on Naim, IOS, Sony and Evoke Pure  is a lot better, but I don't ask it to do so much other than serve my music which probably helps.

Simon

Excellent points Andakian ... 

Apart from the lack of support for FLAC and high res audio in Airplay there is a difference in the architecture. While UPnP knows three kinds of devices:

• Media renderer = the streamer
• Media server = the NAS
• Control point = the iPad,

Airplay only knows two different devices:

• Airplay sender = the Mac or the iPad
• Airplay receiver = the Airport Express

This makes Airplay inconvenient to use while sitting on the couch. You can airplay from the iPad but you probably don't have your entire music library on it. So you would be moving data twice: Once from the NAS to your iPad, second from the iPad to the Airport Express. Both over the same wireless LAN.

Additionally and from my experience only, Airplay has a rather long latency when streaming from iPad to Airport Express: Sound from games etc. usually is half a second late.

So, essentially Airplay is nice when

• working in front of the Mac anyway (but Linn's Songcast e.g. works much better for me) or
• streaming low res content from the internet via the iPad

Apart from that I don't like Airplay and I almost never use it. 

To those of you who feel that the AAC 'lossy' content will contaminate your Naim equipment, I am not in absolute disagreement at this moment in time. The fact that I am commenting on this forum is for two reasons. Firstly, I accept and admire the quality of Naim equipment, and secondly, I do not believe I have anything like the audio Nirvana achievable using Naim output gear through my current system, although, as I have said earlier, it's probably good enough for my elderly ears. Nevertheless, even in a room 19 feet by 12 feet I have to accommodate all my AV and HiFi requirements. It is a big compromise.

However, what I am conjecturing is that Apple has enabled a relatively stable, internet driven means of consolidating all your music content with instant access, but without any need for a NAS or a PC, or any localised music at all. The dimensional characteristics of the content or its delivery is very valid at this moment in time but becoming potentially more and more redundant with each evolutionary step of the internet. Who would have thought that we could have 100 mb internet access and stable high speed wifil in the home only ten years ago? Apple, like them or loath them, has analysed the potential of this delivery system and turned out a pretty good product with plenty of evolutionary capability, albeit of their own propietary characteristics.

In answer to jfritzen, I only have 3 elements to my Apple setup. I have the PC (nothing Apple about it) for capturing my music into iTunes, admittedly Apple Lossless; an Apple TV connected, sadly, via HDMI to my AV amp and ultimately my Samsung TV; and an iPad or iPhone. I bought 64 gb versions of the phone and iPad thinking I'd need that for my music, but both have virtually nothing on them - they basically only store playlists, which are downloaded automatically from the iCloud. When playing my music, I have my Onkyo in Pure Audio mode that allegedly bypasses all the potential Japanese massaging and is also in bi-amp mode. The Apple Remote App (free) connects to Apple TV (no actual tv needs to be operational for music playback) and the oRemote app (free) controls the amplifier, both can work from my iPhone or iPad, and I could have multiple Apple TVs, if i so wish. Can I stress that no local music server is active or accessible to play the music

To be honest, I am aghast at the plethora of hardware and wiring that Naim seems to feel essential to achieve ultimate streaming reproduction, and am deeply sceptical of a dodgy NAS being the initial instance. The technical glitches discussed on this forum also make me concerned of the propietary nature of Naim's own gear e.g. the HDX, which will almost certainly be evolutionarily eclipsed in the very near future. Does it merit the investment of precious and costly technical expertise that could be aimed at pure reproductive output? Accept the airwaves and turn it into magic - that should be Naim's future.

I really like AirPlay for what it does - although it certainly (and purposly?) has its limitations. But I'm not convinced Naim should integrate AirPlay. It would seem a bit shortsighted - Naim equipement is for the long term, right? For instance. What about Microsofts smartglass then - should not that too be integrated? Or whatever similar offering Android might produce? And what happens when Apple/Google/Microsoft/Android updates the protocols? Naim would forever be chasing tails. uPNP is more stable, crossplatform and importantly (for 3. parties) an open standard.    

Not sure what the ultimate standard should be, just pointing out where the future will be and exemplifying it with the Apple version of current events. Could be any or all of yur suggestions, but it is happening and it will change the way that we access our music collections. Naim should simply play 'catcher' to the arriving media and reproduce it as cleanly and beautifully as possible. I think they are behind the wave so far.

Part of the problem is the conflicting product branding. iPods/iphones/ipads etc designed with a ~2 year expirery date allowing/demanding for new features/products to be introduced at a rapid rate.  The same pace isnt acceptable for a 2K £ Naim stereo (when essentially the same can be had for a quarter of the price). 

The features we are talking about are irrelevant to Apple's obvious intent of gouging more money on a very frequent basis from its adulating customers. My real spend on this exercise is £90 (probably less as I bought on Amazon) for the Apple TV to connect to my AV receiver. The iCloud bit costs about £24 per annum. I do appreciate that I am in a bit of a lion's den here by espousing any virtues at all in Apple's direction, but am struggling to find any true negative aspects to Apple's delivery mode, other than its proprietary nature, the AAC bit rate and the lossiness of the product versus CD reproduction. However, the real question is whether the output sound is compromised. My AV receiver will never output a sound of the quality of decent Naim products, but the question is whether the Naim products would be comprised by Apple input?

If i could get off my lazy backside I should put a CD through my (decent) Marantz CD/DVD player and measure it against the streamed output, and if their is an idenfifiable difference I will happily relate that on this site.

As far as I can tell at the moment, my music listening pleasure is actually most disturbed by production quality than the reproduction of my equipment. Am afraid am a middle of the road man whose taste is unmoved by classical music or jazz. For example, yesterday I was listening to a Best of Kinks (streamed) album and the recording of Waterloo Sunset is woeful. However, an early Nat King Cole album, Nina Simone, most Led Zeppelin recordings and even Jimi Hendrix at his drugged best are wonderful to listen to due to proper mastering and production. The is not to say that rubbish hardware and speakers will not ruin any listening pleasure. Evidently it will.

Now, if I am lucky and my slack HiFi salesman does what he says he will do, I may have the pleasure of visiting the Naim factory in Salisbury next month. I am a true fan of this company and would be delighted to be able to accommodate their products in my setup. Wife is a bit of a stumbling block though :/

I just tried private sharing from iTunes to my iPad to my Airport Express. The data travels twice (to and from the iPad) and drains the iPad battery. Removing the iPad from the WiFi stops the music. It's not an elegant solution. 

Then I tried the Apple Remote app. This seems to be a remote controller for a running iTunes program on a remote computer. In this case the data seems to travel directly to the Airport Express. Still not very elegant IMO, but better.

But since you already own an Apple TV why do you need Naim to put Airplay into their devices?

Ok, firstly humble pie time! As an exercise I played Ralph McTell's excellent remastered album Not Till Tomorrow through the Apple TV and then my Marantz CD Player and the CD won. It was more open, airier and less harsh but not by a large margin. I suppose that was to be expected. To jfritzen, you won't be able to do what you think I am recommending unless you feed an Apple TV into an AV receiver, probably using HDMI connections. It is simple, elegant and it works but it will not reproduce Naim class quality, unless and until Naim want to embrace it, and I suspect that the Apple TV interface per se will not be good enough. But I can live with the compromise for the moment.