I love my Unitiserve

I get all warm and fuzzy too knowing that I can transport my entire music collection between two homes. Do back it up though, if you can sort out the labyrinthian routine to get the US to see a share on your NAS. I couldn't. At least copy the files to a USB hard drive or similar. I did. I feel better. I have 1362 CDs ripped on the Serve. At an average of $20 a pop, that works out to... Oh my !

As to your last question there are those that love the US and those that love to hate it.

I like mine, too. No backup in place - that's risky!! It is a bit of a faff setting up a NAS backup, but if you run into problems, Naim support (Phil) will be able to get it up and running for you.  

Another vote for the UnitiServe.  I missed it when it went back to Salisbury a few years ago (minor fault).  Somehow Minimserver on my Synology just didn't sound as good (at least on my system it didn't). 

Nice to see some acknowledgement of just how good this box is.  I would unreservedly recommend the UnitiServe to anyone who streams music.  Even die-hard Linn fans recommend the UnitiServe.

I have the SSD version, and my NAS is backed up regularly.  Works well - no fuss.

ATB. George

Yeah I love mine and bought an ex demo one complete with hundreds of CDs already loaded and I can loan CDs from the library for £2 for ten......oh did I mention internet radio 

Yes, there's nothing quite like stealing music. 

Of course! Musicians are gypsies and don’t actually earn a decent living ...

What's that supposed to mean? Are you condoning theft?

personal use only, the law was changed I think

You certainly should not be copying albums that you've borrowed from the library, as you have not bought them. And if you do, you'd be wise not to brag about it on the Internet. I know most people don't care about this, but it's a point worth making. Despite ripping over 2,000 CDs, I still have the bloomin' things in the loft. Even if I gave them to the charity shop, the rips would no longer be mine to keep. 

lescouse posted:

personal use only, the law was changed I think

 

If you don't currently own the CDs, your rips are illegal under UK law. 

ChrisSU posted:

lescouse posted:

personal use only, the law was changed I think

 

If you don't currently own the CDs, your rips are illegal under UK law. 

Is this true outside the UK (or outside Europe in fact) ?

Lescouse is right on one point... the law was changed recently.  But I thought the change was that any copying is now illegal, even copying for use on a personal player for example.   I do remember thinking 'Bugger, I'll have to sell my HDX'.

As for stealing music from the local library or even mates, I speak as one whose mortgage was for many years paid by the music industry, when I say "Please don't kill the music industry as we know it".  A few more words came to mind, but I thought better of making Richard's (moderator's) day   

lescouse posted:

personal use only, the law was changed I think

 

If you are in the UK then the law was changed to allow copying for personal use on another platform of music recordings that you owned, so covered ripping of CDs to a hard disc. It didn't permit copying of recordings that you didn't own.

But anyway this law was set aside by the ECJ a few months back, as being an inadequate implementation of EU law because it didn't make any provision to compensate the copyright owners. So currently ripping CDs is unlawful, even of CDs you own.  

I doubt that any copyright owner will ever want to go after a Unitiserve owner who owns the CDs that he/she has ripped, but keeping the music you found on a Unitiserve which you bought second hand is straightforward theft.  Not a position I would want to be in personally, for several reasons.

best

David

Well it is theft but what would you call a practice where you pay 0,0001 (or whatever) €/£/$ for each track played on your net player. Damage done to the artist seem similar.

Hungryhalibut posted:

What's that supposed to mean? Are you condoning theft?

Obviously not.

Guys you do suprise me not backing up your collection... In my earlier days of streaming circa 2004 I had all my files (probably about 50CDs) on one drive in a USB file store. It went phutt after a power cut.  .. In a determined manner I took it apart to mount the hard drive elsewhere to recover the music... The hard drive was completely scrambled.. No dice... I had to re rip my CDs ... It felt such a waste of time and intensely irritating... The thought of doing it for 1300 discs might drive me into depression. Anyway my lesson learnt .. Backup anything of value whether it be of time or monetary. Backups for me have  saved the day to varying degrees severeal times now since 2004.

Simon

Olek_K posted:

Well it is theft but what would you call a practice where you pay 0,0001 (or whatever) €/£/$ for each track played on your net player. Damage done to the artist seem similar.

That is completely different because the artist can always decline to allow their works on a streaming service, as Adele did with 25 for example. Also I imagine that some artists would regard allowing their music on a streaming service as a form of advertising.  You can see many comments on this forum where people listen to music on a streaming service so as to decide whether or not to buy a CD or download.

best

David

lescouse posted:

Yeah I love mine and bought an ex demo one complete with hundreds of CDs already loaded and I can loan CDs from the library for £2 for ten......oh did I mention internet radio 

Don't forget torrent downloads and, depending on the quality you desire, YouTube extractor. 

Why pay for the music you enjoy? It's now just a byproduct of the internet and the artists will survive on their own merits.

Indeed they survived home taping will be the death of music ... 

(BTW tongue very much in cheek) 

I'm sure any of us into music have spent an absolute f**ing fortune over the years on LPs, tapes, CDs, and downloads, so we don't need lectures on ripping off the music industry, thanks. It's a bit like jet-setting celebs lecturing us on our carbon footprint...

Lots of love for the Unitiserve here ...

i think a lot of owners come to rely on the uServe so sort of indispensable to them. I can understand how affection grows for it.

Speaking as someone who makes a living in the music industry, the dealer should have never sold the UnitiServe with albums on in the first place and, while some of us might not appreciate being told that it is illegal to copy music you don't own, it would appear that not all are aware of this fact.    

Streaming from a legal service like Spotify isn't theft and the artist does earn income from streams.  In fact some make good money out of streaming but it is all about scale and often the devil is in the details.

As for the UnitiServe, I have mixed feelings about mine.  I like what it does and that it removes some of the variables involved with computer/network audio but don't appreciate its limitations when it comes to metadata, tagging etc. 

I am fully aware that streaming is legal - but is it just?

Just or unjust in what way? As an industry that has had to contend with our content, product, material, call it what you will, being freely (albeit illegally) available we have had to be quite creative in terms of the ways we enable consumers to access it.  I don't think it is a case of just or unjust, buying a CD or streaming an album from Spotify are simply different forms of consumption. One results in a one-off payment irrespective of how many times you play it. The other results in a fee every time you play it.

It is important to realise that not all track streams are of equal value. A stream by a premium subscriber, bundled subscriber, ad-funded subscriber, or even from YouTube attract/create markedly different revenue.