What (in lay terms) does a Streamer do ?

Claus-Thoegersen posted:

If we forget internet radio and spotify/tidal, can someone tell me the difference between playing a file from my nas, using e.g. the ndx streamer, and playing the same file from my nas using one of the Naim servers?

  

The difference would come down to potential operational differences and sonic differences.  The operational differences come about from the precise functionality of the servers themselves; e.g. the functionality of whatever server software you're running on the nas (such as MinimServer, Asset, J River, Synology Media Station, etc etc) vs Naim's server software.  Some, like MinimServer, offer more user-adjustable "tweaks" in the software than do Naim.  A bigger difference is that some support serving of DSD format files while some do not.  Conversely, the Naim servers can be much simpler to use for those uncomfortable with software installation and settings and maintenance.

Sonic differences . . . we're in the world of 'what hardware sounds better if at all.'  Many opinions on that.  I cannot hear a difference between music served by my nas and music served by my uServe.  Others can in their homes on their systems.  I have not extensively a vs b compared, so with casual comparisons it all sounds about the same to me.

The basic functionality of streaming alone (i.e. Digital transport only, no DAC) seems almost trivial. So why not include it in  a server, or anything else for that matter. 

Or is there more to digital transport than meets the eye (ear) ?

Paul

PBenny1066 posted:

The basic functionality of streaming alone (i.e. Digital transport only, no DAC) seems almost trivial. So why not include it in  a server, or anything else for that matter. 

Or is there more to digital transport than meets the eye (ear) ?

Paul

What generally is the point of a server that serves music to itself?  A philosophy question, perhaps.

But such devices do seem to exist.  The Aurender W20 "music server" for example is indeed a server, with (what they say is) various high-quality outputs including USB and SPDIF for direct connection to a dac.  They call it a "server" but I'm not so sure it includes UPNP server functionality.  It has an ethernet port, but that seems to be used so that the device can live on the home network and use a nas for external music storage.  It is designed to live on the hi fi rack.  In the vocab of this thread, I think it's a player not a server.

*edit* Even Aurender can't decide what it is.  They use both the "server" and "player" word to describe this thing.  Their newer much-less-expensive model, called the N100h, they call a "player."

PBenny1066 posted:

The basic functionality of streaming alone (i.e. Digital transport only, no DAC) seems almost trivial. So why not include it in  a server, or anything else for that matter. 

Or is there more to digital transport than meets the eye (ear) ?

Paul

The only point to having a streamer in the box with the server would be to stream music from online music services.  I think getting it to work properly and reliably is non-trivial, cf the difficulty and time it's taking for Naim to get the streamer firmware for Tidal optimised.

best

David

PBenny1066 posted:

The basic functionality of streaming alone (i.e. Digital transport only, no DAC) seems almost trivial. So why not include it in  a server, or anything else for that matter. 

Or is there more to digital transport than meets the eye (ear) ?

Paul

That is the Userve! all other servers has spdif out but also build in dac. 

Claus

I think I have to give up on this! All Naim servers has a upnp server in the software! All servers can stream files from the network, streaming files over Ethernet is what I think most people refers to as streaming and what a hifi streamer does. Support for internet radio, and online streaming services is not as such part of a streamer. The Naim servers has internet radio, but currently do not support internet streaming services, and until Naim decides otherwise this is not going to happen, unfortunately.

And the Naim upnp server can be used by the Naim streamers as a upnp server, along with any other upnp servers available on the network.

Claus   

PBenny1066 posted:

The basic functionality of streaming alone (i.e. Digital transport only, no DAC) seems almost trivial. So why not include it in  a server, or anything else for that matter. 

Or is there more to digital transport than meets the eye (ear) ?

Paul

Yes there is more to digital transports than meets the eye... Especially when coupled to a synchronous digital stream. (Highly stable clock, upstream decoupling and low noise.. to achieve this requires expense and careful engineering)

if you had a server and a renderer combined such as possible with the Naim HDX or Unitiserve, you would by definition not need a streamer, remember a streamer is a device remote from the server... that's the whole point of it. However both of those devices will support acting as a media server for a remote streamer if required..... such as for the NDS for example.

In the world of low noise/distortion electronics crosstalk can be our enemy, and Naim typically deal with this by allowing the decoupling of components such as preamps from amps, and media servers from streamers. Some of us go one step further and decouple our streamers from our DACs as well.

Simon

Looking at this in a simple manner, the process of digital replay from a stored file involves

1. Some sort of file server holding the file.
2. Software, usually called a uPnP (universal plug and play) player, to manage, find and feed the content of a chosen file into
3. a processor to convert the file to a digital stream in real time, in effect 'playing' the recording but with a digital output - as has been noted on here this is generally referred to as rendering.
4. A DAC to convert the digital stream into an analogue stream that can be amplified and played through speakers or headphones.

A typical Naim "streamer" such as the ND5XS combines 3 & 4, with 1 & 2 on a computer (or the uPnP player on a computer and file on an online fileserver), or more usefully 1 & 2 on a separate dedicated fileserver such as 'network attached storage'. The Naim 'streamer' controls the uPnP server so once set up you don't have to touch the computer or NAS.

Other options are available, including using a computer to do the rendering (3), which could be the same computer as the uPnP player (2), again whether or not the files are stored on it (1). A common problem with computers, however, is that electrically they are 'noisy' environments, while frequently they have other functions which could detract processing from the audio activity. A solution to this that has been much extolled on these fora is to dedicate a computer, with minimal other functions or attachment, the most popular being a Mac Mini, which once set up can be run 'headless' without monitor or keyboard, in effect functioning just like any typical hifi box. 

I personally use a Mac Mini, with two solid state hard disks in it storing all my music so I don't even need it networked (though it is for backup and upload purposes), running the excellent Audirvana streaming software (whichdoesn't need separate uPnP player software), in a dedicated mode that restricts other use of the MM while playing music, the USB output going to a DAC. In my case the DAC is a Hugo, and I feed it through a USB/SPDIF isolator/convertor (Gustard U12) to remove any electrical (RF) noise that otherwise degrades the signal.

So if the question was how to stream using an existing DAC, it could be just that, a Mac Mini with suitable sized hard disks, solid state if preferred for silence and reliability, running Audirvana, feeding the nDAC.  i don't know if an isolator like the Gustard would be necessary as the nDAC's input isolation may be better. Based on my experience, and that reported on these fora by others who have tried it, the MM/Audirvana will not give a lesser SQ experience than going for a Naim streamer. 

My journey was from ND5XS+XP5XS with Zyxel NSA325 NAS, first swapping the power supply for the Hugo instead of using ND5XS's own, improving SQ. Then I wanted to replace the NAS that was irritatingly noisy, intending to go for a silent QNAP one, but the change I made was to move to the MM as above, replacing both the ND5XS and my NAS, to not only be silent, but a further improvement in SQ, with the benefit that my MM/Audirvana/Gustard/Hugo significantly less costly than the original ND5XS+XP5XS, even without factoring in the cost of a QNAP. 

Having written the above I realise it doesn't fully address the OP, as in multi room, and that is because it's not something I've ever considered as I only have one music system, howeVer music files ona fileserver with a uPnP player - items 1 & 2 in my last post, make the same music available to any other player on the network, that was true of my original Zyxel NAS, and then my Mac Mini on which I installed the (free) Serviio uPnP player before going the whole hog with Audirvana, when I played through ND5XS via the network.

Claus-Thoegersen posted:

I think I have to give up on this! All Naim servers has a upnp server in the software! All servers can stream files from the network, streaming files over Ethernet is what I think most people refers to as streaming and what a hifi streamer does. Support for internet radio, and online streaming services is not as such part of a streamer. The Naim servers has internet radio, but currently do not support internet streaming services, and until Naim decides otherwise this is not going to happen, unfortunately.

And the Naim upnp server can be used by the Naim streamers as a upnp server, along with any other upnp servers available on the network.

Claus   

Claus it's all in the vocabulary.  "Servers can stream files from the network" sounds intuitive, but actually as I'm sure you know servers send files TO the network, and streamers receive them FROM the server and play them. In this context server means server and streamer means client.  "Streamer" is a funny word; as used its counter-intuitive to me.  I prefer "streamer player" or "network player."  

There is also the point that some hear a rise in quality of music streamed . Many say the unitiserve sounds better in a networked situation than playing locally into a dac. I haven't tried this feature so I can't comment on wether it does or not, but to me (in theory) the jitterless nature of bit packaging from streaming is negated by the jitter busting technology in the Ndac.

Tobyjug - jitter of a synchronous bit stream such as SPDIF or isochronous USB is quite separate from the network data transfer. The latter when using TCP has not concept of timing at all and therefore jitter in TCP transfer in terms of audio samples is a meaningless concept.  Just about all DACs now - and have done for several years now - don't derive their DAC clock directly from the SPDIF transport clock.... unlike in the early days - and so jitter in the SPDIF has no bearing on the jitter from the DAC clock... HOWEVER ... in a closed system the two are not completely decoupled because of cross talk - one interferes with the other - albeit and minuscule rates - which is why on revealing DACs the quality of the synchronous digital transport is important. Noise in the transport clock will couple into the DACs electronics. This is also why I like to decouple my DAC from my streamer - to help minimise the cross talk from my streamer TCP/IP stack... but even here I can hear subtle SQ changes based on TCP windowing parameters.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Tobyjug - jitter of a synchronous bit stream such as SPDIF or isochronous USB is quite separate from the network data transfer. The latter when using TCP has not concept of timing at all and therefore jitter in TCP transfer in terms of audio samples is a meaningless concept.  Just about all DACs now - and have done for several years now - don't derive their DAC clock directly from the SPDIF transport clock.... unlike in the early days - and so jitter in the SPDIF has no bearing on the jitter from the DAC clock... HOWEVER ... in a closed system the two are not completely decoupled because of cross talk - one interferes with the other - albeit and minuscule rates - which is why on revealing DACs the quality of the synchronous digital transport is important. Noise in the transport clock will couple into the DACs electronics. This is also why I like to decouple my DAC from my streamer - to help minimise the cross talk from my streamer TCP/IP stack.

 

I also see on the highest-end systems the "clock" being in its own box, separate from the "dac." 

Yes - indeed that would have some advantages - but also  the wires and distance  connecting a remote clock could introduce other challenges. So I would (and I think this is what Naim does) have the clock close to the DSP processor and use the DSP processor as the clocked bit stream generator using I2S and then couple that into the DACs through an optical isolator. I2S connections can only be accurate over short distances.

All,

thanks for the responses, I am wiser for reading them. What motivated my original question ?

To ponder whether a US (which can serve music to up to 6 streamers via upnp) would be capable of doing multi room, with one room ( the main system) using spdif into nDAC, and all the other rooms being served  by upnp (or whatever else) into streamers such as Mu-so, all in perfect synchrony. This perhaps answers Barts question - "why would a server want to serve music to itself ? " Answer : if by so doing the server can multi room to a locally connected hifi and networked devices.

I think the conclusion is no it can't. But I am still not sure I understand why it couldn't  be simply done with a bit of software/firmware jiggery pokery inside the US. 

Thanks again, Paul

Hmmm... If your music files were on a fileserver on a network (computer or NAS, with installed uPnP player software), you could play music from it using Muso  in another room, and some other player in some other room, but what they wouldn't be able to do is simultaneously be able to play the same tune in sync. However my understanding (but not knowledge) is that multiple Musos or Qubes can, as might also some (maybe all?) Naim 'streamer' products. But whether that applies if the music is on a US is a question for Naim experts.

At the risk of opening all this up again, the maximum number of concurrent serves is something that the designer selects to stay within the processing capability of the hardware. So I suspect the answer to the question framed as you do in your most recent posting is just that if the firmware were written to do that, it could do it, but with limited bit rates per serve.  So it's a hardware limitation I think.

best

David

Innocent Bystander posted:

Hmmm... If your music files were on a fileserver on a network (computer or NAS, with installed uPnP player software), you could play music from it using Muso  in another room, and some other player in some other room, but what they wouldn't be able to do is simultaneously be able to play the same tune in sync. However my understanding (but not knowledge) is that multiple Musos or Qubes can, as might also some (maybe all?) Naim 'streamer' products. But whether that applies if the music is on a US is a question for Naim experts.

So I think the following is correct.

You can stream to five Naim streamers concurrently in sync with each other in multi-room mode from a US, but you are limited to 320kbps MP3 I believe.  

You can simultaneously serve five different music files from a US to Naim streamers and I think in that case they can be 192 Kbps loss free files.  And by Naim streamers, I mean any and all of them.

No doubt someone will say if I have any of that wrong!

best

David

Been reading a couple of threads on this and similar subjects recently. As a novice, read enough and you risk getting a headache. Advice comes well intentioned but you do wonder if at least some advice is coming those not as knowledgable as they think. Occurred to me that wouldn't it be nice if our friends at Naim put out an on-line tutorial on computer music, ripping, downloads, NAS's and the like. Include a network connection diagram of various Naim products. You'd think it might help sales.

Clay Bingham posted:

You'd think it might help sales.

Certainly part of Naim's strategy is that dealers need some expertise in this area and are a great resource for customers.  There is, however, much variability there. 

As a practical matter, Naim cannot possibly support every combination of router/switch/nas etc etc that customers may use to network a Naim server and/or streamer.  It's a tough business - selling something that requires some technical acumen to run successfully in the home.

It is hard to know where the hifi side of the service should stop and transfer to computer dealers, however one would have thought that as a minimum Hifi dealers selling streamer sources should all offer as a matter of course  perhaps a choice of 2 or 3 NAS models, ready set up, spanning a reasonable range of performance/capacity, together with a network cable, so that anyone could go in and buy something off-the-shelf at the same time as their Naim streamer, guaranteed to work the moment music files are added. 

IIRC when I first looked into replacing my dying CD player with a streamer about 3 years or so ago, Cyrus were particularly good at information, having a very clear guide readily available on their website showing and describing setup of a streamer system, which was far better than the info I found at that time on the Naim site.

David Hendon posted

So I think the following is correct.

You can simultaneously serve five different music files from a US to Naim streamers and I think in that case they can be 192 Kbps loss free files.  And by Naim streamers, I mean any and all of them.

No doubt someone will say if I have any of that wrong!

best

David

David, I assume that you meant to say 24bit 192kHz (9,216kb/s) lossless files rather than 192Kbs.

sjbabbey posted:

David Hendon posted

So I think the following is correct.

You can simultaneously serve five different music files from a US to Naim streamers and I think in that case they can be 192 Kbps loss free files.  And by Naim streamers, I mean any and all of them.

No doubt someone will say if I have any of that wrong!

best

David

David, I assume that you meant to say 24bit 192kHz lossless files rather than 192Kbs.

Yes of course, just as you say.  Comes of writing with half my mind on something else!

best

David

Innocent Bystander posted:

It is hard to know where the hifi side of the service should stop and transfer to computer dealers, however one would have thought that as a minimum Hifi dealers selling streamer sources should all offer as a matter of course  perhaps a choice of 2 or 3 NAS models, ready set up, spanning a reasonable range of performance/capacity, together with a network cable, so that anyone could go in and buy something off-the-shelf at the same time as their Naim streamer, guaranteed to work the moment music files are added. 

IIRC when I first looked into replacing my dying CD player with a streamer about 3 years or so ago, Cyrus were particularly good at information, having a very clear guide readily available on their website showing and describing setup of a streamer system, which was far better than the info I found at that time on the Naim site.

Absolutely. The main reason I ended up with a non-Naim server into an NDAC was that I - late 30s, male, work with digital if not the tech side - couldn't work out what all the streamer bits did and didn't have confidence that I could set up and maintain it.  Also, to the uninitiated, the idea of needing (worst case) a NAS, a US & an ND plus one or more PSUs when others provide server/player options for less outlay than any of the above, is not easily explained - and no-one seems to try particularly hard.

Another side effect that's not ideal from Naim's perspective was that having put one non-Naim box in with success, the idea of other non-Naim components stuck...

Accordingly my 'xps' and 'hicaps' have inverted commas and short of upgrading the whole set up to an NDS, were that to clearly beat a DAVE in a listening test, I'm unlikely to 'need' anymore stuff that makes Naim money. I suspect I'm not alone. 

SamC posted:

Accordingly my 'xps' and 'hicaps' have inverted commas and short of upgrading the whole set up to an NDS, were that to clearly beat a DAVE in a listening test, I'm unlikely to 'need' anymore stuff that makes Naim money. I suspect I'm not alone. 

And so the question: does the whole shebang indeed  beat DAVE? And more simply, does DAvE beat Hugo TT? (By a margin more than trivial to justify the £5k extra)? There has been precious little to date precious on these fora re actual sound of Hal's nemesis' namesake, with one view expressed that it's not as musical as 2Qute, IIRC