Uniticore - first impressions of sound quality and app interface

I think the point is that getting a bit perfect rip is achievable with most ripping software, and can be confirmed by checking it against an online database. If these devices sound different, it's likely to be caused by differences in the UPnP server, PSU quality, or network, but not by the bits themselves.

i think the ripping of the core vs unitserve is the same, about perhaps a better metadata and tags for the core. But is the sound quality of the core, as a nas, is better than the unitserve with a linear power supply?  i am very curious to here next sharings from users.

Hmm, I was sure that I had read somewhere that they used 2-pass ripping, but it appears I was mistaken. 

From the hdx ripping engine white paper:

'The Naim audio servers use a superior technique called Secure Mode Ripping on a specially selected audio grade CD mechanism. Secure mode works by using a CD mechanism that does not cache data and reads the sectors multiple times. It also uses the un-correctable C2 error feedback information supported by the CD mechanism, so known problematic areas can be re-read and handled accordingly.'

A ripper can read and re-read a CD as many times as it wants, but the point is that the Accurate Rip process will check that every bit has been read correctly so that the rip is identical to the CD. So a rip is either right or wrong, and the Naim ripper is not the only one capable of getting this right. 

ChrisSU posted:

A ripper can read and re-read a CD as many times as it wants, but the point is that the Accurate Rip process will check that every bit has been read correctly so that the rip is identical to the CD. So a rip is either right or wrong, and the Naim ripper is not the only one capable of getting this right. 

I'm guessing that we won't have a repeat of the UnitiServe discussions over whether the UnitiServe ripped "better" than a computer could.  But I've been known to guess wrong!

Indeed Bart, it does amuse me to think in what way data could be read from a CD incorrectly and not sound like random static... perhaps others might try and explain, or are we talking about the occasional tick sound or silence of complete data loss from a bad or marginal CD pressing?

S

J Seville,

Please don't let anyone talk you out of listening to new rips from the Core.  I have no idea why a rip is not just a rip, and many knowledgeable members here will put forward explanations for why they cannot be different.  I have personally been exposed to UnityServe rips which, on a high resolution system, sound more natural to my ears than my own XLD rips.  It appears that some at Naim (who are famous for leaving no stone unturned in their quest for audio quality) know something about ripping which is not "common knowledge."  I among others are curious to learn if Naim have any further improvements to this process embodied in the Core.

I am sorry if posing this question has derailed the original thread.  It would seem that speculation is of no use, and what matters is to listen and report.

Cheers to All,

Charlie

 I also did a comparison of rips and they were slightly different. I tried a few before settling with xld, as I rip with a mac. I recently tried a rip with dbpoweramp, which sounded slightly different to xld. I personally prefered the presentation of xld. The other day I compared a rip from a friends unitiserve to an xld rip, this time I prefered the unitiserve rip.

The differences are subtle but in a revealing system they really do make a difference. I don't claim to know why these differences are there, but they certainly are there.

Oh I can sense a possible repeat of what a few of us did on this forum severeal years back... a few of us examined and checked some rip files that were shared... including from  iTunes, dbpoweramp, Unitiserve, and EAC... and apart from the iTunes rip which had a few mS chopped off the front of each track, the rest were bit perfectly identical, there was no digital or numerical differentiation at all.. absolutely identical... they key is to ensure you are ripping from the same CD pressing/master...

According to Naim some of the key advantages of the Uniticore lie in its library and media management as well as a tidier and cleaner digital output due to a better powersupply.

i suspect some people may  confuse ripped file differences with media server streaming differences, the latter can  cause a change to the produced sound when interacting with a Naim streamer, and here I would expect the Uniticore to have a 'signature' sound, albeit this  will have nothing to do with the produced rips.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Innocent Bystander, don't know where you got that comparison from.. certainly no one at Naim I have spoken to recognises that... they are completely different products, the only thing I have definitely heard is that there is an expected performance lift compared to the SPDIF out of the earlier Unitiserve.. through better decoupling and powersupply amongst other things.

IIRC Phil Harris stated that in his system, which includes NDX, Core through SPDIF  was indistinguishable, and, though rather vague, I also thought there had been a more general observation attributed to Naim to the effect that the Core was as good as any existing products. 

The point , of course, of my suggestions to compare, when people have their hands on Core in a system capable of revealing differences, is to find a general concensus as to how good it actually is as rendered source (player) direct into any DAC, to see if it is as good as any of the generaally well respected rendering sources including NDX, Melco, etc.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Indeed Bart, it does amuse me to think in what way data could be read from a CD incorrectly and not sound like random static... perhaps others might try and explain, or are we talking about the occasional tick sound or silence of complete data loss from a bad or marginal CD pressing?

S

As evident in this thread, people can not-blindly a/b compare ANYTHING and hear differences.  People heard the green pen.  People will always hear everything.  It's ok . . . just the way it is.  

Indeed.. and if one is content on this basis then this is absolutely fine, I guess when it becomes an issue to me is when perceived differences are attributed to false assertions... to be fair to Naim I don't think such assertions are from them,  I think they are measured and responsible in their assertions.. there is no magic or outrageous claims used in their designs, just honest engineering design, and in the digital world they tend to implement and internalise well respected third party technologies to great effect whilst following true to their DNA. 

J Saville posted:

Hmm, I was sure that I had read somewhere that they used 2-pass ripping, but it appears I was mistaken. 

From the hdx ripping engine white paper:

'The Naim audio servers use a superior technique called Secure Mode Ripping on a specially selected audio grade CD mechanism. Secure mode works by using a CD mechanism that does not cache data and reads the sectors multiple times. It also uses the un-correctable C2 error feedback information supported by the CD mechanism, so known problematic areas can be re-read and handled accordingly.'

Indeed this is a benefit from Naim and many non Naim rippers, it gives a higher confidence to recovering data and reducing lost data  from a damaged CD. However if the disc is badly damaged beyond easy recover it rarely makes a bit perfect rip.. usually a tiny silence appears or a skip.. just like on CD play back.