Units core- short lived ?

Klout10 posted:

David, before my HDX went belly-up, I've made a copy of my music to a QNAP NAS. In the last couple of months, I've made some minor changes to the metadata using MP3Tag. If I would get a Uniti Core, how do I transfer my music? Would it be best to copy everything to the download folder? Or let the Core descide??

If you've edited any of the HDX rips outside of its ecosystem, I would advise that you put them in the Core's 'downloads' folder. 

Core's rip folder should read UnitiServe / HDX rips, provided they have not been edited outside of their systems. Basically it boils down to that extra file that US/HDX platform created and how it reads the appropriate WAVs. 

Klout10 posted:

David, before my HDX went belly-up, I've made a copy of my music to a QNAP NAS. In the last couple of months, I've made some minor changes to the metadata using MP3Tag. If I would get a Uniti Core, how do I transfer my music? Would it be best to copy everything to the download folder? Or let the Core descide??

If you copy it all into the downloads folder then you won't be able to edit using the Naim app.  I would be inclined to tell the Core to import it and see what happens and where it puts it. You can always delete it and start again if you want to.

Another possibility, depending exactly how you saved your music to your NAS, is that you could try to "restore" your Core from the NAS using the restore function in the Naim app.  But I never tried this so I don't know whether it would work.

Although you have made some edits which is a Naim no-no, you may get away with it and it may just be that you have to edit a bit more.

There is another possibility which is that you define the NAS in the Naim app as a music share and allow the Core to index the music. That way it will appear in the app exactly as if you had it in an inside disc, but you have had to do no copying at all!

For all that the Core does have some bugs still and various perceived shortcomings that have been discussed endlessly, it is a very neat bit of kit and very flexible. In Naim terms it isn't expensive and I expect Naim will go on developing it for years yet.

best

David

Adding to my above post and Adam's comments before, Naim say that editing Naim rips without using their system "may" break the indexing, not "will". It does depend what the edit is. For example you can edit anything Naim ignore, like Composer presumably, and Naim products will continue to ignore it.

As Klout10 proposes to buy a Core and move music from a NAS, he can afford to try all sorts of things because you can easily start again. And importing music originally from a Naim server using the import function in the Core is totally different to copying the music into the Core with a PC. It does indeed boil down to the special files that Adam mentions.

best

David

If one knows what one is doing, sub-folders can be added manually to a main 'Rips' folder as long as they have been created using a US/HDX (and presumably Core).

But I would recommend this only for experienced users. 

Thank you all for your replies, they are really helpful to me.

To give you some more information: I've always loved the fact that CD's can be found dirt cheap on the second hand market en I miss the ripping facility the HDX used to have. Also, I don't like the fact that all my music is stored on a single location (my QNAP NAS). Therefore, I consider getting a Uniti Core, fit an SSD drive and use the NAS pure as a back-up ... 

Do I need to add that I'm not good with computer stuff and do not want to do the ripping with a PC? My laptop even doesn't have a CD drive ... 

David Hendon posted:

... And importing music originally from a Naim server using the import function in the Core is totally different to copying the music into the Core with a PC. ...

Which says a lot about interoperability and seamless integration. It would have been much better (and certainly easier) if Naim had abandoned their proprietary database. Just plain .flac (or .wav, .aiff, etc.) files with their embedded metadata in whatever folder a user likes them to be.  

nbpf posted:

David Hendon posted:

... And importing music originally from a Naim server using the import function in the Core is totally different to copying the music into the Core with a PC. ...

Which says a lot about interoperability and seamless integration. It would have been much better (and certainly easier) if Naim had abandoned their proprietary database. Just plain .flac (or .wav, .aiff, etc.) files with their embedded metadata in whatever folder a user likes them to be.  

Why 'much better'? Please explain and rationalise your statement. 

Klout10 posted:

To give you some more information: I've always loved the fact that CD's can be found dirt cheap on the second hand market en I miss the ripping facility the HDX used to have. Also, I don't like the fact that all my music is stored on a single location (my QNAP NAS). Therefore, I consider getting a Uniti Core, fit an SSD drive and use the NAS pure as a back-up ... 

Do I need to add that I'm not good with computer stuff and do not want to do the ripping with a PC? My laptop even doesn't have a CD drive ... 

You should keep a few copies of your data, ideally in different locations. One does not need to be a computer literate to rip CDs with a laptop, it is not different from ripping with a Core or with any other ripping station. If I was not interested in classical music, I would have no reservations using the Core as a UPnP server or as a SPDIF player. But I would not rip my CDs with a Core or with a US: the metadata of Core (US) rips get stored in a proprietary database and the possibilities of editing those metadata are very limited.

Adam Zielinski posted:

nbpf posted:

David Hendon posted:

... And importing music originally from a Naim server using the import function in the Core is totally different to copying the music into the Core with a PC. ...

Which says a lot about interoperability and seamless integration. It would have been much better (and certainly easier) if Naim had abandoned their proprietary database. Just plain .flac (or .wav, .aiff, etc.) files with their embedded metadata in whatever folder a user likes them to be.  

Why 'much better'? Please explain and rationalise your statement. 

Because Naim's proprietary database does not bring any advantage against embedded metadata while imposing unnecessary and arbitrary restrictions on indexing and metadata editing capabilities.

For instance, as we have learned with the latest firmware upgrade, Naim's proprietary database does not support editing the values of the "Composer" and "Conductor" indexes, let apart removing indexes which are not needed and adding needed indexes.

Thus, the database brings complications and imposes limitations for no obvious advantages. If the Core's ripping engine would generate files with embedded metadata like most bit perfect ripping software do, rips could be stored in the same folders as downloaded files. They could be edited with third-party tools without silly restrictions.

Cbr600 posted:

Richard Dane posted:

I use my Core as a ripper, store, server and local player (via s/pif) and so far its working really well.  If I download a music file on my computer then I sort out the metadata, clean up file structure etc. on the computer because that's what a computer is really good at doing.  I imagine that many of the issues reported with the Core are down to trying to get it to do things that its not ideal at doing?  Anyway, just to add my ha'penny worth, so far I'm very pleased with the Core and...  the most important thing - it sounds great!

Richard, I am pleased to hear you are happy with the performance of your core.

fr myself, it is less than satisfactory, and I am only using it as intended in its simplest form.

i rip new CDs using the core and the music is stored in the music share folder.

i transferred all my original music, previously dipped by my HDX, using the core process to transfer the music, and it all went into the downloads folder, as expected.

all worked well for some weeks and then updated software to latest version, and suddenly by download folder and 60% of my music is not visible.

i don't see the as me trying to use the core outside its design intent.

as for issues reported being dealt with, that was the point of my comment on size of the support team. In spite of correct logging of the fault, there are n come from "the team", only by Phil, and these seem to be 1-2 weeks between emails, after I am asked t try something, which I do, report back, as not resolved, and then no answer again for an extended period.

meanwhile I have a loss of benefit of my music access for weeks on end with no solution.

CBR600,    I had exactly the same download folder problem with my Core and the lack of decent support to resolve it. My last email of 4/4/17 still hasnt recieved a reply and it went quiet so i just contacted my dealer and he replaced my "faulty" core without any quibbles. I then set the new one up using my backup drive to reinstall all my music. 

Just do the same, my new one has been fine since then.

Gerry.

I find it rather odd that people keep highlighting the deficiencies of the Core, yet they seem to be selling rather well. 

nbpf posted:

Because Naim's proprietary database does not bring any advantage against embedded metadata while imposing unnecessary and arbitrary restrictions on indexing and metadata editing capabilities.

For instance, as we have learned with the latest firmware upgrade, Naim's proprietary database does not support editing the values of the "Composer" and "Conductor" indexes, let apart removing indexes which are not needed and adding needed indexes.

Thus, the database brings complications and imposes limitations for no obvious advantages. If the Core's ripping engine would generate files with embedded metadata like most bit perfect ripping software do, rips could be stored in the same folders as downloaded files. They could be edited with third-party tools without silly restrictions.

In a nutshell. One doesn't have to own or use a Core to realise that this is a poorly devised system. Worse, it closely resembles the proprietary system introduced for the NS/HDX/US  some years ago now. It wasn't terribly good even back then. Linn's solution was, and remains more sensible, elegant and non preparatory. Still, if people will buy it then Naim will build it. And good luck to them. If I was in the market I wouldn't go there, although this only comes with the benefit of a lot of hindsight.

Christine posted:

The Unitiserve was and still is an amazing product and I believe that when Core was announced we all assumed it would be a Unitiserve but more advanced and with better sound quality etc etc

Unfortunately right now the Core is very much a step backwards in relation to a Unitiserve and this is what is confusing so many Naim owners.

My thoughts exactly! I like everything about the US apart from the reliability....so it looked to me that the Core was meant to improve the reliability and keep all the other US functionality. 

CSI_Basel posted:

Christine posted:

The Unitiserve was and still is an amazing product and I believe that when Core was announced we all assumed it would be a Unitiserve but more advanced and with better sound quality etc etc

Unfortunately right now the Core is very much a step backwards in relation to a Unitiserve and this is what is confusing so many Naim owners.

My thoughts exactly! I like everything about the US apart from the reliability....so it looked to me that the Core was meant to improve the reliability and keep all the other US functionality. 

CSI, the only functionality the Uniti Core is lacking (compared to the Unitiserve) is iRadio. Regarding reliability, the Core seems to have a more robust power supply and the possibility to exchange harddrives yourself ... so regarding functionality / reliability it seems an improvement IMHO.

Klout10 posted:

CSI_Basel posted:

Christine posted:

The Unitiserve was and still is an amazing product and I believe that when Core was announced we all assumed it would be a Unitiserve but more advanced and with better sound quality etc etc

Unfortunately right now the Core is very much a step backwards in relation to a Unitiserve and this is what is confusing so many Naim owners.

My thoughts exactly! I like everything about the US apart from the reliability....so it looked to me that the Core was meant to improve the reliability and keep all the other US functionality. 

CSI, the only functionality the Uniti Core is lacking (compared to the Unitiserve) is iRadio. Regarding reliability, the Core seems to have a more robust power supply and the possibility to exchange harddrives yourself ... so regarding functionality / reliability it seems an improvement IMHO.

Your statement isn't quite correct, there are many functions that the Core lacks compared to the Unitiserve, below is a non exhaustive list;

1.  No physical power off button

2.  No ability to directly attach a VDU, Keyboard & Mouse

3.  No serial connection port and other ports

4.  No PC based metadata editing

5.  No PC based control, monitoring and setup software

6.  No Web based playback and monitoring.

Of those six, I only ever used the first one when I had my UnitiServe. I can imagine that the Core is a great solution if one wants to connect to a DAC and use its spdif output, but if one wants to use it on a networked system it seems, apart from the easy ripping, to be pointless. A simple nas does everything, again apart from the ripping, so much more flexibly. But then, as Harry says above, hindsight is a wonderful thing. 

If people don't find the Core does what they want, the easy answer is not to buy it. You don't buy a microwave and then complain that it doesn't do the washing up. 

Christine posted:

Klout10 posted:

CSI_Basel posted:

Christine posted:

The Unitiserve was and still is an amazing product and I believe that when Core was announced we all assumed it would be a Unitiserve but more advanced and with better sound quality etc etc

Unfortunately right now the Core is very much a step backwards in relation to a Unitiserve and this is what is confusing so many Naim owners.

My thoughts exactly! I like everything about the US apart from the reliability....so it looked to me that the Core was meant to improve the reliability and keep all the other US functionality. 

CSI, the only functionality the Uniti Core is lacking (compared to the Unitiserve) is iRadio. Regarding reliability, the Core seems to have a more robust power supply and the possibility to exchange harddrives yourself ... so regarding functionality / reliability it seems an improvement IMHO.

Your statement isn't quite correct, there are many functions that the Core lacks compared to the Unitiserve, below is a non exhaustive list;

1.  No physical power off button

2.  No ability to directly attach a VDU, Keyboard & Mouse

3.  No serial connection port and other ports

4.  No PC based metadata editing

5.  No PC based control, monitoring and setup software

6.  No Web based playback and monitoring.

 

I have an HDX (not a UnitiServe). Other than being able to edit metadata on the PC - which is really useful - the other functions quoted are of little relevance. 

Probably of more relevance to most people is a lower price and hopefully higher reliability. 

Hungryhalibut posted:

Of those six, I only ever used the first one when I had my UnitiServe. I can imagine that the Core is a great solution if one wants to connect to a DAC and use its spdif output, but if one wants to use it on a networked system it seems, apart from the easy ripping, to be pointless. A simple nas does everything, again apart from the ripping, so much more flexibly. But then, as Harry says above, hindsight is a wonderful thing. 

If people don't find the Core does what they want, the easy answer is not to buy it. You don't buy a microwave and then complain that it doesn't do the washing up. 

But you do agree it's reasonable to expect a newer version of a product should be better?

John Bailey posted:

Christine posted:

Klout10 posted:

CSI_Basel posted:

Christine posted:

The Unitiserve was and still is an amazing product and I believe that when Core was announced we all assumed it would be a Unitiserve but more advanced and with better sound quality etc etc

Unfortunately right now the Core is very much a step backwards in relation to a Unitiserve and this is what is confusing so many Naim owners.

My thoughts exactly! I like everything about the US apart from the reliability....so it looked to me that the Core was meant to improve the reliability and keep all the other US functionality. 

CSI, the only functionality the Uniti Core is lacking (compared to the Unitiserve) is iRadio. Regarding reliability, the Core seems to have a more robust power supply and the possibility to exchange harddrives yourself ... so regarding functionality / reliability it seems an improvement IMHO.

Your statement isn't quite correct, there are many functions that the Core lacks compared to the Unitiserve, below is a non exhaustive list;

1.  No physical power off button

2.  No ability to directly attach a VDU, Keyboard & Mouse

3.  No serial connection port and other ports

4.  No PC based metadata editing

5.  No PC based control, monitoring and setup software

6.  No Web based playback and monitoring.

 

I have an HDX (not a UnitiServe). Other than being able to edit metadata on the PC - which is really useful - the other functions quoted are of little relevance. 

Probably of more relevance to most people is a lower price and hopefully higher reliability. 

John, this is exactly what I meant ... and I've been using an HDX for about 7 years ...

ChrisSU posted:

Richard Choong posted:

Richard,

How do you deal with compilation CDs?  The way the Core sorts its music doesn't appear to allow the Naim app to read artistes and songs found in a compilation CD under the Artist and Song lists. 

Richard Dane posted:

 

Richard, I generally play files as albums.  Not sure I've noticed anything awry with the few compilations I've ripped thus far.  I'll check it out sometime.  

I think this is a valid criticism: a compilation album will show the artist for each and every track as 'Various', which is useless. I've tried moving the album to the downloads folder and adding the artist for each track using Metadatics, but this is no use, as the app then displays each track as a separate album. I find the best solution is often to open the much-maligned Rovi booklet, which generally shows the track listing along with the correct artist for each one.

(As a dinosaur, I am assuming that this is relevant to the Core, as it's what I've found on my Unitiserve.) 

I understand that the Core and the US make the files in the downloads folder available on the LAN. Thus, one could likely circumvent the problems with compilation albums by running a UPnP server that honours artist metadata (MinimServer, Asset, etc.) on a networked device and simply ignore the Core's (US's) internal UPnP server.  A Raspberry Pi would be more than enough. As a bonus, one would be able to enjoy the advantages of a well implemented UPnP server also for albums which are not compilation albums. Of course, this workaround does not work if the Core (US) is used as a SPDIF player.

Christine posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

Of those six, I only ever used the first one when I had my UnitiServe. I can imagine that the Core is a great solution if one wants to connect to a DAC and use its spdif output, but if one wants to use it on a networked system it seems, apart from the easy ripping, to be pointless. A simple nas does everything, again apart from the ripping, so much more flexibly. But then, as Harry says above, hindsight is a wonderful thing. 

If people don't find the Core does what they want, the easy answer is not to buy it. You don't buy a microwave and then complain that it doesn't do the washing up. 

But you do agree it's reasonable to expect a newer version of a product should be better?

Not with Naim necessarily. Their speakers got worse, so why not their hard drives?

Christine posted:

Klout10 posted:

CSI_Basel posted:

Christine posted:

The Unitiserve was and still is an amazing product and I believe that when Core was announced we all assumed it would be a Unitiserve but more advanced and with better sound quality etc etc

Unfortunately right now the Core is very much a step backwards in relation to a Unitiserve and this is what is confusing so many Naim owners.

 

 

Your statement isn't quite correct, there are many functions that the Core lacks compared to the Unitiserve, below is a non exhaustive list;

1.  No physical power off button

2.  No ability to directly attach a VDU, Keyboard & Mouse

3.  No serial connection port and other ports

4.  No PC based metadata editing

5.  No PC based control, monitoring and setup software

6.  No Web based playback and monitoring.

 

I suspect most Core buyers, including me if I'm honest, would regard these as advantages of the Core, not disadvantages, to the extent that they cared either way. I dislike having to let my PC anywhere near my music.

I'm being deliberately provocative but, with respect, I think what you want is mostly a niche and just not worth Naim investing development effort in it. I do think Naim's decision not to allow metadata editing of the downloads folder of the Core from the Naim app is daft though and I predict that they will also come round to that way of thinking in due time. Maybe version 2.0 of the Core Firmware or version 6.0 of the Naim IOS app ("Your UnitiCore reimagined"?)

best

David

Hungryhalibut posted:

... I can imagine that the Core is a great solution if one wants to connect to a DAC and use its spdif output, but if one wants to use it on a networked system it seems, apart from the easy ripping, to be pointless. A simple nas does everything, again apart from the ripping, so much more flexibly. ...

The problem is that, even as a SPDIF player, the Core sucks. For classical music contents, it is essentially unusable. One would expect the Core as a SPDIF player -- a potentially ideal source for SPDIF DACs and, more generally, for devices with high quality SPDIF inputs -- to provide access not only to LAN resources but also to internet radio, Qobuz, Tidal, etc. From this angle too, the device appears to be an incomplete solution.

I have no insider knowledge, of course. But it seems to me at least conceivable, that Naim has embarked into the Core project with limited experience on how to setup Linux-based server solutions. I seem to remember that the old Naim servers were based on an embedded Windows platform and that the development of the servers' software was basically outsourced. This would perhaps explain the initial difficulties and delays and the focus on merely reproducing the functionalities of the old servers on the new platform.

On the other hand, we see small companies that, in a short time, manage to come out with Linux-based solutions that well integrate LAN resources, internet streaming services and internet radio, support MPD and well-established UPnP servers and players, can act as Roon endpoints, etc. Thus, Naim's software design decisions are, to say the least, puzzling.

I finally have no idea of what went wrong with the Core. But, for sure, something went very wrong. Perhaps the software architects were not given enough time or they had to deliver under changing boundary conditions and specifications. Who knows. The good news is that, from the point we are now, the Core can be easily improved.

Hungryhalibut posted:

Christine posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

Of those six, I only ever used the first one when I had my UnitiServe. I can imagine that the Core is a great solution if one wants to connect to a DAC and use its spdif output, but if one wants to use it on a networked system it seems, apart from the easy ripping, to be pointless. A simple nas does everything, again apart from the ripping, so much more flexibly. But then, as Harry says above, hindsight is a wonderful thing. 

If people don't find the Core does what they want, the easy answer is not to buy it. You don't buy a microwave and then complain that it doesn't do the washing up. 

But you do agree it's reasonable to expect a newer version of a product should be better?

Not with Naim necessarily. Their speakers got worse, so why not their hard drives?

My point exactly......why