Music Server vs. PC vs. Transport vs. ?


I don;t really want to add another rack in my living room. If I do, I may end up sleeping on one of the couches. Ideally, I would like to do the following:

1. Either use a pc or a server to store discs and have them accessable.
2. Have a way for the kids/wife to hook up their ipods
3. Have a way to get digital radio (xm, sirius or even computer streaming, doesn;t matter)
4. Do all of this WITHOUT degrading the sound quality ( i know, the ipod, by definition will do this)

My understanding of most high end DACs is that they do not have USB ports, but that is the ideal port to use to negate jitter. As I was researching this, I got the latest issue of the absolute sound, and they address some of this a bit. My feeling seems to be that one pays a HUGE premium for a server, that both their DACs and PCs DACs suck, and one has to get a USB to AES or other adapter, and still use an external DAC. It also seems that if one is willing to use a lossless system, that the universal opinion is that a hard drive rivals or beats any transports.

So my initial thought would be to get a pc with an ipod dock, run lossless, get an additional adapter say from Wavelength, and use the current dac. That adds at least two pieces, maybe three.

Help?????
Thanks,
Chris

Help??????

Thanks,
Chris
128x128chrisla
Chrisla - What type of jitter resolution does your equipment have?

Are you an engineer or tech?

I might be interested in paying you to do some measurements or otherwise horse-trading something for them. email me.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
Chris, I dove into the computer/internet-based music world recently and beliieve my experience can possibly provide some more insight for you. I basically had the same criteria as you did, including multi-room access, one-spot storage of music, high-quality sound, etc. I elected to stay away from the USB route as it is my understanding that: (1) the DAC has to be hard-wired to the computer in this configuration and (2) it also requires a computer to be on to play music.

I decided to go wireless and purchased: (1) a Slim Devices Transporter and (2) a NetGear ReadyNAS (Network Array Server) configured for SlimServer and with 3 TB of raw storage. Since I have configured the NAS with x-RAID (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks) for automatic data back-ups, my effective storage capacity is ~1.85 TB, or some 5,000 CDs +/- when ripped in FLAC (Free Lossless Audio Codec). I chose FLAC since: (1) I have a PC and not a Mac, (2) FLAC saves disk space and transmission bandwidth, (3) is "bit-perfect" lossless, (4) the Slim Devices have FLAC firmware for data decompression, and, probably most importantly, (5) FLAC incorporates tags with meta-data (e.g., album, artist, track, etc.) for each file/song whereas this information is lacking with WAV files (note: tags are important for sorting an album's songs correctly instead of alphabetically and for managing large databases of albums/songs).

Of course, FLAC is not iPOD friendly - I don't think iPODs support FLAC, but you can easily substitute Apple Lossless for FLAC, or you could easily convert FLAC to any number of other codecs using readily available software.

The NAS installs as an IP address on the computer network. The Transporter gets digital data from the NAS wirelessly over the network without the computer being on; you can also connect the Transporter to the network using ethernet if you can/want to run cables. The Transporter also has the ability to turn the NAS on and off and can access internet radio via the network (again, without the PC on).

I also put a Slim Devices SqueezeBox 3 in another room and both the SB3 and Transporter can play eiher internet radio and/or any of the ripped files on the NAS at the same time. My understanding is that just about any number of SB3's or Transporters can all access the one NAS and/or internet simultaniously since they all install on the network using different IP addresses.

Both the SB3 and Transporter sound incredible, although the Transporter does sound more detailed and less grainy than the SB3. FWIW, I'm playing the Transporter through a PS Audio GCC amp and Duevel Bella Luna speakers. I also did some back-to-back comparisons between the music off the Transporter versus playing the original CD on my well-used Underwood HiFi Level 2 modded Jolida JD100A CDP. It really was a toss-up with both having great detail and soundstage, but the Jolida had the edge with "warmth" IMHO, which I attributed to the vacuum stage output.

The total cost for this leap into the computer/internet-based music world was about $3,600, with $1,700 for the Transporter and another $1,900 for the NAS. You can save money on the NAS by specifying lower capacity hard drives, but I am also looking to use some of my extra storage for video.

Finally, as I am a fan of vacuum stage outputs, I will be shortly sending my Transporter into ModWright for their Class A "truth" mods. BTW - if you already have a high end DAC that you like, you can use the relatively cheap SB3 (only $300) to pass digital data to your high-end DAC.

Obviously, my opinion regarding the Transporter and Slim Devices technology is somewhat biased. Nevertheless, I am VERY pleased and suggest you give the SD technology a good look (or listen if you can). Good luck.
Bronto - very elegant solution! And incredibly cost effective.

For those that are still struggling a bit with all this, might I add that nothing prevents him from also using a computer with a USB DAC on the same network - of course the computer does need to be on.
Chris, what brontotx is what I did but with a Sonos. One piece of advice, do not skimp on the NAS storage. Get something that is designed for business use with a good RAID backup scheme and recovery software. I had my first NAS (a consumer grade unit) stop working and I lost all my data. Luckily at the time I only had a few hundred cds stored on it. I recommend Infrant ReadyNas NV+.
So, I was at Tommie's yesterday and listened to his Sonos system on his main system. It has the advantage of being hidden, and I like the remote on it. The sound going into his dac was very very good, certainly good enough for background music. I really like my dac, and like Tommy will connect whatever I have directly to it. Also, from the listening chair, one cannot see any of the squeezebox devices although I know I can program a remote to work with it.

I still think I will wait to see what awaits at CES. Although I am almost done with the hardware part of my system, I still have to decide how much I want to invest in turntable ancilliaries, what tonearm cord to use, and start on room treatments and re-designing the fireplace... maybe a display that I can see from my listening chair? Maybe a dropdown heavy curtain that covers the fireplace for serious listening... how about designing the fireplace as a resonator in the first place? Ad nauseum.


This has been very very enjoyable reading all your posts, and I thank all of you, keep 'em coming. I feel quite confident that others have gained insite as well. I contacted MBL, and apparently there are no plans to have a USB input on their DAC. Shortsighted if you ask me, but there it is.

Also I have issues with my wireless already in my house, it is 4 levels, and the knucklehead made the connects in the basement, in the corner. I lose connection way too much as it is in other rooms.....grrrr.

Best,
Chris