XXHighEnd

I have resently purchased a external Western Digital Harddisk (500Gb) and try to use it for storing music on. However loading of files to my PC takes too long time, so now I have gap before playing first song (>5 sec) and between songs (2 - 3 sec longer than normal).

Does anybody have a idea if this just the way it is and that I should use the disk for other purposes, or can something be tweaked to operate better to be able to play XX with it?

If you have the data in uncompressed form (not in a form which has to be converted which would mean WAV only) then the upcoming version will help out.
Otherwise there is not much to do other than upgrade the wireless for speed if possible (up to 108Mbs (or maybe more) is possible, but the hdd probably won't deal with that).

Peter

Peter

I wanted to hear your views on how best to play music at moer than one location.
Some time ago you touched on this as I had included it as a side question to another more technical issue, but I thought best to clarify your views.
Currently I store my music on my main PC in my (upstairs) study , hardwired to my local wireless (Ethernet) router.
I will outline my assumptions, and you can correct me, if I am wrong.

1. Using Ethernet to send music files from Main PC computer to other location in the house and use XX on my laptop in my family room (on the main floor).
a. Sound quality (SQ) will  not be negatively affected by transfer of (EAC ripped) music files over Ethernet from PC in study to be played by XX on another computer (PC or laptop) in another location in the house.
b. Transfer over hardwired Ethernet faster and more secure than wireless transfer, but either mode of transfer OK (and does not interfer with SQ).
c. Laptop usually has built-in sound inferior to internal PCI sound card in desktop PC (in my case M-Audio Delta 192), but if hooked up to external DAC, laptop SQ not inferior to PC hooked up to same external DAC (using the same USB or FW interface, Vista and same associated driver).

2. If instead of using Ethernet/wireless, you copy music files onto removable hard drive (HD), both USB and Firewire acceptable interfaces.



 

If you're using a USB dac you don't want any other USB device attached ... use FW for your external HDDs.  USB dacs, if not asynchronous, have wild variations of SQ... well, usb is still suspect in my book, even though I heard a top notch system using a Wavlength Crimson.

Hi Bjorn,


True.


True.
But note that when the PC playing the music (your laptop) is receiving the wireless directly, we can expect that this *does* influence sound. This is because of the high activity of the wireless receiver/transmitter. Besides that, it can really incur for things like hiccups.
Whether this is really the case, depends on the particular implementation.


Not true, but only because more parameters are involved;
A. generally *everything* a laptop does, is worse in the first place, and quite unsolveable in the second.
B. FW connections do matter, hence the transmitters do. For a laptop it can be a pain to get it properly working to start with, and next it must be sounding good. More expensive to try etc. etc.
C. In a desktop you have possibilities to tweak the USB connections to the sense that usually more "hubs" are internally provided. With a laptop *maybe* the same, but if so less accessible. Furthermore the laptop depends more on USB so it is not easy (convenient) to cut out half of the connections.

Together with laptops being sluggish always, I would never use a laptop. Only if you have one ready at hand, and it does all the things you want in a decent / good sounding way, go for it. Never buy one explicitly for the task, because the chance is 95% that you will be sorry.

I know, this is a typicle means of a "NAS" if you like, which should not be confused with a 100% dedicated music PC (which I would not call a music server). This theoretically implies that you can have the storage anywhere, but still need that music PC. If you have two music rooms, of course it is logic to use something as a laptop for it, if it is about you listening only. But better would be two PCs like you'd be having two CD players without a PC.

Lastly, note that this repsonse is in the context of nitpicking the best sound out of everything *and* is about avoiding the chances of not being satisfied (up to glitches and all) while you can't do anything about it, but being annoyed.


As SeVeReD said, USB should be avoided when you have an USB DAC.
Then, although in the base you are right, I see no reason to do so, unless you don't have the ethernet connection. But then it would be tedious, and you certainly won't be copying the music you want to play on a per day basis, and instead you would want it on line all. In that case the "NAS" principle has become useless ...

Does this help ? :)

Thanks Peter and SeVeRed for sharing insights.

1. I already have laptop (ACER 8204), currently running WIN XP, but about to upgrade to run VISTA (32x) - not just to run XXHIGHEND, current XP install unstable in operation. However, judging from your comments, I might view use of laptop as interim measure and consider (in long run) additional PC (with PCI M-AUdio Delta 192 - SPDIF audio card) in family room.

2. For interconnect btw computers, I will continue my attempt to replace current wireless with hardwired Ethernet btw study and family room.
Running hardwire Ethernet will eliminate need for external HDD and possible interference btw external HDD and external DAC (whether using FW or USB). 

3. External DACs I have had my eyes on (price range around US$ 500-600):
a. M-AUdio Profire 610 (Firewire) US $500; one reason, as SeVeRed said, is to use FW to avoid conflict with other USB devices, in particular if using laptop. Second benefit is that the Profire 610 is both an external DAC and an external ADC - useful for me to be able to use external ADC when transferring my LPs to digital and feed Profire digital out via SPDIF to SPDIF input at PCI M-Audio Delta 192 installed in main PC (should be improvement over using ADC function in PCI M-Audio Delta 192). Third benefit is Profire 610 has built in headphone amp (to feed my AKG 340, now being re-built, modded/upgraded).

b. My stereo equipment expert (Partsconnexion, Canada), who has extensive experience in selling and upgrading Benchmark Dac-1, has alerted me to the fact that MusicHall (N America distributor of Shanling) has introduced a very (on paper) impressive DAC - DAC-25.2 US$ 600; which seem to (although comparative listening tests not yet conducted) be able to challenge and beat Benchmark DAC-1, at about half the price. However, although it has a headphone amp built in, it does NOT provide ADC fucntion. Interface IN is SPDIF (192/24),  Toslink, XLR and USB (at present not clear whether USB restricted to 96/24 or able to cover up to 192/24 - tech details "i2s USB input with PCM 2704 chips" and "TI SRC 4192 asynchronous sample-rate converter, TI PCM 1796 192/24 DAC chip").  Analog unbalanced out (RCA) and balanced (XLR).   

Well Bjorn, serious you are !

About the DACs ... they *make* the sound (together with some XX part :)). Depending how serious you really are, I don't think you'll get anything most serious for that price tag. So a kind of advise is : you will be having everything under control including a good sounding "CP player" for a handful of euro's, now spend your time on the DAC !

If you just know this, no problem of course. Not want to spend the money ? again no problem of course.
But if you did not, the first thing you may do is investigate the difference between Oversampling and Non-Oversampling DAC's. There is really a big difference you know.

That's all. :)
Peter

Peter

I am a serious music listener and therefore appreciate XXHIGHEND.
However, serious listener under a budget constrain.
I am fully aware that a product in $ 500 range is not the ultimate in sound quality, but I am taking your advice that "even a $ 100 external DAC is improvement over internal PC DAC".
Update:
I found out by trying to play LPs and convert to digital via internal M-Audio Delta 192 PCI card (although 24/193 capable) did not produce acceptable results - digital file contained (static electricity) pops and SQ not at acceptabel level. In other words AD function of M-AUdio Delta 192  card not up to par. Similar occasional pops occurs when listening to XXHIGHEND FLAC files through M-AUdio Delta 192 card's DAC - analog out to speakers. As similar pops are not occuring when listening through USB headphones, this indicates problem is with the card.
On the other hand, I have been told by Benchmark (who has tested M-AUdio Delta 192 card) that the digital RCA/SPDIF in/out on the Delta 192 card is good (if not absolute, almost bit-perfect).
I have therefore decided to get a M-Audio Profire 610, which can (either in AD or DA mode) interface both with my PC (through digital RCA/SPDIF to DELTA 192 PCI card) and my laptop (through Firewire).
In the first instance I will use the M-Audio Profire as the AD converter for transferring my LPs to digital on my PC (via Delta 192 card digital RCA/SPDIF), while also being able to monitor resulting digital file through earphones (once my AKG340 headphones are back from being modded/upgraded).
In the longer run, when I get a dedicated high quality (NOS) DAC, I can restrict the use of the M-AUdio Profire 610 to a Firewire/ digital SPDIF interface - while still making use of the headphone amp built in to the M-AUdio Profire 610.

Bjorn
   

Hi Bjorn,

I am not sure whether your last sentence was a question, or just the outlay of your final route to Walhalla. In the case it was a question :

I would not be sure about that without investigating / asking the supplier or test it. I mean, when you route an audio stream to SPDIF (which is what you would be doing with a DAC at the other end of the Firewire) it is not said at all that the internal DACs of the soundcard are operational at the same time. If they are, they are, but this is to be investigated.

Am I correct that there were no other questions ?

Peter

Peter

You are correct, I did not really pose a question, but my statement was based on my impression that I could use the M-AUdio Profire 610 as an interface only - similar to your use of the FF400 (if not in SPDIF, than through Firewire). However, given your statement, this may be subject to test and verification - I admit I assumed it was possible w/out checking this out in detail.

Bjorn