hard drive/networked hifi vs CDs for classical music

[clockworks]

I suppose the point was that a high resolution flac file could be bigger than CD wav, depending on the resolution of the original recording.
A bit misleading though, as a flac made from a wav is about a third of the size, IIRC.

[tgr]

Thanks a lot everyone for their posts. Boiling it down, the advice seems to be that a hard drive will probably be better than a high end cd player as a source. I'm guessing that the main manufacturers (Naim, Linn, Meridian etc) all have their versions.

I'm still not sure I understand what streaming/networked systems will offer the best sound - in my basic mind the hard drive simply replaces the cd player and that I can cope with. What am I missing?

Ideally my music collection could be played back both in the lounge and the kitchen at the other end of the house

[fulgurex]

Some good advice on this thread.

Don't ignore streaming from one of the services that stream high quality FLAC files. I use both Qobus and Tidal which offer a large selection of classical music.

My system has Squeezebox Transporter for online streaming and also an Aurender unit for storage of files (both ripped cd files and hirez files downloaded from the internet).

The attraction of this arrangement is that I can use the online services to explore new releases or different music and then for the "keepers", download and permanently store music on the Aurender.

I would not consider buying a player for SACD disks. The catalogue is quite limited. I do have an SACD player (DCS) which has not seen a disk for over 12 months.

[telecat]

fulgurex said:

Some good advice on this thread.

Don't ignore streaming from one of the services that stream high quality FLAC files. I use both Qobus and Tidal which offer a large selection of classical music.

My system has Squeezebox Transporter for online streaming and also an Aurender unit for storage of files (both ripped cd files and hirez files downloaded from the internet).

The attraction of this arrangement is that I can use the online services to explore new releases or different music and then for the "keepers", download and permanently store music on the Aurender.

I would not consider buying a player for SACD disks. The catalogue is quite limited. I do have an SACD player (DCS) which has not seen a disk for over 12 months.

Depends on your Taste. I have a growing number of them. I bought the "old" Depeche Mode remasters and the New Queen Discs. Roxy Music is also coming in the spring. The Japanese tend to prefer them. Classically they are a shed load of discs available.

[theboss]

tgr said:

Thanks a lot everyone for their posts. Boiling it down, the advice seems to be that a hard drive will probably be better than a high end cd player as a source. I'm guessing that the main manufacturers (Naim, Linn, Meridian etc) all have their versions.

I'm still not sure I understand what streaming/networked systems will offer the best sound - in my basic mind the hard drive simply replaces the cd player and that I can cope with. What am I missing?

Ideally my music collection could be played back both in the lounge and the kitchen at the other end of the house

A hard drive in these streaming setups is merely a data repository for local storage of audio files - and is not strictly necessary if you decided you would stream all your music from online sources. Its the streaming device itself which is downloading the audio files, decoding and (generally) converting to audio which is comparable to the CD player or source in conventional hifi terms, and which will influence the sound quality.

I don't know much about Naim or Meridians offerings - I believe they offer streamers with built-in hard disks as 'all in one' solutions - but Linn and most other manufacturers have developed streamers as strictly standalone devices with any data storage being external and accessed via standard networking technologies e.g. ethernet or WiFi.

There are pros and cons of each approach - generally simplicity vs flexibility.

[TheInternet]

Jon1967x said:

And what was that bit about the middle of the screen? The MP3/pixilated image exaggerated the effect but was a reasonable demonstration of what digital compression is but then I'm not sure what the middle bit was? Its worrying when you think you know something about a subject and can't comprehend what they are saying!

The bit in the middle was the same as the bit on the right but not so extreme. It was a flawed demonstration from a technical perspective but served well enough to explain the subjective nature of lossy compression i.e. it seems you didn't find the central part noticeably worse whereas others would.

Also

Jon1967x said:

The volume level is more where it gets interesting - the volume of somebody speaking is much quieter than a full band thrashing stuff out - yet the same 16 bits needs to capture that and the same dodgy stereo has to play it. So the frig is basically to make the quite bits louder and the loud bits quieter which reduces the range but makes it easier to hear.

Dynamic range compression is not generally applied to overcome limitations in sample bit depth as far as I'm aware.

[Jon1967x]

TheInternet said:

Jon1967x said:

The volume level is more where it gets interesting - the volume of somebody speaking is much quieter than a full band thrashing stuff out - yet the same 16 bits needs to capture that and the same dodgy stereo has to play it. So the frig is basically to make the quite bits louder and the loud bits quieter which reduces the range but makes it easier to hear.

Dynamic range compression is not generally applied to overcome limitations in sample bit depth as far as I'm aware.

Someone else made that point too. You're probably very right (I certainly accept audio compression is made for other reasons) but I'm still not convinced in my own head - 90db means the quietest and loudest bits can be captured with a significant variation in volume, but the 24 bits gives the finesse in between - I'm probably very wrong so leave my head to dig out my degree notes which are buried back there somewhere!

[tgr]

theboss said:

I don't know much about Naim or Meridians offerings - I believe they offer streamers with built-in hard disks as 'all in one' solutions - but Linn and most other manufacturers have developed streamers as strictly standalone devices with any data storage being external and accessed via standard networking technologies e.g. ethernet or WiFi.

There are pros and cons of each approach - generally simplicity vs flexibility.

Another stupid question then: how does one judge the quality of the streamer bit (either of an all in one or a separate)? Where is the quality of the reproduction coming from - the hard disk or the streamer? It seems to me that the more separates you have the more difficult it is to judge what is really making the difference to the sound (though you could say that about 'normal' hifi too I suppose

[theboss]

tgr said:

theboss said:

I don't know much about Naim or Meridians offerings - I believe they offer streamers with built-in hard disks as 'all in one' solutions - but Linn and most other manufacturers have developed streamers as strictly standalone devices with any data storage being external and accessed via standard networking technologies e.g. ethernet or WiFi.

There are pros and cons of each approach - generally simplicity vs flexibility.

Another stupid question then: how does one judge the quality of the streamer bit (either of an all in one or a separate)? Where is the quality of the reproduction coming from - the hard disk or the streamer? It seems to me that the more separates you have the more difficult it is to judge what is really making the difference to the sound (though you could say that about 'normal' hifi too I suppose

Without getting into the technical complexities the hard disk is just holding the data - for any one audio file, the actual digital data entering the streamer and being decoded will be the same whatever the storage device looks like. Its the streamer that determines quality. To judge you should listen and make comparisons, keeping all other things the same, with other streamers and/or a CD-player which sounds good to you.

There are some pretty good 'all in one' solutions from all the big manufactures so you don't need to get into systems comprising many separates. Linn's DSM products for example incorporate a streamer, pre-amp with analogue/digital/HDMI inputs and (at the lower end) a power amp, and there are also plenty of active speakers on the market. You can therefore have a very good sounding one-or-two box solution wired to a pair of speakers. I would personally consider the storage and network elements as completely separate from the hifi system - they do not impact sound quality and exists simply to deliver the audio file data to the streamer. We're usually talking about a broadband router and a NAS drive which many people have in the home anyway.

When do went and heard the Naim demonstration - how did it sound to your ears, without having anything to compare it to? Also what sort of price bracket was the demo system or what might your budget be? That might help some of us suggest some components to listen to.

Edited by theboss on Sunday 25th January 15:15