Questionable strategy

[TLS]

Most hifi firms are now investing in the development of streamers which are said to replace cd players and the like. Trying to position themselves in front of the pack might seem a good strategy for the moment but what if the need for computers and NAS boxes suddenly become unnecessary?

Music (pushers) in the form of internet radio stations are now offering millions of songs at 320kbps for a very convenient monthly subscription fee. In a not too distant future, internet providers will have much higher dsl speeds to offer and the music could then be broadcast-ed at 24/192!

All that will be needed is an internet tuner with a decent d/a converter. What do you think?

 

[dave]

The person that decides to hold out for The Best Ever will have a very long wait.

In the meantime, the clock is ticking so buy whatever makes you happy and replace it whenever you find something you like better.

 

[TLS]

The person that decides to hold out for The Best Ever will have a very long wait.

In the meantime, the clock is ticking so buy whatever makes you happy and replace it whenever you find something you like better.

Things are moving fast and streaming from hard drives doesn't seem to offer any better SQ than cd's if listening to 16/44.1. The convenience thing is offset by the complexity of the boxes and software required and many people don't want to bother with that.

Having to buy again our music collection at high definition formats and stocking it at home leave an impression of déjà vu. I'm not trying to praise the merits of internet music but for the cost of a couple of hd downloads you could get full access to millions of files.

 

[rubaiyat_23]

Most hifi firms are now investing in the development of streamers which are said to replace cd players and the like. Trying to position themselves in front of the pack might seem a good strategy for the moment but what if the need for computers and NAS boxes suddenly become unnecessary?

Music (pushers) in the form of internet radio stations are now offering millions of songs at 320kbps for a very convenient monthly subscription fee. In a not too distant future, internet providers will have much higher dsl speeds to offer and the music could then be broadcast-ed at 24/192!

All that will be needed is an internet tuner with a decent d/a converter. What do you think?

Most streamers have that capability built-in-perhaps you have confused the concept of a "server" with that of a "streamer"??

 

[Nic P]

I was talking to a high-end dealer who sells a lot of Linn's DS range and his comment was that local hard disk storage and software was merely a stepping stone to Cloud-based music storage and music service provision. His main reason for saying this was the effort of ripping your CD collection.

Nic P

 

[Darth Vader]

Most streamers have that capability built-in-perhaps you have confused the concept of a "server" with that of a "streamer"??

Yes the servers lower bit rate is to reduce the bandwidth that the server must have to connect to the internet i.e. keep running costs down. The streamer can easily buffer the data and play at a higher rate than it had been received. Even my humble Pure Internet radio buffers the data........

Cheers,

DV

 

[dave]

Things are moving fast and streaming from hard drives doesn't seem to offer any better SQ than cd's if listening to 16/44.1. The convenience thing is offset by the complexity of the boxes and software required and many people don't want to bother with that.

Having to buy again our music collection at high definition formats and stocking it at home leave an impression of déjà vu. I'm not trying to praise the merits of internet music but for the cost of a couple of hd downloads you could get full access to millions of files.

I'm not convinced that giving up my CDP is the way to go from a sound quality standpoint compared to my SB Touch when either streaming or using local storage.

Personally, I'm content to wait until the whole distributed audio thing settles down alot more before investing any more time and effort into the whole thing. On top of that, I have absolutely no desire to mix business (computers) with pleasure (music listening) so antiquated, 16/44 technology serves me just fine here.

regards,

dave

 

[dave]

I was talking to a high-end dealer who sells a lot of Linn's DS range and his comment was that local hard disk storage and software was merely a stepping stone to Cloud-based music storage and music service provision. His main reason for saying this was the effort of ripping your CD collection.

Nic P

I'll probably hold out for cloud storage maturity for the reasons mentioned above. (If I'm going to move to another format (again), why not wait until it's easy and pretty much bomb-proof as well as better sounding.)

 

[sojourner]

I'm streaming with a sonos system, because it makes the cd collection available in several different room swith ease. Importantly, my cd's don't disappear to the children's rooms. My wife likes spotify, but still listens to FM radio.

I have become slightly more comfortable with dtreaming once I accepted that everything digital - music or photography - is ultimately disposable in a way the I don't feel about the analogue versions - me being a bit antiquated really.

Mike

 

[tuga]

Most hifi firms are now investing in the development of streamers which are said to replace cd players and the like. Trying to position themselves in front of the pack might seem a good strategy for the moment but what if the need for computers and NAS boxes suddenly become unnecessary?

Music (pushers) in the form of internet radio stations are now offering millions of songs at 320kbps for a very convenient monthly subscription fee. In a not too distant future, internet providers will have much higher dsl speeds to offer and the music could then be broadcast-ed at 24/192!

All that will be needed is an internet tuner with a decent d/a converter. What do you think?

I see no point in broadcast-streaming 24/192...16/88,2 is enough for classical.

Cheers,
Ric

 

[Robert]

Most hifi firms are now investing in the development of streamers which are said to replace cd players and the like. Trying to position themselves in front of the pack might seem a good strategy for the moment but what if the need for computers and NAS boxes suddenly become unnecessary?

Music (pushers) in the form of internet radio stations are now offering millions of songs at 320kbps for a very convenient monthly subscription fee. In a not too distant future, internet providers will have much higher dsl speeds to offer and the music could then be broadcast-ed at 24/192!

All that will be needed is an internet tuner with a decent d/a converter. What do you think?

I think that while we are in a transition stage, it will be pretty fast one with things settling down in a couple of years.
There are three problems with cloud based streaming at the moment IMO.
Firstly, it required good consistent broadband speeds for the higher bitrate streams and those aren't quite as common as needed. Secondly, while I actually think that 320kbs is perfectly fine, we have no control over the file being downloaded.
At the moment you can choose from a multitude of different issues where a CD or vinyl are concerned in order to get exactly what you want. With downloads it tends to be song based, so for example you can listen to a song that appeared on more than one album and it will be the same file, where on the actual album they were different. So you don't quite know what to expect at the moment.

Also I find that many of the files available on the likes of Spotify suck in terms of sound quality.
They sound clearly inferior to CD, not because 320kbs or the streaming process is screwing the sound but because the provenance of the file is questionable.

So still some basics to sort in terms of the technology and file choice, and that will probably mean we run our file libraries alongside the cloud for some time.

 

[9designs]

Not sure I see the need to wait, data in the cloud would probably only need a software tweak and it would be working on the likes of a DS now. I currently do/can stream from the NAS, any thing stored on the PC, any application on the PC can have it's sound streamed to the DS as well. Plus the BBC listen again and all the Internet radio stations.
The 24 bit 320 mp3 Linn radio feed is excellent quality if you've not tried it. My 4.5meg copper/bt line copes with it most days and times.

Think that covers most requirements and needs.....

 

[paskinn]

What a mess. The best strategy was to stick to vinyl and wait a few more years.I would guess that cloud technology will win through and then I might switch from my records. But for now, I am not going to waste hard earned cash on poor sounding computer boxes. Computer technology is both moving at an incredible pace and also. at the same time, managing to stay profoundly immature .Strange mix really.But then we live in strange times.....

 

[SteveS1]

I think that while we are in a transition stage, it will be pretty fast one with things settling down in a couple of years.
There are three problems with cloud based streaming at the moment IMO.
Firstly, it required good consistent broadband speeds for the higher bitrate streams and those aren't quite as common as needed. Secondly, while I actually think that 320kbs is perfectly fine, we have no control over the file being downloaded.
At the moment you can choose from a multitude of different issues where a CD or vinyl are concerned in order to get exactly what you want. With downloads it tends to be song based, so for example you can listen to a song that appeared on more than one album and it will be the same file, where on the actual album they were different. So you don't quite know what to expect at the moment.

Also I find that many of the files available on the likes of Spotify suck in terms of sound quality.
They sound clearly inferior to CD, not because 320kbs or the streaming process is screwing the sound but because the provenance of the file is questionable.

So still some basics to sort in terms of the technology and file choice, and that will probably mean we run our file libraries alongside the cloud for some time.

Good post Rob, it's a point of optimism for me anyway that when you do know the source of the file because the only issue available is a good one - the results can be excellent.

 

[dudywoxer]

I'm not altogether sure if I have it right or wrong. At the moment, as I wanted some of music collection easily available I have ripped the CD part of it to houshold server. A squeezebox thing gives access to that music anywhere in the house easily. Or at least anywhere that a music replay system is available. The squeezeboxes as standalone streamer/dac may be a long way from the best available, but for non-critical usuage, i.e. office, kitchen etc they are more than good enough for my needs. The cd player and CD's remain in the listening room.

When the local storage/cloud thing is sorted then I will either rip my vinyl, or source suitable digital files. As I currently have 50mb internet access, the speed is not an issue, but the cloud servers can be.

I would personally miss the physical interaction between the source and me for more 'serious' listening sessions. Taking the vinyl from the sleeve, lowering the arm etc are all part of the enjoyment of selecting my music and enjoying it. A part that clicking a mouse or a remote does not replace.

 

[YNWOAN]

Could someone explain to me why one would actually want to use 'cloud' technology, I can't see the benefit? Why would you want to store files remotely, if you could store them locally and have far more control/ownership of them? Surely hard-drive space is cheap and small by domestic standards? I can see the benefit to portable devices as storage space can be an issue (at present), but otherwise, why bother?

 

[SteveS1]

I would be interested, just like effectively doing the same thing with mail accounts, contacts and documents. I prefer not to have all the back-up locally and being able to access (subj to adequate bandwidth) on different devices from anywhere can be handy.

 

[Nic P]

Could someone explain to me why one would actually want to use 'cloud' technology, I can't see the benefit? Why would you want to store files remotely, if you could store them locally and have far more control/ownership of them? Surely hard-drive space is cheap and small by domestic standards? I can see the benefit to portable devices as storage space can be an issue (at present), but otherwise, why bother?

You could use the Cloud / Internet to get a spotify type service for your mainstream catalogue. The Cloud will offer backed up storage plus the software for your own rips of vinyl etc. and will be easier to use for less techy types.

Nic P

 

[YNWOAN]

I prefer not to have all the back-up locally

But why not?
___________________

A friend of mine works in a job that deals exclusively with very sensitive data. As a result, his work phone and laptop use encryption and all data is cloud based (in case the hardware is lost or stolen) - he tells me it is a right royal PITA!

 

[PsB]

When I see the gaps and dropouts we sometimes get in Internet availability from our dear internet service provider, I am not about to depend on some server in a remote location for access to the music I want to hear.

A server in the home is a different matter of course. I haven't seen a need for that as I don't have enough time to listen to the LPs and CDs that I have, but it's a possibility.