Page 1 of 1
CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-25 13:49
by Lego
This comparison isnt ideal as its the same track from different Synology/hard drives NAS's .NFS has volumio grabbing the music but CIFS is served by the Synology media server . Would like to listen to CIFS and Volumio doing the grabbing. There's not much in it in spite of this.
A)
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ezv2i5ta1nxa0 ... 8.mp4?dl=0
B)
https://www.dropbox.com/s/e7gm56fmli2vk ... 9.mp4?dl=0
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-25 21:35
by lejonklou
I find A more together and easier to get into.
B is sprawling a bit.
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-26 04:08
by markiteight
A. It wasn't an immediate stand out but after going back and forth a few times I began noticing the musicians had a certain swagger and swing in clip A that's absent in B. It was easier to follow and kept my attention longer.
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-26 07:40
by beck
I hear A as easy to follow individual instruments but not agreeing on where to put the beat down (machine gun beat). I hear B as them trying to agree on the beat almost (not quite) getting it right.
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-26 09:33
by Lego
No 'Sound' differences here then :0)
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-26 16:31
by tokenbrit
Not much in it but found myself less interested in B - A 'won' it for me
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-27 15:36
by Lego
lejonklou wrote: ↑2019-02-25 21:35
I find A more together and easier to get into.
B is sprawling a bit.
A was NFS
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-27 15:37
by Lego
beck wrote: ↑2019-02-26 07:40
I hear A as easy to follow individual instruments but not agreeing on where to put the beat down (machine gun beat). I hear B as them trying to agree on the beat almost (not quite) getting it right.
So are you saying B is right and A is wrong Beck
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-27 18:27
by beck
I cannot pick out right or wrong.
I can say that I find B slightly more “human” sounding in a “heavy/clumsy? kind of way.
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-27 23:53
by ThomasOK
Sometimes these streaming files are a pain in the A$$. Yesterday I clicked on both links to bring them up in separate tabs. I started to listen to the first one and then had a customer and was unable to get back to it. Today was pretty busy too but has finally calmed down so I started to give them a listen. Listened to A and it sounded OK then tried to listen to B but it said I couldn't preview the file and would have to download it. So I closed the tab and clicked the link again and this time the file opened in a new tab. I listened to it and thought that clip B bounced along better than clip A. I went back and forth a couple times and always preferred clip B. Then I read the rest of the comments and almost everybody seemed to prefer A. Hmmm! So I went back and listened again and still found B to have more movement to it.
It was then I wondered about the fact that I had linked to A yesterday and B today so I closed A and clicked the link again. Amazing, A now sounds more in time and rhythmic than B! Listened a couple of times and it remains with A being better. I would have blamed expectation bias except after reading others comments I still found B better with the two files I originally listened to. It would certainly be nice if these digital files were more consistent.
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-28 02:29
by tokenbrit
Maybe the A electrons got tired waiting, Tom, then you got a fresh wave of particles. It's elementary - just 1 or the 0ther; really not worth getting in an elevated state over it :)
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-28 11:07
by Tendaberry
I agree with the others, that A is better, more in time as Tom said. And I agree with Beck, that B sounds clumsier ;-)
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-28 11:57
by lejonklou
Lego wrote: ↑2019-02-27 15:36
lejonklou wrote: ↑2019-02-25 21:35
I find A more together and easier to get into.
B is sprawling a bit.
A was NFS
Very cool!
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-28 12:14
by Lego
ThomasOK wrote: ↑2019-02-27 23:53
Sometimes these streaming files are a pain in the A$$. Yesterday I clicked on both links to bring them up in separate tabs. I started to listen to the first one and then had a customer and was unable to get back to it. Today was pretty busy too but has finally calmed down so I started to give them a listen. Listened to A and it sounded OK then tried to listen to B but it said I couldn't preview the file and would have to download it. So I closed the tab and clicked the link again and this time the file opened in a new tab. I listened to it and thought that clip B bounced along better than clip A. I went back and forth a couple times and always preferred clip B. Then I read the rest of the comments and almost everybody seemed to prefer A. Hmmm! So I went back and listened again and still found B to have more movement to it.
It was then I wondered about the fact that I had linked to A yesterday and B today so I closed A and clicked the link again. Amazing, A now sounds more in time and rhythmic than B! Listened a couple of times and it remains with A being better. I would have blamed expectation bias except after reading others comments I still found B better with the two files I originally listened to. It would certainly be nice if these digital files were more consistent.
I found I could hear a difference with the first couple hits on the drums
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-28 12:15
by Lego
tokenbrit wrote: ↑2019-02-28 02:29
Maybe the A electrons got tired waiting, Tom, then you got a fresh wave of particles. It's elementary - just 1 or the 0ther; really not worth getting in an elevated state over it :)
There's always a simple explanation
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-28 12:16
by Charlie1
Like Beck, I'm sitting on the fence more than most. I really like the tunefulness and vitality of A. Whereas B seems like a band that are now getting tired and ready to pack up for the night. However, underneath that they seem like a tighter playing band which I also appreciate.
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-28 13:14
by Lego
Charlie1 wrote: ↑2019-02-28 12:16
Like Beck, I'm sitting on the fence more than most. I really like the tunefulness and vitality of A. Whereas B seems like a band that are now getting tired and ready to pack up for the night. However, underneath that, they seem like a tighter playing band which I also appreciate.
I can see (hear) where both sides are coming from. Here at home I initially felt that NFS(A) was slightly less engaging than CIFS and always thought engagement was a prerequisite for me, now I'm not so sure. Engagement could also be you're not sure how things will pan out, like watching someone run for a bus, a very engaging pastime, but not top drawer sport.
When tunefulness is improved, for me listening to music is far less tiring with the most important melody at a particular time in the track standing out more. Solos! I discovered this in a song I knew really well when I found myself humming along to the bass line as the tune was finishing. Even though it wasn't prominent in the mix it was prominent in the tune. I had always heard it but never noticed the playing ie the melody.
Rhythm is important but I'd rather listen to a song without rhythm than a song without melody, in saying that I have a barrowload of 90's dance music, but don't talk to Arkiv about dance music.
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-28 13:15
by Lego
Charlie1 wrote: ↑2019-02-28 12:16
Like Beck, I'm sitting on the fence more than most. I really like the tunefulness and vitality of A. Whereas B seems like a band that are now getting tired and ready to pack up for the night. However, underneath that, they seem like a tighter playing band which I also appreciate.
I can see (hear) where both sides are coming from. Here(Hear?) at home I initially felt that NFS(A) was slightly less engaging than CIFS and always thought engagement was a prerequisite for me, now I'm not so sure. Engagement could also be you're not sure how things will pan out, like watching someone run for a bus, a very engaging pastime, but not top drawer sport.
When tunefulness is improved, for me listening to music is far less tiring with the most important melody at a particular time in the track standing out more. Solos! I discovered this in a song I knew really well when I found myself humming along to the bass line as the tune was finishing. Even though it wasn't prominent in the mix it was prominent in the tune. I had always heard it but never noticed the playing ie the melody.
Rhythm is important but I'd rather listen to a song without rhythm than a song without melody, in saying that I have a barrowload of 90's dance music, but don't talk to Arkiv about dance music.
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-28 17:57
by Charlie1
Thanks for posting Lego - interesting to better understand how you listen and enjoy music.
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-02-28 20:37
by Lego
Charlie1 wrote: ↑2019-02-28 17:57
Thanks for posting Lego - interesting to better understand how you listen and enjoy music.
Indeed Charlie it wasn't something I ever thought about until you raised the topic.
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-03-14 22:47
by FairPlayMotty
Given the implications and risk of bit rot (
https://www.blisshq.com/music-library-m ... s-bit-rot/) has anyone on here used or considered using ZFS? ZFS is as close to data loss nirvana as is possible as far as I'm aware. I just wonder:
1. What it sounds like?
2. Whether Snakeoil OS could implement it?
My NAS prior to my Hakai Server build was a Netgear ReadyNAS which used BTRFS which Netgear claimed was close to ZFS in data protection standards. However, the Hakai Server sounds leagues better than my Netgear ReadyNAS and is quicker, easier to use and more flexible for audio.
Re: CIFS vs NFS
Posted: 2019-03-14 22:49
by FairPlayMotty
Views of agent_kith would be invaluable.