The best NAS for a DS?

We use the Tune Method to evaluate performance

Moderator: Staff

JohnS
Member
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: 2007-10-02 21:59

Post by JohnS »

Hi,
I ‘m feeling like I’ve had a bit of a breakthrough on the NAS/Network issue! I’ve managed to completely isolate the DS so the network/NAS configuration makes absolutely no difference at all, and I get my best sounding results yet.

I got hold of 2 Ethernet to fibre media converters and 10m of fibre connecter, all for about £125, reasonable considering the cost of the DS.

So I now have my DS connected through 0.5m of shielded cable (non crossover) to a DLink DMC-300SC which converts the Ethernet to fibre optic and makes a 100M connection over fibre. These are about £55 each, they are easy to find via google.

I then have a 10m fibre optic patch cable (about £15 on ebay or shops, 62.5/125 SC connectors) linking to another DMC-300SC that then links to the rest of my normal Ethernet network.

I was a bit worried, but it was so easy to set up; pull off the protectors, push the fibre connector into the DLink and it works at 100mbs. I have a 10m fibre, but I could have 1m up to 2km (rather bigger than my house). There are several other products on the market, but I chose the DLink only because it’s a recognisable brand.

I get great results, the best I’ve had and identical, no matter what the network config I throw at it, even through what was my awful home wireless router which used to kill the sound. I think the fibre had removed any chance of electrical/radio noise getting to the DS from the switches/computers/cables/NAS’s.

This seems to have resolved the issues of variable sound quality and I can now link the DS into my home network in any network structure I desire which is what I originally expected. I guess I could have just 1m of fibre to disconnect the two electrically, although I’ve not tried it.

So I think my 'problem' is resolved unless someone finds something better.

John
paolo
Active member
Active member
Posts: 125
Joined: 2007-01-31 12:49
Location: Rome, Italy

Post by paolo »

This is quite an achievement John!
I guess the only network device which could still have an influence on DS performance with your new architecture is the media-converter. Have you tried if also NAS/HDDs have become uninfluential to the sound?

Paolo
JohnS
Member
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: 2007-10-02 21:59

Post by JohnS »

Hi Paolo,

I've been thinking about the problem and solution for a bit, and since we seemed to agree it was noise/RFI of some sort, after a bit of research on networks I had high hopes for this approach as nothing could go down an optical fibre except the real data signal.

I've not got enough equipment to try different disks or NAS's. What I did do is compare my previous best configuration with the Fibre connected version, simply replacing the 2m Cat6 SSTP cable to the DS with fibre. The fibre was immediately and clearly better, it just sounded more analogue. I then went to my previous worst network configuration (via the home router and 5m FTP cables) with fibre at the last part to the DS and happily absolutely nothing changed, it still sounded it's best. Before that would have impacted the results significantly and I couldn't find any difference at all, it sounded identical.

I think this gives me some rationality as to what is happening, Ethernet (via Fibre) is delivering the data as any data network would, but the noise has gone (other than the last media converter). I'm going to try a bit more to be 100% certain, I'll try more and more convoluted networks to see if the theory breaks down, but I think I can have a 'normal' network with the Twonky server wherever I like and the last connection to the DS via fibre, that's my target. I am fairly certain that it will also remove the effects of disks etc. as these all deliver the data over ethernet.

I did wonder about the effect or quality of the Media converter at the DS end, maybe a better power supply could make it better still, although I've no idea if it'll change anything. Maybe earthing the metal case to the DS.

The best option would be for the DS to offer an industry standard optical connection - I'd really like that, total isolation, no media converter. It can't be very expensive in parts and it's a standard design.

I ended up with one of those evenings where listening went on a little too late and then even a bit too long this morning, making me loose sleep and be late for work... :)
John
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

Great work, John!

I will try your suggestions as soon as I have a chance (no DS at home yet, the one I really want is a bit out of reach at the moment).

I'd really like to do some measurements on the ethernet line on this kind of setup, too. We had a theory that it was noise that caused the differences in performance, but after all that was just a theory.
JohnS
Member
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: 2007-10-02 21:59

Post by JohnS »

Thanks!
I agree that it's a theory at the moment. This is the rational to the theory... if anyone can let me know where the faults are in my argument I'd be happy.

I work in IT so I guess I have a particular viewpoint on servers, data and networks. Servers and ethernet networks deliver files with 100% accuracy from A-B globally. The DS is simply asking for a file bit-by-bit via HTTP (I believe for UPnP). It'll get the file - accurately! It's not even time critical as the DS has a buffer and doesn't use much network bandwidth. If you browse the twonky catalogue in any browser, all it does when you get to the track is to give you the file to download over HTTP which is what it does for the DS.

As long as the network throughput is enough to get the file to the DS in time, network latency or that kind of thing won't change anything. If the network wasn't fast enough, the music would simply stop. The DS asks for about 5-6Mb/minute for FLAC files.

If someone knows more about UPnP streaming please tell me, I'd be really interested.

I'd be truly amazed if the real differences found between hard disks or cables had anything to do with data level or network transport, although if there was a reason I'd really love to know too.

I think the computer 'data' devices such as disks/switches are designed to be just that. They are designed to deliver high speed data that can be read by another computer device, but RF noise that could effect hifi is just not considered while designing the next best fastest SATA disk drive, as long as the data is readable in a computer environment. Digital data is lots of square waves which create noise. Network cables are big 'ariels' that span rooms which is why shielded cables helped a bit. Even switches could introduce out of band noise. All of this could make it's way to the DS over CAT5/6 along with the data. We are linking a computer environment to an audio one where the data gets there, but so does the rest of the stuff that a computer would ignore

Once again, fire away?

That's why I went fibre, because the data goes in, data comes out. A square wave in light doesn't introduce noise, and there is no chance for anything else to get through or along the fibre, only the data in the file. So I believe that the pure data arrives at the DS end and the noise just is not converted.

That is why I believe (hope) that I can put any IT network between Twonky and the DS, and use fibre to clean the signal!

Once again if anyone knows more about fibre that would change this viewpoint, I'd love to know again!
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

Over on the Swedish Linn forum, some guys have been trying out various network parameters this weekend. Strangely, they found that a DLink optical converter made the Klimax DS sound clearly worse compared to running directly from the switch. It did reduce the differences between switches, but was worse than a good switch driven directly.

This seems to be the opposite of your findings, John!?

I also did a comparison in my last installation, where it turned out that a DLink wireless router improved the sound compared from going directly from the switch. I did not have time to do this methodically and in depth, all I could be certain of was that whenever I took the shortest route directly from the switch, the Akurate DS became stiff and less tuneful in comparison with going through a wireless network...
Patrik
Member
Member
Posts: 17
Joined: 2008-01-31 16:31

Post by Patrik »

lejonklou wrote: I also did a comparison in my last installation, where it turned out that a DLink wireless router improved the sound compared from going directly from the switch. I did not have time to do this methodically and in depth, all I could be certain of was that whenever I took the shortest route directly from the switch, the Akurate DS became stiff and less tuneful in comparison with going through a wireless network...
As I understand you didn't use wireless bridging, So wireless is only fo control. Hmm-- can you describe the configurations in more detail :)


I have 15 m cat 6 going to a netgear switch. A Readynas and linksys wire less control point as well as the computer network (and internet ) i s connected to that switch. In effect I suspect that the whole network acts as an antenna. I have easily been able to hear tune dem differences when turning on and off high power discharge lamps. Probably the "antenna" picks up the fields created by the lamps and feeds the DS with disturbances.

Some of the reported findings/differences may be because of different antenna properties (different geometries and cables) giving more or less impact on tune.

I wrote to Linn helpline and they replied that short ethernet cables and short interconnect cables are recommended to avoid RF pick up.

I think not only the length matters. Geometry etc. are important as well.

Just some thougts...
JohnS
Member
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: 2007-10-02 21:59

Post by JohnS »

Thanks for letting me know Fredrick, it made me think and I've been doing some testing. I was a bit confused by the results you talked about and was wondering if I was missing something better!

My config has a direct connection between a PC with twonky and the DS. The advantage of optical is that I can have any length I want (up to 2km), complete electrical seperation and without it being an aerial.

I rebooted everything as the DS has been running 24*7 to burn-in and I wanted a consistent starting point.

I tried my best 3m FTP crossover cable against the DLink optical and found them broadly similar, as I did in the past.

But I found that I do have an interesting mains setup which is making a difference. The Hifi (KDS, Kontrol, Solos) are all plugged in together on a single mains extension board and the DLink power block is on another extension plugged in at the far end of the room (looking for seperation). I then plugged the Dlink power block into the hifi extension strip and the results were noticably worse, it all 'closed in'. I then replugged the DLink power supply block into the original seperate extension strip and placed the power block as far away as possible and it was all better again.

So I think I was lucky by plugging it in elsewhere, I suspected it, but didn't test it before.

The only connection between the hifi and computing electrical environment is the DLink converter, it's power block and 0.5m of cable. I was wondering about the quality and noise from the mains block as it's a probable weak link. I'll stay with the Dlink, but I'll put it and it's power supply as far away as possible, with maybe a slightly longer ethernet cable to connect to the DS and get it even further.

I may look for a better quality power supply? Does anyone know if the power block is putting noise on the mains, or creating radio interference?

John
Last edited by JohnS on 2008-05-27 21:41, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Music Lover
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1673
Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil

Post by Music Lover »

Music Lover wrote: Here is a list of NAS/HDD's:
- ReadyNAS #1 ST3500830NS 500GB (ES)
- ReadyNAS #2 ST3250620AS 250GB (7200.10)
- LaCie ST3500630AS 500GB (7200.10)
- Qnap #1 ST3500320NS 500GB (ES2)
- Qnap #2 ST31000340NS 1TB (ES2)
.
I forgot to report back regarding the ranking, sorry.
Before comparing - each unit was warmed up, connected to same port in the switch, using same (identical) ethernet cable, connected to same power outlet and if possible using same power cable. (we also tried rotating the power plug 180 deg to be able using the most musical phase on each NAS)
Only one NAS was connected to the system/power network at same time.
The test music was uploaded using same USB memory&procedure.
All this to make NAS the ONLY difference.

fyi, you have the Seagate HDD model number in the list below

- ReadyNAS #1 ST3500830NS 500GB (ES) not tested yet

best - ReadyNAS #2 ST3250620AS 250GB (7200.10)
a lot worse- ReadyNAS #3 Western Digital HDD
slightly worse Qnap #2 ST31000340NS 1TB (ES2)
VERY close to the other Qnap - Qnap #1 ST3500320NS 500GB (ES2)
by far worst - LaCie ST3500630AS 500GB (7200.10)

All NAS models are to be found on this page
http://www.linnrecords.com/artist-vario ... sical.aspx

Conclusions:
Seagate HDD's are most musical (yet)
Netgear ReadyNAS NV+ is the best NAS I heard (yet)
Dont buy LaCie. These on a budget get QNap 109 that is just slightly costlier but WAY better.

Tested again and EAC is ripping more musical FLAC files than Ripstation.
With some custom settings, EAC is even better. Thanks Paulo for the info!

The CD-drive have effect on the ripping results. Some CD-drives produce more musical FLAC-files.

2*Dlink "opto to ethernet" converters between the switch and DS killing the tune.

Power cord phase makes a different on all LAN equipment; Opto converter, switch, NAS and also on the PC where the LinnGUI resides.

Switch/NAS are very depending of a good rack. Switches seems more critical so use the best rack position for the switch...
Strangely, using the opto jump, the Switch/NAS position didn't matter. But power phase still did!
It's all about musical understanding!
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

Thanks Patrik and John for your input. There is quite a few people testing these kind of things right now, so I think we could start getting some results in a few months. I would really like two lists here on the forum:

One with the best possible NAS/Switch/whatever arrangement for your DS, for optimal performance judged with the Tune Method.

One list with recommended budget components.

Regarding the Swedish test that I referred to above and ML just reported more from (thank you for this excellent work, ML!), it was NOT as I wrote that the optical isolation reduced the differences between switches - this was never tested. What they did find was that when using the optical isolation, there was no difference when placing the NAS or switch on different furniture. Without the optical isolation, both of these units were clearly sensitive to placement, the switch more so than the NAS.

Now I wonder... If we are talking about RF, electrical noise and antennas, how can the placement of the switch make a difference? :?

One thing I would like to recommend is that when making these kind of experiments, don't rely too heavily on the theory behind it all. I know from experience that this causes mistakes, because one rules out certain options (that could turn out to be the best) and one easily gets stuck on certain tracks (which might be far from optimal).
User avatar
Music Lover
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1673
Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil

Post by Music Lover »

lejonklou wrote: I would really like two lists here on the forum:

One with the best possible NAS/Switch/whatever arrangement for your DS, for optimal performance judged with the Tune Method.

One list with recommended budget components.
- Best NAS; Netgear ReadyNAS NV+
- Budget NAS; Qnap 109
Put it on the best rack you can find and make sure you try both ways to insert the power plug into the power outlet. One of them going to be more musical. This applies on all LAN equipment, even the PC where LinnGUI is running.

Best NAS HDD; Seagate Barracuda HDD

-Best ripping SW; EAC using Linn's config with the following changes.(thanks Paolo)
Drive options> Extraction Method>Secure mode:
- Drive has Accurate Stream feature: not selected
- Drive caches audio data: selected
- Drive is capable of retrieving C2 error information: not selected
It's all about musical understanding!
Nicolav
Active member
Active member
Posts: 201
Joined: 2008-04-07 22:46
Location: Italy - Rome

Post by Nicolav »

Thank you for your useful report Music lover!

I have the Qnap TS-109 and Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 and
I can confirm his superiority over the pc in terms of both tune and sound.

Do you have also tried the barracuda ES2/readynas and the barracuda 7200.10/Qnap combo?
User avatar
Music Lover
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1673
Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil

Post by Music Lover »

No I haven’t (yet) but a friend has a ReadyNAS with Barracuda ST3500830NS 500GB (ES) that he use with his Klimax DS and he consider it VERY good.
To put that assessment in perspective, he also owns a top spec P12...

We plan to compare that NAS with the other. Keep you posted.
It's all about musical understanding!
User avatar
rowlandhills
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 582
Joined: 2008-01-27 19:25
Location: York, UK

Post by rowlandhills »

That's definitely useful info, thanks.
Music Lover wrote:-Best ripping SW; EAC using Linn's config with the following changes.(thanks Paolo)
Drive options> Extraction Method>Secure mode:
- Drive has Accurate Stream feature: not selected
- Drive caches audio data: selected
- Drive is capable of retrieving C2 error information: not selected
I would expect these configuration changes to be very specific to the computer which is being used for ripping (or rather, to the CD/DVD drive being used). I doubt whether they can be used as general settings.
KRDSM, Tundra to 242s
Silvers, K400, Hutter rack
Nicolav
Active member
Active member
Posts: 201
Joined: 2008-04-07 22:46
Location: Italy - Rome

Post by Nicolav »

rowlandhills wrote:That's definitely useful info, thanks.
Music Lover wrote:-Best ripping SW; EAC using Linn's config with the following changes.(thanks Paolo)
Drive options> Extraction Method>Secure mode:
- Drive has Accurate Stream feature: not selected
- Drive caches audio data: selected
- Drive is capable of retrieving C2 error information: not selected
I would expect these configuration changes to be very specific to the computer which is being used for ripping (or rather, to the CD/DVD drive being used). I doubt whether they can be used as general settings.
Hi rowlandhills, good question!
I've tried (with Paolo) those settings against ALL combination of the three secure settings of EAC and seem the best REGARDLESS the optical drive used (three different drives).
LP12/RadikalM/Keel/Ekos SE1/Ekstatik/Urika II/Klimax System Hub/Klimax Exaktbox's/10 Solos/A242
User avatar
sommerfee
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 337
Joined: 2007-02-02 17:40
Contact:

Post by sommerfee »

Nicolav wrote: I've tried (with Paolo) those settings against ALL combination of the three secure settings of EAC and seem the best REGARDLESS the optical drive used (three different drives).
And what are the values EAC is using when you press "Detect read features..."? Are they different?
Nicolav
Active member
Active member
Posts: 201
Joined: 2008-04-07 22:46
Location: Italy - Rome

Post by Nicolav »

sommerfee wrote: And what are the values EAC is using when you press "Detect read features..."? Are they different?
Hi Sommerfee.
Of corse they are different since EAC applies different setting depending the drive used. Eg with NEC ND-3540A is set on in "drive caches audio data" while Plextor PX-716A (my favorite) is set to off. EAC assume that Plextor don't cache audio but the Nec does, however the Plextor "sound" at best when this feature is checked!
All EAC tutorial on internet say that "accurate stream" feature goes EVER enabled. But my listening (and Paolo e ML too) shows better tune when this feature is set (forced) to OFF.

PS EAC set to on the cache feature (radio button greyed) when "accurate stream" is off.
LP12/RadikalM/Keel/Ekos SE1/Ekstatik/Urika II/Klimax System Hub/Klimax Exaktbox's/10 Solos/A242
paolo
Active member
Active member
Posts: 125
Joined: 2007-01-31 12:49
Location: Rome, Italy

Post by paolo »

Musi Lover,
thank you for the precious informations you've shared with us. Your findings about HDDs confirm mines, Seagate HDDs "sound" better than Western Digital.

I've tried 7200.10 500 Gb and ES 500 Gb and both are clearly better than WD GP 750 Gb. Now it would be great to know which of the Seagates' series is the best, so we can have a immediate indication about the most musical solution for our DSs. Have you any idea (or feeling) about which is the ranking between the following Seagates:

- 7200.10
- 7200.11
- ES
- ES.2

Moreover, among the same series, is there a difference between different capacities (ML, you say Qnap with Seagte ES.2 1 Tb and ES.2 500Gb are close. Does it mean we can consider their performance substantially on the same level?)

Last point about the CD drives. I can confirm that different drives, using EAC with the same (optimized) settings sound differen also if EAC says none of the drives make any error on a given song. Anyway I still couldn't make personally any systematic comparison on drives. Anybody of you (again ML?) has a suggestion or ranking of best CD drives he has tried?

Paolo
User avatar
Music Lover
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1673
Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil

Post by Music Lover »

paolo wrote: Does it mean we can consider their performance substantially on the same level?
At least for now Paulo I consider it safe to answer YES on that Q.
Based on many different tests on two different locations/systems, ReadyNAS is the "one" NAS to consider.
Same goes with Seagate HDD's.

Likely there are differences in Seagate HDD's performance but they are all a GOOD step above the other.
Having said that, I still like to compare the ReadyNAS mention in my previous post that we haven’t compared with the other five NAS.
Just as a reality check that the individual Seagate HDD's (and ReadyNAS) really ARE quite close to each other re performance.

Other items; rack, power phase, switch etc etc, all have bigger impact so I'm going to concentrate on these items going forward.
Switches/cables are first in the list :mrgreen:

Then…when we have a good architecture we can get back checking if we can find an EVEN better NAS/HDD 8)
Likely there is.
Remember the many years it took understanding how to set up a LP12 :wink:
It's all about musical understanding!
paolo
Active member
Active member
Posts: 125
Joined: 2007-01-31 12:49
Location: Rome, Italy

Post by paolo »

Music Lover wrote: Based on many different tests on two different locations/systems, ReadyNAS is the "one" NAS to consider.
Same goes with Seagate HDD's.

Likely there are differences in Seagate HDD's performance but they are all a GOOD step above the other.
Great work ML, so we have a very good starting point here.

So we can consider the recommended NAS/ HDDs list done at the moment:

NAS

1) Readynas NV+: best sound, 4 disks supported, noisy
2) Qnap 109: good sound, 1 disk supported, silent, cheaper

HDD

1) Seagate Barracuda: differences between series or dimension to be verified but can be considered of minor entity.


Now it would be very useful to create shortlists regarding best switches, cd drives, cables.

My best switch is still Netgear FS-105.

About the CD drives, here is a list of the ones I have tested together with my friend Nicolav, from best to worse:

1) Plextor PX-716A
2) PBDS DVD+-RW DS8W 1P (laptop cd drive)
3) Nec ND-3540A
4) Plextor Ultraplex 40TS (scsi with scsi-usb adapter)

Anybody has any suggestion about good CD drives?

I have also tested a number of cables and will post shortly my list.

Another interesting point IMO is about Power Supplies. With the DS infact we have to connect a number of new devices (switch/router/modem/NAS) to the mains, each of them has its own - generally cheap and often noisy - power suply. In my experience these PSs have their importance and can influence the sound of the hifi, for two reasons: first because they influence the "sound" of the network device, second because they can inject noise into the mains.

Regarding the first point, I'd kindly ask my friend Nicolav to report his experience about comparing two commercial PSs with his network switch.
As for the mains pollution effects I have tried and compared several general purpose PSs (of the kind tipically used with domestic network devices), just connecting each to the mains and detecting the influence on the performance of the system. The effect is almost always audible and some times (for instance with my Dell laptop's PS) considerably deleterious. Sound is quite the same but tune is not!

So how could we solve this issue? Maybe I've an idea: Fredrik, are you ready to start producing for us high-performance low-noise power supplies for use with third party devices? :mrgreen:

Paolo
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

To Music Lover, Paolo and everyone else:

You are doing fantastic work! On top of that, you are sharing your findings with the rest of us. Thank you!!

I have only experimented on a few installations with the digital side of the DS, so I know far less than you but the differences when for example changing switches have been quite obvious.

At least once a week I talk to an enthusiast who is highly sceptical to any kind of sound difference due to different digital gear.
I always ask: Have you compared?
The answer is usually "No, and if I heard anything I wouldn't believe it".
I then ask: Why?
A very common reply is "Because there is no reason why there would be a difference".

When I hear that (and it almost always boils down to just that "it's impossible"-thing), I can't resist pointing out: With that attitude, there would much less scientific progress!
User avatar
Music Lover
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1673
Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil

Post by Music Lover »

lejonklou wrote:A very common reply is "Because there is no reason why there would be a difference".

When I hear that (and it almost always boils down to just that "it's impossible"-thing), I can't resist pointing out: With that attitude, there would much less scientific progress!
Yes!

Remember, it was not long ago CD technology was considered the ultimate and "all CD-players sound the same"...
Based on that - I have some hard times understanding why people again makes same mistakes discussing DS technology and impact from the LAN equipment.
It should be no difference, sure :roll:
It's all about musical understanding!
hcl
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 360
Joined: 2008-01-13 11:03
Location: Göteborg
Contact:

Post by hcl »

I totally agree on that it is valuable to learn all about optimizing DS performance, but I also think we should try not to exagerate the differences. Especially we should be careful not to frighten off new DS-users. That would be a real shame, afterall any DS installation perform very good compared to the alternatives.

Considering the actual optimisation work I am afraid that you (we) are trying to solve the problem in an unneccesary complicated way. I think that it should be solved by keeping the problem un-analougue as long as possible. I really think that the only ones really able to really overcome the unesseary differences we have found to have impact on the final sound quality is Linn. Maybe they could incorporate an optical input in the DS elliminating the electrical disturbances introduced through the ethernet connection. In this case they only would have to focus on overcoming the limitations of the optical link. A good start would probably be to investigate/modify an existing optical solution.

In the long run I would think that it is not unlikely that the most valuable result from the optimization work is to show Linn that the customers are aware that there are limitations of the existing concept and to push Linn to further develop the DS concept.
User avatar
vicdiaz
Active member
Active member
Posts: 248
Joined: 2007-02-06 04:37
Location: Trujillo Alto, PR U.S.A.
Contact:

Post by vicdiaz »

The only other optical interface I can think of besides SPDIF is Fibre-Channel, but that would be an overkill.
Vic
Ivor's "Tune-Method Seminar" Alumni
User avatar
Music Lover
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1673
Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil

Post by Music Lover »

hcl wrote:I totally agree on that it is valuable to learn all about optimizing DS performance, but I also think we should try not to exagerate the differences. Especially we should be careful not to frighten off new DS-users. That would be a real shame, afterall any DS installation perform very good compared to the alternatives.
Yes, all DS products are great and perform excellent even without optimization.
Same can be said for LP12. But still we discuss how to set up&adjust a LP12 in the best way.
Why? We know that we can take a LP12 from great sounding to utterly fantastic with a careful set up.
So tell me...what is wrong with doing same with DS?

Or do you think we frighten off new vinyl users mention how to get the best out from LP12?


Regarding DS, I'm quite sure Linn designed it as simple as possible just to obtain optimum performance, hence no interfaces except Ethernet.

Yes, Linn is VERY aware of the results we have seen (I've discussed this with Gilad earlier this year) but they simply don’t have the time to check all details. Linn are grateful that some customers spend their time on this and report their findings.
It's all about musical understanding!
Post Reply