Although I expect that Linn will sometime end up supporting Apple Lossless format and may even come up with Mac versions of their software, I am not supremely confident that it will be soon or that the implementation will be flawless. :)
My question is really for the programmer types here, a group which I really don't belong to. I am wondering how hard it would be to hack some way of making a Linn DS look like an Airport Express or Base Station to a computer or NAS running iTunes?
It seems to me that the ideal way to use a DS would be to use iTunes as the server and an iPod Touch or iPhone with Apple's new Remote software as a controller. Although I haven't used the Remote software yet, a friend in the business has and says it is the closest thing he has seen to an ideal remote control yet. Apple obviously has the interface part of streaming audio down so why re-invent the wheel? If a DS could be controlled by one of these and decode the formats iTunes supports (there is already a start with the support for WAV, MP3 and AIFF but Lossless is still needed) it would greatly simplify the whole setup.
The first one who comes to market with a device that can somehow allow this to happen will make a chunk of money for both themselves and Linn. And once we do that we can beat up on Apple to support FLAC in iTunes and everyone will be happy.
DS and iTunes
Moderator: Staff
sound like a good idea. although i think it's kind complicated. as there are different concepts. DS uses streaming audio via twonky and itunes does not really use "streaming" it just plays the files from filesystem. ok, that's not the truth as you can setup itunes to use the itunes server from another pc. so there is some kind of streaming.
the itunes remote with iphone is really cool. no cover flow but the rest is really very good.
linn has realy fantastic products with all of the DS boxes. the only drawback is the control side. linngui is nice but nothing special and not really very comfortable to use. itunes - and i think there are many itunes users out there - is kind of a "standard". linn is now software company so you can't really blame them. but i think you have to see it as a complete package. and there the software side is weak against the very strong, good and perfect palyer side.
markus
the itunes remote with iphone is really cool. no cover flow but the rest is really very good.
linn has realy fantastic products with all of the DS boxes. the only drawback is the control side. linngui is nice but nothing special and not really very comfortable to use. itunes - and i think there are many itunes users out there - is kind of a "standard". linn is now software company so you can't really blame them. but i think you have to see it as a complete package. and there the software side is weak against the very strong, good and perfect palyer side.
markus
The Digital Streaming market has developed quite a bit since I wrote the original post (and it will continue to develop at a rapid pace).
Linn has indeed increased the support for iTunes. With the CARA software accepting AIFF, ALAC (Apple Lossless) and AAC Linn now supports all the native iTunes formats that aren't DRM protected. DRM is also quickly becoming a thing of the past so it will no longer make our lives difficult.
Linn is also supporting the Mac better with the coming CARA Kinsky Desktop for Mac and the CARA Konfig which will run in a browser from a PC, Mac or Linux machine. And third parties have made the iPhone and iPod Touch popular control devices. So things have moved well in the direction I had asked about.
In addition, Micromega just showed a new network DAC due to ship in November that directly streams from iTunes. They have licensed the technology from Apple to allow their device to act like an Airport Express so that you can control it with an iPod Touch or iPhone with Apple Remote software and use iTunes to stream the music. This is basically what I suggested originally so it shows the concept can work.
However, after learning more about the intricacies of streaming audio I now see that iTunes - even in the latest V9 form - is not yet near to being an ideal server for quality music.
First and foremost, iTunes will not stream music in the native format it was ripped in. At least on a Mac the data rate is set through a control panel and anything with a different sample rate or number of bits is transcoded, apparently with some loss of fidelity.
Second, iTunes does not support high-res digital very well. It cannot output any higher than 24bit/96kHz and it can't RIP anything higher than 16bit/48kHz.
Third, iTunes on the Mac doesn't support FLAC. Since FLAC is quickly becoming the standard lossless compressor, especially for high-res audio, this means iTunes users have to go the extra step of converting from FLAC to ALAC.
Fourth, Streaming from iTunes can only be done to an Airport Express or other device using Apple technology such as the Micromega unit mentioned, an Apple TV box or a Mac computer. Workarounds all involve putting the iTunes files into a different server program such as Twonky or SqueezeNetwork.
So now that Linn has become more accommodating of iTunes and Apple products it is really time for Apple to belly up to the bar. Apple could become the de facto standard for music streaming, including high-res, if they would make iTunes more robust at handling and serving these files. What we need to see in iTunes is:
Support for FLAC on Macs as well as PCs, and preferably on iPods as well.
Support for streaming audio files at their native bit rates.
Support for resolutions up to and including 24bit/192kHz in any appropriate formats (ALAC, FLAC, AIFF, WAV).
Support for a better RIP engine using tools like CDparanoia and AccurateRIP to assure the highest quality audio files.
Either support within iTunes for UPNP or widely available, free licensing of the software code necessary to implement Airport Express architecture in other audio devices - preferably both.
Until these needs are addressed, I fully understand and agree with Linn sticking with UPNP servers for storing and serving audio files. I just wish they were as straightforward and easy to use as iTunes.
Linn has indeed increased the support for iTunes. With the CARA software accepting AIFF, ALAC (Apple Lossless) and AAC Linn now supports all the native iTunes formats that aren't DRM protected. DRM is also quickly becoming a thing of the past so it will no longer make our lives difficult.
Linn is also supporting the Mac better with the coming CARA Kinsky Desktop for Mac and the CARA Konfig which will run in a browser from a PC, Mac or Linux machine. And third parties have made the iPhone and iPod Touch popular control devices. So things have moved well in the direction I had asked about.
In addition, Micromega just showed a new network DAC due to ship in November that directly streams from iTunes. They have licensed the technology from Apple to allow their device to act like an Airport Express so that you can control it with an iPod Touch or iPhone with Apple Remote software and use iTunes to stream the music. This is basically what I suggested originally so it shows the concept can work.
However, after learning more about the intricacies of streaming audio I now see that iTunes - even in the latest V9 form - is not yet near to being an ideal server for quality music.
First and foremost, iTunes will not stream music in the native format it was ripped in. At least on a Mac the data rate is set through a control panel and anything with a different sample rate or number of bits is transcoded, apparently with some loss of fidelity.
Second, iTunes does not support high-res digital very well. It cannot output any higher than 24bit/96kHz and it can't RIP anything higher than 16bit/48kHz.
Third, iTunes on the Mac doesn't support FLAC. Since FLAC is quickly becoming the standard lossless compressor, especially for high-res audio, this means iTunes users have to go the extra step of converting from FLAC to ALAC.
Fourth, Streaming from iTunes can only be done to an Airport Express or other device using Apple technology such as the Micromega unit mentioned, an Apple TV box or a Mac computer. Workarounds all involve putting the iTunes files into a different server program such as Twonky or SqueezeNetwork.
So now that Linn has become more accommodating of iTunes and Apple products it is really time for Apple to belly up to the bar. Apple could become the de facto standard for music streaming, including high-res, if they would make iTunes more robust at handling and serving these files. What we need to see in iTunes is:
Support for FLAC on Macs as well as PCs, and preferably on iPods as well.
Support for streaming audio files at their native bit rates.
Support for resolutions up to and including 24bit/192kHz in any appropriate formats (ALAC, FLAC, AIFF, WAV).
Support for a better RIP engine using tools like CDparanoia and AccurateRIP to assure the highest quality audio files.
Either support within iTunes for UPNP or widely available, free licensing of the software code necessary to implement Airport Express architecture in other audio devices - preferably both.
Until these needs are addressed, I fully understand and agree with Linn sticking with UPNP servers for storing and serving audio files. I just wish they were as straightforward and easy to use as iTunes.
Re: DS and iTunes
AFAIK the communication protocol is not documented by Apple. Solutions like Amarok (which is able to stream to AirPorts as well) are based on reverse engineering, and using an AirPort for streaming is much easier to reverse engineer and implement than the opposite direction. It's always easier to use (a part of) an existing interface than implementing the whole interface on the other side and fitting the needs of all existing applications which want to use it.ThomasOK wrote:Apple obviously has the interface part of streaming audio down so why re-invent the wheel?
If Apple has any interest in standardisation of their stuff, they would document the AE communication protocol, ALAC, AAC, give away example source files, support the Linux community and so on. But they do not and in my eyes this shows clearly that Apple is not one inch interested in that - and therefore it would IMHO be a very bad decision to base own products on that.
Beside this I would like to ask the question "why re-invent the wheel?" to Apple itself. Why did they re-invent the wheel instead of using existing standards?
Axel