| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
January 14, 2008 - 6:07am
#1
Over Priced (High End) Music Servers
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
Bingo!
What you're paying for in these music servers are:
Brand names
Nice interface that does not require you to be a computer maven to operate (at least in theory).
I agree with you 100% though that if you're computer literate, there is absolutely no value in any of these packaged solutions.
Nice C.E.S. wrap up on the subject by JI.
Never under estimate big money. Plasmas rule! Large music server touch screens will impress friends and guests. Folks that pay these prices also pay to have mundane tasks like ripping music done by others. These are the fortunate few that know music sounds better when loaded by the butler wearing white gloves!
The nonsense started with the $20,000 Linn. We haven
Yeah, but, what amazing music the CD12 produced. Its sound was so liquid, smooth and refined. At the time, it seemed to me it made the top of the line Meridian upsampling behemoth sound like it was playing sandpaper.
Thanks for the link.
I've been rewatching some of the episodes from the Wooster and Jeeves BBC produced TV series from the early 1990's and your reference to the butler cracked me up. Only thing is that it would have been Jeeves and not Wooster who knew what good sound was.
It's amazing to me that only a few of these packaged server/player/DAC solutions support hi-rez audio at sample rates of at least 88.2 kHz and word size of at least 24-bits. And I'm not aware of any that support more than 2 channels. All this functionality can easily be had in PC-based systems (with the appropriate sound card). But, like many of you out there, I'm not willing to include and expensive, difficult to maintain, general purpose PC in my entertainment system. There is a significant opportunity for a hardware vendor to offer a networked device that will allow playback of hi-rez, multichannel audio. One fairly simple implementation would be to have a networked device that could decode the content into uncompressed PCM and output that over HDMI. There are a number of recently introduced A/V processor/receivers that could render that content. Or, just include that capability in the processor/receiver. Such a device could be DLNA compliant to allow connection to any DLNA media server.
Jazzfan,
Bravo, but let's talk even cheaper
Let's assume everyone has a computer already.
Tp =1,600
500 GIG external HD with USB2 99.00 x 2 for a backup= 198.00
router 50.00
new slim remote which has a screen 299.00 with album art etc.
About 2,147.00
any old balanced ic's at 100.00 or so
Oh yea, a new Jetta diesel with all the money saved :-)
That's all well and good but you forgot the gold plated, directional, pure copper custom USB cables to connect the external hard drives to the computer plus the fully shielded, powered USB port, and the custom built power supplies for the every piece of equipment. Also the deluxe air purifier and deionizer, since only with pure, clean and ion free air can one be assured that every bit of data transmitted over the local Wi-Fi network is picked up by the Transporter. (White paper available upon request.)
As you can see, the coming hard drive based music server systems will offer no shortage of opportunities for pricy high end tweaks.
I was discussing this trend toward networked audio with a good friend who happens to be seriously into tweaking, and he went into a panic over the concern that he would have to replace all the CAT5 in his house with Transparent.
CAT5, how quaint. Wireless is the way to go, hence the purified and deionized air. And I almost forgot all the reflective panels one will need to help direct the Wi-Fi waves to the shortest possible path of travel. Ah, the sweet smell of snake oil
Is that true on the street price for a new Transporter, and if so, where?
Try doing a search via Google and Ebay - that's how I found mine for around $1,600.
From whom did you buy it?
Search ebay, it's 1599.00 with free shipping.
That is one great deal.
I had previously searched Google and didn't find anything under list. Strangely, there were several vendors selling them above list (buy.com for example). I'll check out ebay.
And apparently no one wants to share their find either.
I entered "transporter" in the search field at eBay and selected Consumer Electronics as the category. Here's the link.
As far as I am concerned I am buying the new "duet" coming out from slimdevices with their new remote control a la Sonos.
Their new remote is indeed cute . . . at least in pictures.
The problem with the Duet however is that the sound device is the same as the Squeezebox; only 44.1 and 48kHz support.
Apparently the Duet remote will be available as a stand alone product and will work with all Squeezeboxes and Transporters.
I still don't get all the fascination with album cover art. My iPod shows album cover art and looking at the tiny album cover on the small little iPod screen tells me absolutely nothing about the music playing. I would prefer a simple text display listing songs, composers, personnel and recording information. And that's the reason that when I'm playing music through my Transporter I like to keep a laptop computer handy so that I can go online to the All Music Guide and look up the information on the album playing.
Sooloos offers that, but at a high price. However, the company has plans of introducing several lower-cost iterations of the product in the near future.
I am with you. I adore having good album notes and information, but having cover art on a portable player or remote is useless eye-candy at best.
I was just discussing this with a friend last night. His is an all digital system starting with a large NAS and ending with a pair of TacT digital amplifiers. Only the output from the amps is analog. Even though he is a programmer, has never ending faith in digital and is using Slim Devices equipment he also sees no need for cover art.
He misses the physicality of location however; that is, knowing that the CD you want to listen to is on the third shelf from the left, second row. Even with a large collection this can be quicker and easier than finding it on a server.
Finding it on the server takes the next mental steps of mentally recalling what the CD is - rather than just "knowing".
After living with my hard drive based music system (and ONLY that music system) for going on something like 5 months, I know exactly what you mean. Nonetheless when I'm back in the US and faced with my rather large vinyl and CD based music system I still don't get a chance to hear everything that I might like to hear since pouring over that collection looking for "something I haven't heard in a while" can be an arduous task.
It goes something like this:
Having all one's music stored in less than one square foot of space: Wonderful
Playing a given selection without having to get up, look of the LP/CD, clean LP, clean stylus, put on record clamp, etc: Wonderful
Never having to get up and refile (or worse yet, misfile) all the LPs and CDs taken out after a long listening session: Wonderful
Not having one's music collection exposed to the prying eyes and hands of friends and relatives, especially during parties: Wonderful
Being able to search for all one's "Miles Davis" selections without having to look through various LPs, CDs, SACDs, etc.: Wonderful
Not having the LP/CD cover and liner notes handy to look at: Unfortunate
I think this depends on what server you're using, and how well you understand it. Watching the Sooloos guys navigate through their touch screen, for instance, I have no doubt that that "physicality of location" exists.
Point taken, but my comment just on this line:
"Not having one's music collection exposed to the prying eyes and hands of friends and relatives, especially during parties"
I LIKE my friends and relatives to look at, handle, appreciate, ask about, and ask for play of my music collection. The physical "existence" is good in this case.
Okay, I know I'm starting to sound like a broken record (heh), but I just want to share this with you:
The guys at Sooloos, and others like them, are also aware of this. They emphasized the fact that their server was created during many late nights of parties, where they had friends coming over specifically to share music. The Sooloos system is the product of all of these concerns you guys are mentioning, and other similar systems will follow, I think.
You have to play with a good server before you can understand the advantages.
"but having cover art on a portable player or remote is useless eye-candy at best. "
Well... not for me. Many times I don't even know what the album title is so much as "that cover with those great songs, etc." In fact given that I have a couple thousand albums (between CD and LPs) often it's the cover art that reminds me of what songs are on the album. In addition it gives me a quick emotional reference to how I felt about the album in general. That's actually why I only recently started using iTunes, because they now have a nice cover art flip-book type of display. I look at a list of songs or albums and often my eyes sort of glaze over.
On the other hand I agree having them all in a smaller space can be really handy. My record and CD storage is in two adjacent rooms due to the volume and I'm sure quite a few great albums get missed due to this fact.
I also love this feature. The new iPods also use it, and I'm jealous of anyone who owns one.
Like any area of hobbies, there will be price points all over the map, and features that suit certain people--some products are just not for all people. There will always be the well informed hunters who will seek out all the necessary info and get something of high quality at a fraction of the cost of a nearly comparable item someone else is offering. Some people don't want to do the homework. Maybe a music server that costs 3x what you can build for yourself, or 7.5x what you're willing to spend just isn't for you. Companies charge what they charge for lots of reasons: R&D, health insurance for employees, you name it... maybe they can't even justify it, but, it doesn't matter. Some products might offer just the right features one seeks. I recently ended up buying a NOS phone because nothing new did something simply enough (thankfully, the phone I got happened to be reasonably cheap).
I wrestle with the same issues when it comes to rare books. Something missing from my collection might've cost $3.50 in 1962. Maybe I could wait and find a copy in a thrift store for 50 cents--it might take years to find any copy, let alone one in desirable condition. Maybe I could pay $200.00 to any of 15 dealers who have flawed copies of this title. Or maybe I would opt to lay out $1000.00 to $1500.00 to the 2 dealers who have nearly flawless copies to offer. The most expensive copies might seem ridiculous, but, no one else is offering quite the same book.
I suspect that whether one wants/needs cover art as part of the music selection process reflects how our individual minds work. That is, visual versus concepetual thinkers, etc.
When I made my initial comment I forgot about you guys that sort your CDs, LPs and books by color.
Drobos have come up a couple of times. What's neat about them? From my quick glance, they look like NAS. Is there anything more to it?
I'm not certain, but, yes, I think so.
I believe that Sooloos uses the All Music Guide database for their information so it shouldn't be to hard check out some of my more obscure titles against the AMG information.
Yes, Sooloos uses AMG and two other databases, in case AMG doesn't have the info. When we asked the Sooloos guys about it, they said it was very, very rare that they came across an album that didn't exist in one of the three databases.
That depends on what you mean by "very, very rare."
Kal
Oh, Kal. That depends on what you mean by "mean."
While we could go on for quite some time debating whether or not the Sooloos will be able to find cover art for each and every CD in one's collection this little debate is really just a side track from the main issue.
And the main issue is that all the so called "audiophile"/high end music servers, in addition to being relatively expensive, fail the one basic test for any piece of audio equipment with high end aspirations - they don't sound all that good. And that's really what's important.
This sad situation is made even worse by the fact that several of these wannabe "high end" music servers are striving to be all-in-one solutions when, in fact, one would still need to purchase an external DAC to obtain true "high end" sound.
So once again I ask: why is it that a manufacturer of computer products (Logitech/Slim Devices) can get it "right" with the Transporter while the high end audio companies (McIntosh and Arcam) get it "wrong"? And not only do they get it "wrong" but they it "wrong" in the one area where they should know better, i.e. how the product sounds.
So yes, I understand that many, many people don't have or are unwilling or unable to learn the computer skills required to assemble a complete music server system from the ground up and that many of these people will be more than willing to pay a premium for a no-brainer all-in-one music server solution but that still does not excuse the lack of a good DAC within any of these products.
I should also add that only in Stereophile's review of the McIntosh music server was the less than stellar performance of the onboard DAC given a thorough trashing, with Wes Philips even going as far as stating that the same level of sonic performance could be had for much less by using a Squeezebox and an external DAC.
This is indeed an excellent question.
Perhaps the answer lies in part because the resulting product feels so much like a computer and this hangs them up. It shouldn't, a CDP also feels a bit like a computer.
Similarly however, I would like an explanation as to why the Transporter is $2,000.00. There are many excellent sounding DACs the retail for about $1,000.00. The wireless reception and display of the Transporter is not that expensive (see, for example, SlimDevices own Squeezebox for $299.00). Where is the extra money going?
Yeah, kudos to Wes for that comment.
I was wondering the same thing about the Transporter since its introduction. The EMU 0404 uses the same DAC (along with a very good ADC) for a tenth the price. This page has a picture of the TP with the cover off showing the wide open spaces.
Interesting article. He sure stuffs a lot of stuff into that skinny box.
Perhaps the "extra money" repays a costly R&D commitment? With $100,000 Turntables out there I don't hold anything against Slim Devices. Would we take the Transporter seriously if it cost less? Sure. Please let us prove it Logitech.
Yes, but excellent $1k DACs have essentially all these things as well, except for the display. Of course, the Transporter also has a basic wireless receiver.
Thus, I would expect the Transporter to be priced at about $1,500.00 or a tad less.
I don't begrudge Logitech however for its pricing. It is fully entitled to make a profit.
I am also certain that the empty space is a function of the form. However, displays can radiate a good bit of noise and the physical separation may be a good thing.
And I paid $1,600 or a tad more for my Transporter. Pretty close.
What I'd like to see is a Transporter with full line level pre-amp functionality. Consider the pc or NAS as just another source component, albeit a wireless one. How sweet would that be?
Transporter has 4 digital inputs and outputs a remote and a wordclock in.
Not too bad for it's 1,600.00 street price.
So it can take a CDT or CDP with digital out.
I run TP straight to my amp. The only time I use my pre-amp is for vinyl.
I heard a lot of these Music Servers at CES, and frankly most all of them miss the point and don't sound very good either. There is a lot of proprietary nonsense involved in a lot of them too, like they can do something entirely new in this area.
I did hear one unit, only taking pre-orders I think, which did things a bit differently. They were not selling a "BOX" but a custom-built system with hand-picked parts, etc. Said it took them a year of testing individual components to see what actually worked best. While pricing was in line with the others, it used an outstanding external DAC along with some DSPs I think to really do some damage. Ripped CDs sounded very analog and they were even able to rip some Vinyl so that it sounded better than straight off the table - perhaps some digital audio processing?
Whatever, it is worth a few bucks to have someone do the research, cut through the crap and actually put together a unit which will deliver. Don't care about proprietary software or hardware unless it can sound MUCH better than this thing. Using standard pieces and software means I'm so much less tied into them as a company down the road and can grow this thing without having to go into debt.
In the end, of the couple of dozen or so units I heard, this one was by far the best, and very different from the others. Let me see if I can find that card...