So if i understand it right, for 1st gen streamers latency is a problem because the buffer is too small, and at the same time it is recommended to only stream WAV instead of FLAC because the noise floor of the DAC is too high (mentioned in other threads)? While WAV requires a lot more buffering?
That is really mind boggling…
To be fair, the original streaming platform was designed in around 2006-08 and predates even lossy streaming subscription stevices, so the small buffer was fine for their intended use with local streaming. It took Naim a lot of effort to get lossless streaming to the relatively reliable state it now has on these older streamers.
The issue with Tidal was very variable depending on your location, your ISP, and the location of the particular Tidal server that was playing the track you selected. Multiple hops around the globe would, I guess, cause considerably more delay that you would see if you ping with something like a speed test app.
Well yeah ok that’s a while ago.
It should just not have any bearing on performance anymore for any modern equipment.
Just as a little experiment I ran speed test on my own 2 bar 4G signal I have when I switch off WiFi.
I get 55ms ping and 14.7 Mbps. That’s translates to 1.8MBps. As a typical lossless wav averages 10 Megabytes per minute, the first minute of music should be downloaded in around 5 - 6 seconds. Making the latency obsolete.
So I get your point for the ancient hardware but it should not impact anything modern.
I was streaming 320kb MP3’s just fine over the internet (Napster/Audiogalaxy) in 2001 with a $175 Squeezebox and a crappy ADSL connection. The premise that in 2006-2008 a $5000-10000 Naim device wouldn’t be able to stream the same file or a 1000-1500kbit/s FLAC without running into problems just feels a bit contrived really.
I’ve never had any significant issues streaming Tidal via the Naim App to a QB and ND5XS. I moved to Bubble for improved sound quality and from there to Roon.
WAV is generally best with 1st gen streamers as decoding FLAC on the streamer may generate electrical noise. Nowt to do with the noise floor of the DAC as I don’t use it and WAV was clearly superior.
Think it’s important here to put the different effects into perfectieve.
The OP had a question about mp3.
So already in the thread we have SQ differences because of:
For the OP it should be noted that 1 is gigantic, 2 is small and 3 minute.
Hi Richard
Bit off topic here but I see you mention you play your ripped CDs in CORE via nDAC
I too have above components but in different locations and thinking of bringing them together . However I’m thinking is it better to have core/atom combo or core/ndac/nait 2 combo?
Thoughts greatly appreciated Richard
Happy festive season
Bevan
It would be much better to rip them again if possible but I have a few mp3s in my collection and I’m often surprised how good they sound. There’s been a few times where I’ve had to go back and check the file type.
With the benefit of hindsight, Naim might perhaps have done things differently, although in 2001 Napster was neither legal nor lossless, so wouldn’t have been on their radar.
Online streaming services that offered real HiFi sound quality and had enough presence in the marketplace to be worth supporting for a relatively small company like Naim didn’t come until much later. So the 1st gen. streamers were designed for those who wanted to rip their CDs, or perhaps buy downloads that were then gaining in popularity until the streaming services started to take over.
The Core has a quality SPDIF out which would work well with the NDAC, as I dare say Richard would confirm. The Atom is a great all-in-one player, but it’s no match for the NDAC as a source.
I think that is for streaming from your own local store, not streaming online, whereas the latency/buffering issue relates to online streaming not from your own store.
Yes I find the same thing. These Dacs we have make MP3s sound unbelievably good most of the time.
They’re not my normal source, of course, but they sound good when I put a stick in the front of the NDS.
Some sound pretty good (not all) through my 272, it’s a credit to Naim that they play so well.
I’ve actually tried the Core + DAC into a NAIT 2 combination, and it’s really good. I’ve not directly compared against the ATOM but I’d be surprised if the NAIT combo wasn’t comfortably ahead. Of course, the ATOM is a lot more flexible, offering a whole host of streaming services and all in one neat box. However, if you just want to replay your ripped or downloaded music collection then the Core + DAC and NAIT 2 would be my choice purely on performance grounds. And the DAC is flexible too with plenty of inputs, so you could always add extra streaming sources, or even a CD transport should you wish.
Thanks so much for your advice Richard really appreciated, confirmed my thoughts
I met you many years ago when you were here in Sydney visiting Harry and Norman at Audio Genesis.
Cheers
Bevan
Bevan, thanks for the memory. I enjoyed visiting Harry and Norman, they have a lovely shop and they were always excellent hosts.
I don’t think that’s correct IB, in a technical sense there is no difference between streaming a file locally or over the internet. In both cases the streaming device connects to a certain a IP-address, and the only difference is the range of the addresses (192.* or 10.* for LAN, other numbers for WAN).
So for instance for locally streaming a WAV:
Latency: 10ms
WAV bitrate: 1411kbit/s (fixed)
This means that if you have a buffer of 1 Megabyte, circa 6 seconds of audio can be buffered. Somewhere in those 6 seconds the streamer can connect to the source and get more bytes, and each time it does it will need to wait 10ms before the bits come back.
For internet streaming a FLAC:
Latency: 20-200ms
FLAC bitrate: 1 - 1411kbit/s (variable)
This means that with the same 1 Megabyte buffer, roughly double the amount of audio (12 seconds) can be buffered.
I don’t know how large the buffer is on 1st gen Naim streamers, but with a 1MB buffer this means you would have 12 seconds before new data needs to come in, a 20ms latency would be negligible in that regard. Even a 200ms latency which was sometimes the case on ADSL connections circa 2000 shouldn’t be a problem.
Considering the price of the 1st gen streamers, if any of them had less than a 1MB buffer i think that would be a serious design flaw. These devices used shared (RAM) memory for buffering so the cost of the memory would not have been a factor.
Exactly my opinion too. I sometimes see things on the forum that make me raise an eyebrow. Having to restart entire networks when a streamer chokes, separating mesh networks to make something work with WiFi and this. At the cost of these devices? I work daily with devices a fraction of the cost that are rock solid tech.
Not trying to say that that makes all Naim networking equipment bad, just saying that it sometimes feels like a different world here.
In fact I have a suspicion that the issues often lie with a single greater networking issue where the eventual fix becomes a blanket solution for all issues even if it is overkill. Cause as you say if they did not throw in more than 1MB buffer into something of that stature it leaves me solidly confused.
Thank you for that. I have tried what @Pete_the_painter suggested and actually the mp3 do not sound that bad! But they sound a bit ‘cloudy’ if I can say like this. It is interesting to compare local that I have ripped to Innuos with streamed. If you take the albums I have listened to so far (Modern Times by Bob Dylan) I cannot hear difference to my ear. But I will try different one’s to compare because like Richard Dane says there are lots factors.
Hello @litemotiv I am interested in your opinion on this, do you take that in that a pure technical sense, or can you hear difference? If you tried of course. Thank you. Because of course you are right that in theory by the time the info hits the DAC through digital transportation it doesn’t matter what the origin was. I think!
All the best.