A MP3-format hifi-console

Which MP3-format hifi-consoles are on the market? You know those harddisks you can connect to your hifi-installation.

Where to buy?

thx

I think that you might be asking the wrong people. MP3 is more of a lo-fi media. In fact I don't even own a single MP3 song or player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beckman

I think that you might be asking the wrong people. MP3 is more of a lo-fi media. In fact I don't even own a single MP3 song or player.

---

Sounds like something Thurston Howell III would say. You obviously know nothing about how good mp3, Ogg, wma or a number of other compressed format can sound. Instead of answering an innocent question with snide derision why not just not reply at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stereophonicfan

Which MP3-format hifi-consoles are on the market? You know those harddisks you can connect to your hifi-installation.

Where to buy?

thx

---

There are a lot of such devices on the market now but they're really not a cost effective way to go. I'd recommend a Rio Karma. It's technically a portable but it sits in a cradle and can be connected to an ethernet network or connected directly to your receiver/preamp via rca to rca cables. The results are definately hifi if the source files are high quality. Don't listen to the naysayers. They are living in denial. The quality of digital music and hardware has become extrordinarily high in the last couple of years. TYough to take if you've invested many thousands of dollars in yesterday's tech.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by plextor guy

Sounds like something Thurston Howell III would say. You obviously know nothing about how good mp3, Ogg, wma or a number of other compressed format can sound. Instead of answering an innocent question with snide derision why not just not reply at all.

---

I appolgize for my remarks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stereophonicfan

Which MP3-format hifi-consoles are on the market? You know those harddisks you can connect to your hifi-installation.

Where to buy?

thx

---

As far as I know, all availble prebuilt harddisk based consoles are way overpriced. If you are slightly computer savvy, you can easily build a cheap MP3 server yourself that will rival all available consoles. I built mine for $800 and it doubles as a mail server and an extra internet browser. It's also more quiet than my Tivo. Here are the specs:

Athlon XP 2200 CPU with 512MB RAM
250GB HD
M-Audio sound card with coaxial output
super silent powersupply and CPU fan
hard disk enclosure
Cooler Master home theater computer case

Connected to my home stereo with Acoustic Zen Silver Photon coaxial cable.

My system:
Rotel RSP-1066 preamp
Rotel RMB-1075 amp
B&W 602 L/R
B&W ASW 675 sub
Acoustic Zen Satori speaker cables

I ripped all my CDs into uncompressed WAV files and store it on the computer, which I play with Music Match Jukebox. I also have a IR transmitter on the computer so that I can use my programmable remote to control the jukebox program. That last part is more involved, but is pretty much optional. I am very happy with my setup and I don't even own a CD player anymore. The nice part is that if I run out of space, I just add another harddisk myself and can basically have a terabyte of storage space if I want for another $800.

Hope this helps. If you are interested and need help, I'll be glad to show you how to do it.

Paul.

"There are a lot of such devices on the market now but they're really not a cost effective way to go. I'd recommend a Rio Karma. It's technically a portable but it sits in a cradle and can be connected to an ethernet network or connected directly to your receiver/preamp via rca to rca cables. The results are definately hifi if the source files are high quality. Don't listen to the naysayers. They are living in denial. The quality of digital music and hardware has become extrordinarily high in the last couple of years. TYough to take if you've invested many thousands of dollars in yesterday's tech."Well plextor when you are talking about the many thousands of dollars invested you must be talking about my stock investments. They have dropped faster in price than any stereo component that I have purchased.

I will admit that I now very little to nothing about the new and constant changing technologies that have been coming out lately. I do recognize the value and convenience of MP3 and other newer technologies. However, why do you believe that I have become mad or annoyed with my ancient technologies. I still enjoy playing my shiny black disk and have no desire to replace or throw it out. If I bought every new technology that came out I would have many dollars in equipment that I may or may not use. Only got into CD 6 years ago, maybe I am slow or not as impressed as the experts say I should be.

What would more helpful for me and most likely many others is the positives and negatives of these new technologies. Not all can be the best, what are the differences between ogg and wma or any of the other new technologies. This is the first I have heard of ogg or wma but I will admit that I do not make an effort to keep up with all the new formats.

I just look back at the cost of my computers and software that I have bought to do my job. About this time saving issue that computers are suppose to bring us is not quite true. Although it may have saved time in one aspect it cost me more in the long run, as I am required to do more. Sometimes this extra work has value and can be justified but at other times it just looks like extra work. Boy do I use a lot of paper nowadays probably should be planting a few acres of trees a year to ensure that I do not run out.

I do have interest in new technologies but I am not always convinced that newer is better. But on the other side it becomes annoying that because I use vinyl that I am wrong. I sure like the convenience of CD’s but still have a preference for vinyl. The young keep telling me I am a dinosaur because you must keep up with the newest technologies. Do you work for the recording industry and are trying to get me to upgrade so that I have to replace all my music.

Just think if I had bought each new technology that came out I would have a lot of equipment sitting on the shelf. Please tell me what is new, what you have seen that appears better, but get off this bit about how bad my vinyl is because if that is your only argument I do not need to read more.

Enjoy the music because that what it is all about.

I would go with what Paul suggested earlier. Just build a small computer to use for this. It's cheaper, and works just as good. In fact, I think I would RATHER do that so that I could just add another hard drive when I needed more space.

I usually just run my stuff straight out of my iBook's headphone jack (converting it to RCA). Not exactly HI-FI...but it doesn't sound too bad on a good system.

On a side note, for better sound quality, you might go with a different format, such as AAC or so. I think I read an article where someone done a blind test with the same songs encoded in MP3, AAC, and WMA. Those tested continually chose AAC over the other two, and they chose WMA more often than MP3. MP3 is actually about the worst sounding of the new-age formats. So before you do anything, look into that.

PS: Don't listen to the folks who tell you digital music can't sound good. It can sound damn good, if you encode it right and play it back though a good system.

If you care about sound quality and have spent more than say, $200-$300 on audio equipment, (If you have anything better than a high end boombox) there is only one option:

FLAC

Why purposely cut out significant portions of the source with a lossy format when you have spent money on speakers and amps to reproduce those portions of the music?

FLAC...hrmmm...I gotta look into that. :eek: Thanks.

But as for the whole digital music world, it's just cool to have my entire music collection sitting all in one little "program" where I can just type in what I want to hear and smack the enter key to hear it, instantly. No waiting for a CD changer to shuffle through my disks, no looking through a rack of disks by hand to pick out what I want. Just type it in, and it's there. And for that...I'm willing to sacrifice a little bit of quality. When I want perfection however, I'll put the CD in.

I guess it's a "next-generation" thing. ;)

Over a year ago, I was used to listening to my CD player most of the time... changing CD's every now and then to listen to what I want to hear... about 15 songs at a time.

Now, with my new computer with a simple optical audio output... I listen to my entire 4000 song music collection all at once... build playlists, or put everything in one Winamp program in shuffle mode, changing songs within split seconds at a time...

With my ATI capture card it comes with a USB wireless remote control... that you can control ANYWHERE in the house... even from outside, there's no need to point the remote at the remote receiver. The quality is practically much the same depending what format you prefer of course, and the convenience surpasses everything including a 400 disc CD changer that takes TIME to change through discs.

This is by all means the best method for anyone who has a computer with a digital audio output and a receiver with digital inputs (even if you don't have digital connections, an analog "headphone RCA cord" will work as well through your soundcard's speaker output). Heck you don't even need a preamplifier as you can find a good software one to integrate with your computer and audio program (like Winamp).

i always wondered...is there a difference in decoding with different programs or platforms (meaning intel vs AMD vs Mac)

When I want music for background noise I listen to FM radio, may it be rock classical or whatever. Instead of 4000 songs this gives me an unlimited amount of music. However when I am sitting in front of my speakers I use CD's or analog records. I do understand the convenience of computer music but it does not meet the quality of my CD's and records.

Many times I have heard like CD quality, almost as good, virtually indistinguishable from CD’s. Note the words like or almost, if it was as good or better I am sure the manufacture would say so. I definitely would state CD quality if it was as good but use words like or almost if it was not. Both MP3 and CD’s have used the words like or almost there is a reason for this.

There is no doubt in my mind that it is just a matter of time before computer music matches and surpasses that of CD quality. When this day arrives I may look at using the latest technologies. This day may be closer than I think but it has not arrived as fast as the computer industry has stated.

Just look at when digital photography became available for the public. Many people purchased digital cameras only to be greatly disappointed. I too looked at this new format but just laughed and walked away when I saw them using cheap plastic lens. Ah yes, all the computer experts told me this was not important as the software will more than correct for this problem. Yep garbage in still means garbage out and this does not change with software. Next it was you only need 1 million pixels than two to three and then 5 million pixels. Today cameras with 4 to 5 million pixels are hot consumer products and hence why the year 2003 became the first year that digital cameras have outsold film cameras. Apparently cameras with 11 million pixels match the color accuracy of film cameras. So just like digital cameras digital music is here to say and it is just a matter of time before it meets and surpasses the standard that I am looking for.

Just like the convenience of CD’s, which has great market appeal hence why CD’s took off and replaced records. Most people that tell me CD’s are the only way to go and then they start quoting the specifications. What I find odd is that I still have more cassettes than they have CD’s. Like I said it is just a matter of time and that day may already be here or it is just around the corner. There is a difference between quality and convenience, when the day arrives it will be a bonus for the consumer.

For those that tell me computers are the only way to go because the music is free may or may not be thieves. When an artist or company makes their product free and available to the public this is a free product. However when you down load music so that you do not have to pay for it I consider this as theft. Pay for your downloaded music there is not a problem with this and is acceptable. Don’t get me wrong computers have changed our lives maybe not all for the better but I will take the good with the bad since the good outweighs the bad.

Enjoy your music no matter what format you listen to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happy ears

When I want music for background noise I listen to FM radio, may it be rock classical or whatever. Instead of 4000 songs this gives me an unlimited amount of music. However when I am sitting in front of my speakers I use CD's or analog records. I do understand the convenience of computer music but it does not meet the quality of my CD's and records.

---

I'll have to take exception to that. I think a properly configured computer can sound as good as a typical consumer CD player and probably most higher-end CD players. Case in point is the M-Audio Revolution on my computer. For those not familiar with M-Audio, they're known mainly as a pro audio company that makes digital mastering equipment for studios. While sound quality is certainly not entirely definable by specs alone, those for the M-Audio Revolution is at least par with some of the high-end equipment out there. For example: dynamic range 106dB, signal to noise ratio 107dB, THD 0.003%, with 24bit 192kHz audio playback. And this is from a $100 sound card.

Using a coaxial ouput and uncompressed WAV files, there's a straight digital path from the source to the preamp using the same information as on a CD, so I don't see where the quality of the sound might be degraded just because it's from a computer. If you're talking about a compressed audio format like MP3 or WMA, then I can agree, but with hard disk prices being so cheap nowadays, it really makes no sense to listen to MP3's unless you're downloading most of your music.

Paul.

I fully understand and yes, using uncompressed format will be a big plus over MP3 that I have heard. However my knowledge of the newest formats is non-to nil but it is coming. Glad to hear that we are there but again what has it taken 10 years plus of people telling me computers are better than stereos. Just like CD’s both in players and the disks themselves, which have continuously improved. Funny how this new perfect technologies take a decade to be perfected.

Yes hard drives are cheap but ask my friend what he paid for his first hard drive. Today's youth will tell him that they can buy a computer for that much money. One thing I find annoying is being told over and over that computers are cheaper and better than stereos. In last six years I have spent more on computers than most people spend on a stereo or home theatre. Never had a two-year-old stereo burn out when powering up but I guess it can happen to. My CD or record player has not become obsolete due to new software requirements. Although I understand the convenience and that the technology will or has reached a standard that will put a smile on my face people seam to under estimate the true cost of computers.

My brother laughed when I told him that I used a CD recorder instead of a computer to make CD’s. I did this for two reasons, first they are in different rooms nobody can use the computer when I’m blasting my music. As well at the time I bought the CD recorder I felt it did a better job than anyone’s computer did, but again time has passed and things may have changed. When my brother played one of my CD’s all he said was that it did make a better copy than his computer did and at the time he had the latest and best. But again a few years have passed and what was new is now old.

Maybe I am just an old fart and keep using products for what they where originally designed for. My laptop has a DVD player, yep it plays DVD movies but why would I watch a movie by myself when we all can watch it on the TV. DVD players in a laptop are not obsolete technology it is not using technology for its best use and strength. That overpriced Sony TV sure looks good, big but good. I also understand that many will have to make a choice on what they buy and I will admit that dollar for dollar a computer can be a stereo or a TV and even a computer. But for myself it would be stereo then TV followed by a computer, my wife would say you do not need a stereo as the kitchen has a AM/FM CD clock radio that does it all. For washing the dished no problem but for me listening to music is a hobby and an activity. Everyone has there personal preferences and when those little computers surpass my Vision speakers and stereo components I may have to rethink it.

Enjoy the music

It isn't necessary to spend a fortune on a computer based-audio system. Far from it and when you factor in an easy upgrade path computers are a lot more cost effective. The technology to reproduce sound is largely confined to the sound card so if playback is your primary focus just about any pentium II class or higher machine will do. I say PII because some cards rely on the computer's cpu, the m-audio revolution for example. The trick is to keep the computer quiet but thanks to companies like Zalman and Seagate, noiselss pc's are now a reality. Hard drives keep getting larger and less expensive. 300GB = 400+ uncompressed CD's or roughly ~1200 cd's using minimal compression. Instant access to any song via your choice of software preamps (so to speak). And on and on. It would be fair to say that dedicated preamps are obsolete. Receivers are still viable but only because they are convenient.

True, hard drives are getting more and more quiet and sound cards are becoming more advanced, except the circuitry of a computer still provides more noise than does an amplifier/preamp combo. Also, computers, although they are becoming faster, they are also becoming louder. Especially if you have something like a first generation GeForce FX card with that blower attached. Yes, its a not a fan! It's a rotory blower. Imagine all the noise that produces.

For casual use it's great! I like playing music on my computer, but only for the convience of it. But if I were to enjoy to it closely, I would want to turn off the computer (the fan is too annoying) and turn on something else.

Mind you, it's a great budget item. In fact, I started off with computer music with a pair of altec lansings when I was in grade 9. Of course, this stuff is several years overdue and its time for me to upgrade.

But if you really wanna run everything from a computer, I would suggest you get a very quiet one.

Apple G3, some of these babies dont even need a fan to run so they are superquiet.
Apple G5 - 9 fans separated into 4 separate heat sectors running at low speed giving quiet 64-bit performance and even comes with an pci-X slot (maybe for future even better audio cards?)
PC? THEY'RE ALL NOISY (unless you get a liquid nitrogen cooling system...or a fridge)

Noise is definitely a problem with many current pc's but it's easy to piece together a quiet one. As quiet as my G4 iMac.

I have a Sony Vaio PC (RX-860) which is amongst the QUIETEST PC's I've ever heard... Equiped with a Seagate Harddrive as the previous poster stated they are very quiet... I just happened to upgrade to a new computer and found out how seriously well it integrates into my system.

I do have to say one thing...
A digital connection would be far better than an analog one... as the previous poster stated, can cause some "noise" when transfered to any receiver or amp... A digital output connection to your digital capable receiver gives you zero distortions you might receive from your computer...

I seriously suggest anyone to listen to their mp3s (or any digital computer format) through some digital sound processors available for programs like Winamp. They are far superior enhancers compared to any standard 'booster equalizer'

For a digital enthusiast, I seriously recommend anyone to try some DSP Winamp plugin's like Octimax, DFX, or Izotope Ozone... each have different sound quality characteristics you may be suprised from what you hear. Izotope is tailored to even the vintage audio enthusiast (and those who like the sound of tube amplifiers and analog audio, this one emulates the quality of just that).

sorry, I was exaggerating a bit too much there.
However, the 2 comps i mentioned above are probably the most quiet i have experienced. The G5, although a better processor than any of the G4s is considerably quieter, due to its variable fan speed and engineered flow paths through 9 fans. Some PCs can be soft, but they are generally louder since their clock speed requires them to use about 100W more than mac. Of course, lots of that 100W goes to heat, which needs to be dissipated through the use of a fan