New Music Servers from Cambridge Audio, Rotel, Marantz and Olive

[Ajani]

For anyone thinking about taking the plunge into music servers, there are now 4 new sub $1K options from Cambridge Audio, Rotel, Marantz and Olive.


Cambridge Audio has the $650 Sonata NP30 Network Music Player:

http://news.ecoustics.com/bbs/messag...81/654494.html


Rotel has the $1K RDG1520:

http://www.rotel.com/NA/Products/Pro...ils.htm?id=498


Marantz has the $800 NA7004:

http://us.marantz.com/Products/3298.asp


Olive has the $1K O3HD:

http://www.olive.us/products/music_s.../overview.html

[pixelthis]

HERES' my problem with music "servers". They do what a three year old hundred dollar computer can do as well.
Basically you are paying for looks. In some cases they might not be as versatile as
an older computer. I see computers with 1.8 gig processors selling for as little as a
hundred bucks in the paper all of the time. For five hundred (and thats splurging) you
can build one to spec, there are even horizontal baby ATX cases you can buy.
So who needs a "server"? My current PC can do the job just fine, better probably.

[GMichael]

Kapow! Pow pow pow!

[pixelthis]

AND SUPPORT for flac. Nice, but not the "amazing " advance the PR flak who wrote the article says it is, more like catching up, should have been done years ago. Guess they
got tired of being scared of the record companies, or maybe so much blood is being spilled
it hardly matters anymore.
The CAMBRIDGE is a nice "piece of kit" as the Brits say, but I THINK i'LL JUST ROLL MY OWN.
Pass.

[kevlarus]

HERES' my problem with music "servers". They do what a three year old hundred dollar computer can do as well.
Basically you are paying for looks. In some cases they might not be as versatile as
an older computer. I see computers with 1.8 gig processors selling for as little as a
hundred bucks in the paper all of the time. For five hundred (and thats splurging) you
can build one to spec, there are even horizontal baby ATX cases you can buy.
So who needs a "server"? My current PC can do the job just fine, better probably.

Too right. Even easier is if you have a wireless network and a blu-ray player wired/wireless so you can stream the music through the audio system from the PC. It's pretty sweet and not limited to music but can do movies/video as well.

$1000 for a PC (server) -- nope, wouldn't pay that these days

[Ajani]

Ummm Gents, the reason to consider any of those servers/streamers is not just convenience... a $300 Squeezebox Touch or a $50 used computer would make a convenient music server...

The issue is sound quality... I'd have to connect the Squeezebox/computer to a DAC to get decent sound... So IF the Marantz, Rotel, Cambridge, Olive units maintain the kind of sound quality those brands are known for, then you won't need a DAC to get good sound... Just plug them into your integrated amp (like a CD player) and listen to some sweet tunes...

My existing setup is a Squeezebox Classic ($300) connected to a Benchmark DAC1 ($1K) with an Audioquest digital cable ($30). So total = $1,330... Considering the reputation for sound quality of Marantz's cd players, the $800 NA7004 music server might sound just as good as my $1,330 setup (plus look a lot nicer - just one box)...

[recoveryone]

Ummm Gents, the reason to consider any of those servers/streamers is not just convenience... a $300 Squeezebox Touch or a $50 used computer would make a convenient music server...

The issue is sound quality... I'd have to connect the Squeezebox/computer to a DAC to get decent sound... So IF the Marantz, Rotel, Cambridge, Olive units maintain the kind of sound quality those brands are known for, then you won't need a DAC to get good sound... Just plug them into your integrated amp (like a CD player) and listen to some sweet tunes...

My existing setup is a Squeezebox Classic ($300) connected to a Benchmark DAC1 ($1K) with an Audioquest digital cable ($30). So total = $1,330... Considering the reputation for sound quality of Marantz's cd players, the $800 NA7004 music server might sound just as good as my $1,330 setup (plus look a lot nicer - just one box)...

Not sure what is the issue with your Squeezebox, the built in DAC's are on par with any mid-highend range system. It may be more of what type/format you have ripped your music. I did a side by side when I first purchased my Squeezebox 3/Classic and found that if you rip at a level of 320kps or higher you will be very hard press to tell the differences between the CD. That was a blind test sitting in the sweet spot, having someone else do the switching on the same album. But again to each his/her own, I say why not go complete full bore and get the Transport from SlimDevice/logicTech and that way you can say I have the best of the best. and it still will depend on the level of Kps you ripped the music any way, but have the comfort of knowing I have the best.

Oh and you still need that old computer with these new DAR's minus the olive one and that sales pitch you better get your boots on, cause its getting deep.

[Mr Peabody]

Do any of the others have storage like the Olive? Olive mentions holding 1500 CD's but I didn't notice any storage mentioned in the other descriptions.

[Ajani]

Do any of the others have storage like the Olive? Olive mentions holding 1500 CD's but I didn't notice any storage mentioned in the other descriptions.

None of the others have storage, though they all can read files from a USB hard-drive... So you could just buy a USB Hard-drive (really cheap) and use with them...

[Ajani]

Not sure what is the issue with your Squeezebox, the built in DAC's are on par with any mid-highend range system.

What mid-high end DAC have you compared it to? Based on both my own comparisons and all reviews I've read, the internal DAC is only on par with budget CD players... So nothing High end or even Mid level...

It may be more of what type/format you have ripped your music. I did a side by side when I first purchased my Squeezebox 3/Classic and found that if you rip at a level of 320kps or higher you will be very hard press to tell the differences between the CD. That was a blind test sitting in the sweet spot, having someone else do the switching on the same album. But again to each his/her own,

My music is ripped in Apple Lossless.

I say why not go complete full bore and get the Transport from SlimDevice/logicTech and that way you can say I have the best of the best. and it still will depend on the level of Kps you ripped the music any way, but have the comfort of knowing I have the best.

I could care less about the comfort of knowing I have the best... I am concerned with whether it sounds good to me... Also, the Transporter is not the best DAC in the world (though it is supposed to be very good)...

Oh and you still need that old computer with these new DAR's minus the olive one and that sales pitch you better get your boots on, cause its getting deep.

Ummm... OK....

[Feanor]

I'm ignorant about commercial streaming -- wish I knew more about it. I do know that my DLNA/UPnP-compliant Blu-ray will do some of that but I haven't given much thought to streaming movies. I don't know what's available in Canada at the moment though Netflix is here or will be shortly. Also, I have a $100 ASUS media player will do some of the same stuff as the Blu-ray. Right now I just use it to play videos stored on my Windows Home Server.

For serious listening on my stereo system I use a dedicated computer. This is an old Pentium 4 / WinXP machine with an M-Audio sound card and running Foobar2000 as music player. BTW, I nowadays prefer FLAC as a music format, but have plenty of stuff in other formats, including MP3 and ALAC, (Apple Lossless).

The long & short of it is I don't see myself getting one of these devices. The Cambridge looks as good as any as well as being cheapest. I have no interest in a device with built-in storage, such as the Olive, because I prefer to put in on the Windows server.

[Hyfi]

Do any of the others have storage like the Olive? Olive mentions holding 1500 CD's but I didn't notice any storage mentioned in the other descriptions.

With a 1 or 2 TB hard drive, you can rip way more CDs onto it in wav format and lose nothing from the original disk. With the price of Hard Drives these days, there is no real need to rip to a smaller file size accept for ipod type usage.

So a PC based server or even just a $200 2TB Mybook network drive streamed through a wireless blu ray player will work just the same except for the neat filing and playlist controls.

I actually like the look and convenience of the servers but can't justify buying one just to play my CDs without loading a CD into the player.

[E-Stat]

HERES' my problem with music "servers". They do what a three year old hundred dollar computer can do as well.

Actually, these models are simply "network players" (oops, the Olive is) and still require a back end server for music storage. These devices do, however, offer some advantages that others may find desirable. I use both approaches. Most of my CD library has been ripped and stored on my office computer. Since I use the computer's onboard DAC, it is hard wired via ten meter DIY 89259 interconnects to a Kenwood receiver left by the former owner of my house which powers a multi-room in ceiling music system. It works fine for background listening and works great for parties either inside or out by the back deck.

The first advantage of using a "network player" is that you don't necessarily have to have a desktop computer where you play music. I recently bought a Squeezebox Touch for the garage which leverages the content on that same office computer without having to put another computer in the garage. Also, you can place multiple SBs in other rooms all sharing the same library. The other advantage is they typically contain better DACs (units above) or allow for use with outboard DACs (which is what I do with the SB). The SB also supports USB storage (if you use a USB drive, you'll need an external power source) and SD cards for local storage. Very flexible.



rw

[E-Stat]

...so you can stream the music through the audio system from the PC.

Interesting. While my Samsung BR player can stream Pandora, it does not have the capability to access my music library even with network access. What model of player do you use? Presumably, like my Squeezebox, it works in conjunction with software you place on your music server.

rw

[kevlarus]

Interesting. While my Samsung BR player can stream Pandora, it does not have the capability to access my music library even with network access. What model of player do you use? Presumably, like my Squeezebox, it works in conjunction with software you place on your music server.

rw

Actually, I don't need any extra software on the computer side other than turning on media sharing in media player 10 (running XP). It's Sony's 570 blu player and I was pleasantly surprised that it could grab video/music from the desktop, which is actually in another room. It can handle mp3, wma and wav files. Haven't tried ripping a dvd to the computer and playing it from the player yet.

[E-Stat]

It's Sony's 570 blu player and I was pleasantly surprised that it could grab video/music from the desktop, which is actually in another room.

Cool. I don't listen to music where I watch movies so that wasn't a feature I was looking for. I prefer having my desktop located elsewhere, too.

rw

[recoveryone]

I wired my setup digital from source to output, so less chance of drop in signal in my main system. for the Squeezebox's I have upstairs they are connected via RCA to the AVR's and I do hear the difference. and that may be that the gear upstairs is just not as good as the main system (speakers and all) IMHO your setup on your squeezebox is being over processed unnecessarily, that why I brought up the comment about the transport. From your posting you feel it will never sound good enough unless it has a brand name that you respect. If you read the olive ad info it even says that it only rip to the level of 320kps and that is what I stated as being the starting point of matching a CD, some like apple lossless or Windows lossless, so these DAR don't do anything above or beyond what your squeezebox is capable of doing. As I read each ad info they didn't spend much time on the playback ability of ripped music, but focus more on their ability to play internet channels and services, Just an observation, may mean nothing. Also I notice that the olive only had RCA outputs.

Audio outputs (general)
- Digital and analog outputs
- All RCA connectors are gold-plated
- Volume control is provided for all outputs
- Multiple outputs may be used at the same time

Analog RCA outputs
- High fidelity Burr-Brown™ 24-bit DAC
- Two dedicated linear power regulators for DAC and line-out stages
- Full 6.0Vpp line-level signals
- Signal-to-noise ratio: over 100dB
- Total harmonic distortion: less than -93.5dB (0.002%)
Digital S/PDIF outputs
- Optical and coax digital connections
- Dedicated high-precision crystal oscillators (no PLL, no resampling)
- Standard IEC-958 (S/PDIF) encoding
- Optical connector: TOSLINK 660nm
- Coax connector: RCA, 500mVpp into 75 ohms
- Sample rates: 44.1Khz, 48Khz
- Audio format: linear PCM, 16 or 24 bits per sample
- Intrinsic jitter: less than 50ps (standard deviation)
Headphone output
- Standard 1/8" jack also functions as an IR blaster
- Minimum headphone impedance: 16 ohms
- Total harmonic distortion: less than 0.03%
- Left/right crosstalk attenuation: 92dB
Audio formats
- Lossless Formats (Apple Lossless, FLAC, WMA Lossless)
o "Bit-perfect" CD audio streaming, with reduced storage and bandwidth usage.
o Approximately 2:1 compression ratio
- Uncompressed formats (AIFF, WAV, PCM)
o Supports raw pass-through of uncompressed PCM audio formats
o Digital passthrough to S/PDIF for DTS
- Compressed formats (MP3, AAC, Ogg Vorbis, MP2, MusePack, WMA)
o MPEG decoding uses MAD software, widely regarded as the most accurate, most compatible MP3 decoder.
o High accuracy 24-bit synthesis
o Supports all MP3 data rates and sample rates, including VBR
o May be streamed in PCM (raw), MP3 (transcoded), or FLAC (transcoded) formats
o Sound Check and Replay Gain support for automatic volume control.
o Some formats may require additional software installation (e.g. QuickTime), depending on platform.
Internet Radio
- "Always-on" Internet Radio, powered by SqueezeNetwork, lets you tune in to Internet Radio streams even when the home PC is switched off.
- Quick selection from hundreds of Internet Radio streams offered by Slim Devices' partners.
- Internet Radio favorites can be saved in a playlist for easy access.
- Displays song title information during playback
- Support for MP3, Ogg Vorbis, and WMA formatted Internet Radio streams
Architecture
- 250 MHz 8-way multithreaded RISC processor
- "Pure software" SlimDSP™ architecture
- Field-upgradeable Xilinx CPLD
- 64Mb high-speed RAM
- 16Mb program flash
- Low-power design, all solid-state, fanless

I think Burr Brown Dac's are still considered mid to highend Dac's,

Aphanetworks.com review July 2007



I for one listen often to an internet channel (last.Fm), mainly to find more artist that I may like to download later to my old P4 900Mhz 320 gig external HD running XP pro.
Cost factor:

Computer.......................Free (picked it up from local church that was upgrading)
External HD...................$50 (table sale at Staples)
PCI wireless card...........$5.00 (On Ebay)

Unlimited music listening via internet and my own collection covering from Motown to last weeks top 10 (my kids)

Priceless

[Hyfi]

Cool. I don't listen to music where I watch movies so that wasn't a feature I was looking for. I prefer having my desktop located elsewhere, too.

rw

Ah, multiple PCs are in order. I have a main office with three PCs and a network 2TB drive upstairs, but also have a PC attached to my main livingroom rig that allows me to use my tv as a 42 inch monitor and wireless mouse and keyboard from the sofa. I can then watch AVI movies or any other network accessible media through my stereo, HT setup or PC.

[recoveryone]

didn't want you to think I'm totally bias, here more from the same article

In terms of audio performance, I've heard better from other devices than the analog side. I've streamed uncompressed WAV files as well as FLACs using the Squeezebox, and to this can be compared to the original CD containing the same track. Performance is fairly good, but the high frequencies did not come out as high as expected, nor did the lows come out as distinct and solid as it did over digital connection on the Squeezebox itself.
Digital, on the other hand, seems to be very good on the Squeezebox -- which is usually not too limited to the device itself, since built in DACs are much more complex than a digital connection (It gets converted the analog later anyway, but that's up to the DAC on your receiver and not the Squeezebox). The sound is sharp, layered, separated and distinct between each instrument and the vocals are nice and clear when compared to analog connection. Everything comes in and blends together smoothly into one smooth performance -- but then again, if you don't want to be limited to the performance of the DACs used in a $300 device, I personally would definitely go the route of digital -- through this, the bottleneck effect will be less prominent. I guess what that really matters is that it sounds 'clean' enough over digital.
Therefore, it would be definitely more preferable for a coaxial or optical cable to be included out of the box rather than a RCA analog cable in my opinion. After all, most people who buy the Squeezebox probably have a receiver with digital inputs!

In general, Slim Devices' Squeezebox is quite an excellent product. Setup is extremely easy and almost flawless; and it's easy to use and the features are nice -- it does what it's meant to do -- to stream music. Wireless performance is pretty good; I noticed no drops and to the end user signals are consistent

[pixelthis]

None of the others have storage, though they all can read files from a USB hard-drive... So you could just buy a USB Hard-drive (really cheap) and use with them...

SO THEY ARE just an expensive computer without storage!.
A ONE TERAByte DRIVE and a DVD drive to load stuff with, a few hundred bucks extra.
HOW CHEAP.

[Ajani]

I wired my setup digital from source to output, so less chance of drop in signal in my main system. for the Squeezebox's I have upstairs they are connected via RCA to the AVR's and I do hear the difference. and that may be that the gear upstairs is just not as good as the main system (speakers and all) IMHO your setup on your squeezebox is being over processed unnecessarily, that why I brought up the comment about the transport. From your posting you feel it will never sound good enough unless it has a brand name that you respect.

My posting is based on my experiencing actually using the Squeezebox's internal DAC and comparing it with an external DAC... What's your experience based on? Reading spec sheets? Have you ever tried a CD Player or DAC considered Mid-High end?

I am left to conclude that your believe all digital players (CD, Music streamers) etc sound the same... If that is so then you really should just state it...

If you read the olive ad info it even says that it only rip to the level of 320kps and that is what I stated as being the starting point of matching a CD, some like apple lossless or Windows lossless, so these DAR don't do anything above or beyond what your squeezebox is capable of doing. As I read each ad info they didn't spend much time on the playback ability of ripped music, but focus more on their ability to play internet channels and services, Just an observation, may mean nothing. Also I notice that the olive only had RCA outputs.
.................................................. ................................

- High fidelity Burr-Brown™ 24-bit DAC
- Two dedicated linear power regulators for DAC and line-out stages


.................................................. .......................................

I think Burr Brown Dac's are still considered mid to highend Dac's,

Aphanetworks.com review July 2007



I for one listen often to an internet channel (last.Fm), mainly to find more artist that I may like to download later to my old P4 900Mhz 320 gig external HD running XP pro.
Cost factor:

Computer.......................Free (picked it up from local church that was upgrading)
External HD...................$50 (table sale at Staples)
PCI wireless card...........$5.00 (On Ebay)

Unlimited music listening via internet and my own collection covering from Motown to last weeks top 10 (my kids)

Priceless

So essentially, you read the specs and see the Squeezebox has a burr brown DAC, therefore it sounds as good as any mid - high end DAC? OK then, no point arguing with you here... If you believe that then be happy that you never have to spend more than $300 for "high-end" sound quality...

[Ajani]

didn't want you to think I'm totally bias, here more from the same article

In terms of audio performance, I've heard better from other devices than the analog side. I've streamed uncompressed WAV files as well as FLACs using the Squeezebox, and to this can be compared to the original CD containing the same track. Performance is fairly good, but the high frequencies did not come out as high as expected, nor did the lows come out as distinct and solid as it did over digital connection on the Squeezebox itself.
Digital, on the other hand, seems to be very good on the Squeezebox -- which is usually not too limited to the device itself, since built in DACs are much more complex than a digital connection (It gets converted the analog later anyway, but that's up to the DAC on your receiver and not the Squeezebox). The sound is sharp, layered, separated and distinct between each instrument and the vocals are nice and clear when compared to analog connection. Everything comes in and blends together smoothly into one smooth performance -- but then again, if you don't want to be limited to the performance of the DACs used in a $300 device, I personally would definitely go the route of digital -- through this, the bottleneck effect will be less prominent. I guess what that really matters is that it sounds 'clean' enough over digital.
Therefore, it would be definitely more preferable for a coaxial or optical cable to be included out of the box rather than a RCA analog cable in my opinion. After all, most people who buy the Squeezebox probably have a receiver with digital inputs!

In general, Slim Devices' Squeezebox is quite an excellent product. Setup is extremely easy and almost flawless; and it's easy to use and the features are nice -- it does what it's meant to do -- to stream music. Wireless performance is pretty good; I noticed no drops and to the end user signals are consistent

Did you actually read that review? Do you realize it says exactly what I've said: The analog SOUND quality of the Squeezebox is nothing special... For audiophiles it is a great digital transport, but not a complete source...

[Ajani]

SO THEY ARE just an expensive computer without storage!.
A ONE TERAByte DRIVE and a DVD drive to load stuff with, a few hundred bucks extra.
HOW CHEAP.

Pix these products (with exception of the Olive) are essentially Squeezeboxes (hopefully with better DACs and output stages)... So the reason to consider buying any of them is because they would have good sound quality... If you believe that all digital sounds the same, then you could just buy a Squeezebox or even better yet a used laptop and plug it directly into your stereo...

[E-Stat]

Ah, multiple PCs are in order. I have a main office with three PCs and a network 2TB drive upstairs, but also have a PC attached to my main livingroom rig that allows me to use my tv as a 42 inch monitor and wireless mouse and keyboard from the sofa. I can then watch AVI movies or any other network accessible media through my stereo, HT setup or PC.

Well, actually I have three: the main I7-860 in the office, a Core Duo P8400 laptop and an older Northwood P4 box upstairs as a data mirror for the main one. I really have no interest in having a desktop PC in the living room. I gave away older PCs.

rw

[recoveryone]

Did you actually read that review? Do you realize it says exactly what I've said: The analog SOUND quality of the Squeezebox is nothing special... For audiophiles it is a great digital transport, but not a complete source...

as you should have read how I have mine setup (full digital), I also said I can tell the differences from my analog ones upstairs from the one downstairs. You said that the Dac's used where only budget quality, and I posted the spec sheet to show you the quality of those Dac's being used. I also found a report on why the analog Dac's are weak and it has nothing to do with Burr Brown, but the power supply. It list a company that sales a upgraded power cord ($10.00) that allows the Dac's to reach their full potential. he use a $3k cd transport as the test comparison.

Now with that said you also have your unit connect via digital so your argument is mute.

Maybe you should read my own list of gear, the Elite line is considered a fairly good line. I didn't think I needed to point that out since its listed on every post I make. But I will play along and to let you know my CD is connected via toslink also same as the Squeezebox so my own test was completely fair. Music use was Earl Klugh acoustic guitar and ripped as WAV lossless. I would suggest you google Squeezebox upgrades and find that report and you may save yourself a dollars. $800 vs $10 power cord????? go figure.

Now we all appreciate you bringing this information about the DAR's, but as you can read for yourself not many of us can see the big advantage of these companies, and they have not taken any real steps in furthering the ability of DAR's to play music at reference level no matter the source. It appears they have seen the writing on the wall and now making an attempt to cash in on the growing market of digital playback systems.