External drives

[nwjg]

I am probably missing something in the multiple posts/threads I have read but I'm not clear enough yet. I appologize in advance if that is the case.

 

Here is my story:

 

I'm ready to make the plunge and rip all of my 200 or so CD's. I'm thinking I will do a few per day at work. I also occasionally download music.

 

I just installed a 1TB time capsule at work and I use an iMac connected to an external DAC there. I have an old 500mg G-Drive on hand if that helps.

 

Once finished I want to make a complete copy to use at home with my new 160gb Apple TV connected via HDMI to a Meridian HD621.

 

Do I just set up iTunes Media folder location to be the time capsule or should I connect the Gdrive to the iMac and store the files there? Or should I buy some other piece of hardware?

 

Thanks!

 

 

[nwjg]

I must be missing something pretty obvious here...

 

[rayhil]

I was just about to head in this same direction with the OWC 1TB. However, two things have changed. First, OWC has replaced the Hitachi drive with the Seagate Barracuda 7200.12. Second, I'm increasingly interested in connecting via Ethernet. A couple of questions:

Any views on these Seagate drives and their relative noise levels, particularly if I leave the unit in the listening room.

Also, I don't want to go the NAS route as I'm not enough of a computer person; any thoughts on an ethernet drive (not a Drobo given the comments I've read). It seems that with relatively low price of network cable (versus FW or USB) I could more easily move the drive out of the listening room and still use wireless connection for the Web for retrieval of music tags.

Thanks

 

[Audio_ELF]

Just for reference...

An external drive connected to a network IS a NAS - even if there is only a single drive inside the enclosure. NAS just means Network Attached Storage, as opposed to a USB or FireWire drive which is a DAS - Direct Attached Storage.

 

Eloise

 

[PeterSt]

... I'd like to "complain" a little :-)

 

The fact a "disk" is network connected, doesn't make it a NAS. Notice that a NAS contains its own OS and can well be seen as a file server (though in the consumer circumstance stripped down a lot).

 

Compare SAN (Storage Area Network) which can contain a single disk, and where the transport goes via iSCSI or IOW SCSI over IP.

 

The difference between the both (as seen by us consumers) will be that a NAS will be able to be self contained in making backups, provide RAID and that kind of functions, while a SAN can not. The difference may be not easy to see, because everything a NAS can do in a self contained fashion, a SAN connected drive can do that too, by means of the PC it is connected to (like making a backup).

 

And as usual ... you will find some things against this, Eloise.

Awaitening that,

Peter

:-)

 

[Audio_ELF]

... you are correct Peter.

 

A disk connected to a Network can be a SAN - when using drives on a SAN they appear to the computer as Directly Attached Storage via iSCSI, etc.

 

In the case of single disks such as Western Digital My Book World Edition and similar from Lacie, Iomega, Seagate, etc. (which I assume the comment was about) these are NAS devices.

 

Eloise

 

[cfmsp]

"A NAS unit is essentially a self-contained computer connected to a network, with the sole purpose of supplying file-based data storage services to other devices on the network. The operating system and other software on the NAS unit provide the functionality of data storage, file systems, and access to files, and the management of these functionalities. The unit is not designed to carry out general-purpose computing tasks, although it may technically be possible to run other software on it. NAS units usually do not have a keyboard or display, and are controlled and configured over the network, often by connecting a browser to their network address."

 

I'm with Peter on this one, if ONLY for purposes of helping to distinguish real NAS (as described above) from Eloise's definition of an external drive to a network, which while technically correct, does little to aid the discussions here.

 

IOW, "NAS" is evolving to take on a more specific meaning (note the use of "self contained computer" in the description above). I say, let's endorse it.

 

clay

 

 

[Audio_ELF]

Sorry clay I'm unsure what you are saying here...

 

Are you saying that (for example) a Western Digital My Book World - basically a version of their FireWire / USB drives with a ethernet connection - shouldn't be considered a NAS?

 

Eloise

 

[cfmsp]

 

 

Per my understanding, Chris and others have demonstrated differences in sound quality depending on whether storage devices are connected directly to the computer or whether they are NAS-type devices, which have their own operating system of sorts.

 

TO be clear, THAT is my motivation in my making a distinction in this instance.

 

As for the Ethernet example you mentioned, I would say that since no self-contained operating system in in play that we NOT consider this an example of a NAS, even though it clearly meets the most simple definition of Network Attached Storage.

 

Note, in drawing the dividing line here, my purpose is to help identify the level of network attachment which starts to impact sound quality, as I do NOT think a simple ethernet connection would impact sound quality.

 

If I'm incorrect - and even simply connecting to any disk via network versus directly connected external disks is the dividing line (where sound quality seems to be at risk), then I would quickly defer to your definition.

 

CHris, others?

 

Clay

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Audio_ELF]

I would say that (for the purposes of Computer Audio) you can define a NAS as any external device which connects to an ethernet connection, where the files are accessed by the means of a file sharing protocol such as SMB, NFS or AFP and therefore visible in the Network section of Finder (Mac) or Network Neighborhood (Windows).

 

Eloise

 

[rayhil]

UNCLE, I didn't mean to start a philosophical debate on storage media (although I must admit it's interesting to read the pashon on the subject). Rather, I was hoping for feedback on two simple questions from a lawyer who wants to build a computer audio system and, by virtue of his profession, can't stop researching and learning.

1. Any feedback on the Seagate drive that OWC is now using?

2. And PLEASE don't shoot at me for bad terminology, is there a better storage solution with an ethernet connection (rather than USB or FW) that would let me keep the drive outside the listening room? From reading here, rather than a drive configuration with multiple drives within a box and self-contained redundancy, I;m leaning to simply ripping everything to a single drive and then making a carbon copy of that drive (updated as needed) for backup or mobile use.

Thanks, and despite my slight rant on how touchy some of you can get on terminology, I appreciate the info you have all provided on this site.

 

[cfmsp]

Re your first question, I can't speak to the OWC Seagates.

 

Currently I'm quite partial to the WD drives, and my next drive will be the My Studio II - which is 'green' in the sense that it consumes 30% less power, but is surely slower than others, which I don't think is an issue. It also has USB, Firewire and eSata, which means I can use eSata/USB with Firewire DAC, or eSATA/Firewire with my USB DAC.

 

I'm also planning to put a WD Caviar Green internal Sata drive in my Powermac G5. this is where I believe the 'green' characteristics will pay real sonic dividends, given the lesser AC footprint, and likely less vibrational impact due to slower spinning disc. Apparently this disc spins at such a slow rate that WD are afraid to publish it's RPM, as I can't find it anywhere.

 

As for the 'passion', I don't really have a dog in that fight, so apologies if you felt like I 'started something'. I only hope that we can sort out which aspects of NAS-type setups start to lower sonics (as has been reported by Chris and others). I'm still connecting directly, but with now 4 different Macs (Cube, MBPro, G5, Mini) that I can run, I need a one drive serves all solution, which I've been afraid to do after hearing that 'NAS' implementations degrade sonics.

 

Hope all is well in your neck of the woods.

Clay