Sick and tired of music player hardware manufacturers? Vote and rant here...

[wappinghigh]

Over the years seems to me the hardware players have got this all wrong..

 

I'm tired of *them* telling me what file type can /can't play on/via their device..

 

Worse still *them* throwing their spin on "why" you would want to play (that) file, when (this) file/resolution sounds so much better?

 

Know what? ... who gives a rats?

 

Frankly who gives a toss what the manufacturers think?

 

Why do we have to put up with this crap?

 

Fact is there are now dozens of different available file types.. ranging from low rez up to 24/192 and DSD and beyond.

 

The manufacturers have got to get over this and start to produce "universal" players or streamers that play EVERYTHING..

 

"well *this* file type won't play" just doesn;t cut it for me any more...

 

Would consumers put up with this nonsense with TV channels?

 

"Sorry, this TV only picks up stations in the following (limited) frequency band..

 

Know what?

 

Get over it hardware industry and start producing players that play everything..

 

Linn... you are a prime offender..

 

And so are you Sonos, and every other streamer and player out there..

 

Take your plumb out of your mouths, stop being so condescending and accept change and the fact that consumers might want equipment that can handle everything..

 

Cheers

[One and a half]

You forgot to add :

 

"The manufacturers have got to get over this and start to produce "universal" players or streamers that play EVERYTHING..GAPLESS.

[sandyk]

Take your plumb out of your mouths, stop being so condescending and accept change and the fact that consumers might want equipment that can handle everything..

 

What consumers want, and how much extra they are prepared to pay for this is an entirely different matter.

The early DVD players ,often with SACD and DVD-A thrown in for good measure, were for the most part severely compromised. Jack of all trades, and master of none ?

[Skeptic]

This is why I use a HTPC as my source for everything now.

 

JRiver plays just about anything, and will convert it to a format your renderer supports, if necessary.

 

Dedicated hardware is just too much hassle now. Why buy several boxes when the PC does it all?

Would consumers put up with this nonsense with TV channels?

"Sorry, this TV only picks up stations in the following (limited) frequency band..

Know what?

Get over it hardware industry and start producing players that play everything..

People put up with it in a lot of other areas though.

With video games, if you want to be able to play everything that is released right now, you need to own 6-8 platforms. ("players") It's completely absurd.

 

You can't run that iPad app you just bought on your MacBook, buy the desktop app instead.

Bought a video off the iTunes store? Well you can only watch it in iTunes or on other Apple hardware.

 

Can't read that Kindle book on your Kobo or Sony Reader.

Can't watch that Blu-ray on a DVD or HD-DVD player.

[Sam Lord]

The cost premium for having DSDx2 and DXD (which is a 24 bit, not 32 bit format) and 32bit/384kHz is around $1000 above the analog circuitry if done well enough to really take advantage of the flexibility and available SQ of those formats (Exasound E22, etc.). But I'll give folks a little while to catch up. The bigger problem is how shitty the servers, VNC software (like Screen Sharing) and remotes are like Mac Mini and iTunes. I won't list all their flaws, the list is too long. But anybody recommending a Mac-based system today is doing buyers a disservice, IMO. They sure didn't help me. Still trying to give Audirvana a chance, but my patience for crappy interfaces ran out long ago.

[Skeptic]

The bigger problem is how shitty the servers, VNC software (like Screen Sharing) and remotes are like Mac Mini and iTunes. I won't list all their flaws, the list is too long. But anybody recommending a Mac-based system today is doing buyers a disservice, IMO. They sure didn't help me. Still trying to give Audirvana a chance, but my patience for crappy interfaces ran out long ago.

I have no complaints about JRiver's Theater View interface on my TV, and most people are very happy with the JRemote app as another method of control.

 

I wouldn't use a Mac for media playback though - I would want Windows for that. OS X is very limited in this regard.

[james45974]

The industry is in serious need of being reminded of the K.I.S.S. principle (Keep it simple stupid)! This is why I feel that mp3 has succeeded so well, it is universally supported and the average consumer doesn't have to think at all when using this type of file. And we of the audiophile bent have to be reminded that we are only a small subset of the music consuming population and we don't make the market!

 

On your video reference, a good part of the world had moved on to high def TV, why can't the music industry do a wholesale move like that to high def? Do we have to get the government involved with a mandate? The industry is not doing the move on their own! The one thing that still makes me chuckle is that AM radio is still around, that's like turning on the TV and tuning in a B&W network!

 

Also, you forgot to mention Apple, they are also one of the biggest offenders when it comes to proprietary file types and hardware.

[CatManDo]

I find a streaming client more convenient than a PC, but I would not invest much into one, because they risk being outdated quickly, especially if they are used to connect to an online service. If a new service comes up but the player does not support it, you're out of luck.

 

So I don't understand why one would buy an audiophile $2000+ streaming client. Better get a high quality DAC and connect it to a cheaper streaming client, which can be replaced more frequently.

[sandyk]

The industry is in serious need of being reminded of the K.I.S.S. principle (Keep it simple stupid)! This is why I feel that mp3 has succeeded so well, it is universally supported and the average consumer doesn't have to think at all when using this type of file. And we of the audiophile bent have to be reminded that we are only a small subset of the music consuming population and we don't make the market!

 

Perhaps we need to be reminded here that .mp3 is normally derived from retail CDs . We DO make the market, not the other way around, as without the retail CDs there would have been very little use for .mp3 originally.

.mp3 became into more general use because of the storage limitations of personal portable players at the time, as well as being extensively used for illegal file sharing, especially by the younger generation.

[4est]

Don't put up with it.

 

SOtM Mini Server sMS-100

[davide256]

Don't put up with it.

 

SOtM Mini Server sMS-100

 

I've never been able to figure this one out... its a streamer but its digital output is USB?? How the heck are we supposed to connect that to most DACS which have only RCA/BNC or optical?

[davide256]

I find a streaming client more convenient than a PC, but I would not invest much into one, because they risk being outdated quickly, especially if they are used to connect to an online service. If a new service comes up but the player does not support it, you're out of luck.

 

So I don't understand why one would buy an audiophile $2000+ streaming client. Better get a high quality DAC and connect it to a cheaper streaming client, which can be replaced more frequently.

+1 this is what's wrong with NAIM and Linn product lines and why the Auralic Aries has the potential to sell well when introduced

[Mark Manner]

I've never been able to figure this one out... its a streamer but its digital output is USB?? How the heck are we supposed to connect that to most DACS which have only RCA/BNC or optical?

 

Most of dacs I see now do have USB inputs. For those that don't you would have to convert usb to something else. Probably better in that case to get a box like the rendu that will take lan input and output s/pdif.

[Paul R]

I've never been able to figure this one out... its a streamer but its digital output is USB?? How the heck are we supposed to connect that to most DACS which have only RCA/BNC or optical?

 

It makes perfect sense to me- both DACs and Streaming Players are changing so darn fast that it makes better sense tk have them as separates than as an integrated unit.

[CatManDo]

DACs don't change that fast, in terms of features. I can only think of a few important changes, which are years apart

 

- hi-rez support (late 90's)

- USB input (mid to late 2000's)

- DSD support (last 2 years, but currently only relevant for a minority of audiophiles)

[wappinghigh]

You forgot to add :

 

"The manufacturers have got to get over this and start to produce "universal" players or streamers that play EVERYTHING..GAPLESS.

 

Yes. 100% agree with that...

[wappinghigh]

What consumers want, and how much extra they are prepared to pay for this is an entirely different matter.

The early DVD players ,often with SACD and DVD-A thrown in for good measure, were for the most part severely compromised. Jack of all trades, and master of none ?

 

Sure. Agree somewhat, but seriously how hard would it be, and at what cost could the manufacturers do a player like this? I mean the DAC chips themselves are like what? $10..whether they get the one capable of 24/192 or DSD or not is only a matter of a couple of cents, and not going to break the margin on the product! As for quality being compromise..sure consumers want quality, but that to a large extent is on the analog side and powering of the product anyway.. My main point is who cares? Just produce the universal file players and let consumers decide on quality... It's none of the manufactures business to throw their bias into the debate on whether or not DSD or hi or low rez PCM is "better than this or that".. or whether or not customers can "hear the difference".. Who cares what the manufacturers think? Just make me players that play everything and *I'll* decided if that is important thanks very much....

[Paul R]

DACs don't change that fast, in terms of features. I can only think of a few important changes, which are years apart

 

- hi-rez support (late 90's)

- USB input (mid to late 2000's)

- DSD support (last 2 years, but currently only relevant for a minority of audiophiles)

 

Seems pretty fast to me- just th past two years or so where 24/192 has became really common, and DSD even less time than that. The cost of high performance DACs has also been going down dramatically. Just 3 years ago, $700 or so was considere pretty cheap for a USB DAC with a quality asynch input. Now avail under $100.

 

That is pretty rapid change.

[wappinghigh]

The cost premium for having DSDx2 and DXD (which is a 24 bit, not 32 bit format) and 32bit/384kHz is around $1000 above the analog circuitry if done well enough to really take advantage of the flexibility and available SQ of those formats (Exasound E22, etc.). But I'll give folks a little while to catch up. The bigger problem is how shitty the servers, VNC software (like Screen Sharing) and remotes are like Mac Mini and iTunes. I won't list all their flaws, the list is too long. But anybody recommending a Mac-based system today is doing buyers a disservice, IMO. They sure didn't help me. Still trying to give Audirvana a chance, but my patience for crappy interfaces ran out long ago.

 

I disagree on the price premium of your argument, but agree on everything else.

 

Like I said, I don't think the manufacturers have given a crap about file compatibility. I think they have dropped the ball on this long ago and completely missed the fact that this is one of the primary, if not THE biggest factor in choice of product...

[wappinghigh]

The industry is in serious need of being reminded of the K.I.S.S. principle (Keep it simple stupid)! This is why I feel that mp3 has succeeded so well, it is universally supported and the average consumer doesn't have to think at all when using this type of file. And we of the audiophile bent have to be reminded that we are only a small subset of the music consuming population and we don't make the market!

 

On your video reference, a good part of the world had moved on to high def TV, why can't the music industry do a wholesale move like that to high def? Do we have to get the government involved with a mandate? The industry is not doing the move on their own! The one thing that still makes me chuckle is that AM radio is still around, that's like turning on the TV and tuning in a B&W network!

 

Also, you forgot to mention Apple, they are also one of the biggest offenders when it comes to proprietary file types and hardware.

 

Look, absolutely agree 100% with everything said here. Spot on. Maybe government regulation is required... because seriously, seems like the industry doesn't give a rats... Yep. Force them to make it simple..

[Audio_ELF]

Back to the starting point... Yes and no!

 

A music player should be agnostic and support all (well as many as possible) file formats - both PCM and DSD.

 

On the other hand a DAC can quite rightly be optimised for one format (DSD or PCM) at the expense of supporting the other.

 

The "problem" is there are very few pure music streamers, most combine steamer with DAC.

 

So yes and no...

[wappinghigh]

+1 this is what's wrong with NAIM and Linn product lines and why the Auralic Aries has the potential to sell well when introduced

 

Yep. Correct. They like everyone else, have dropped the ball that customers are shopping for current and ongoing compatibility. What service or file will or won't play is huge for consumers. If customers are suspicious there is or will be a file compatibility or music service problem, they will continue to sit back on their hands and keep their wallets shut..

[wappinghigh]

DACs don't change that fast, in terms of features. I can only think of a few important changes, which are years apart

 

- hi-rez support (late 90's)

- USB input (mid to late 2000's)

- DSD support (last 2 years, but currently only relevant for a minority of audiophiles)

 

This is the industry attitude. Whether or not a particular format is "relevant for a minority of audiophiles" is actually irrelevant.

 

Remove this attitude.

 

Just make the hardware play the files and let consumers decide what is "relevant"..

[wappinghigh]

Back to the starting point... Yes and no!

 

A music player should be agnostic and support all (well as many as possible) file formats - both PCM and DSD.

 

On the other hand a DAC can quite rightly be optimised for one format (DSD or PCM) at the expense of supporting the other.

 

The "problem" is there are very few pure music streamers, most combine steamer with DAC.

 

So yes and no...

 

Ok. ...fair point.. so why aren't there more "agnostic" pure streamers?

[CatManDo]

This is the industry attitude. Whether or not a particular format is "relevant for a minority of audiophiles" is actually irrelevant.

 

What I meant is that DSD support only matters to those who are buying DSD downloads or ripping SACDs, which is currently a small minority of audiophiles.