Differences Between NAA and Renderer

[granosalis]

Hello,

can someone please explain the difference between an NAA (Network Audio Adapter) and a UPnPTM AV/DLNA Media Renderer device (or streamer) ?

 

Thanks in adavance.

Giuseppe

[Audio_ELF]

Hello,

can someone please explain the difference between an NAA (Network Audio Adapter) and a UPnPTM AV/DLNA Media Renderer device ?

 

Thanks in adavance.

I'm sure Miska can give more details ... but in essence (and this is in no way meant to be a technical description):

 

The NAA is purely interface between the network and your DAC. The computer (HQ Player) pushes data to the NAA in a form which can be passed to the DAC with no further processing. The NAA is comparable to a USB to SPDIF interface in terms of the processing it carries out on the music.

 

A UPnP renderer on the other hand is sent a music file, the render is then responsible for "playing" that file in the same was as iTunes, J.River, etc. does - in essence a renderer is a hardware music player. Some renders do more processing than others (it is possible to incorporate DSP into a renderer).

 

Eloise

[granosalis]

Very interesting, thanks Eloise!

So, if I well understood a renderer is a kind of "closed box" with its own Player capability.

Now my question is, which software should I use to transfer files to a renderer? HQPlayer should not support it, right?

[bibo01]

A network audio rendered is like an ethernet-to-DAC interface.

A device like this one by ABC PCB which incidentally you can find it inside a Counterpoint DAC. MSB Tech has also presented something similar for its Analog DAC.

As software, you need a UPNP/DLNA server that streams the signal to the render. For example, JRiver or Foobar can do that.

[Cebolla]

A network audio rendered is like an ethernet-to-DAC interface.

.

.

.

As software, you need a UPNP/DLNA server that streams the signal to the render. For example, JRiver or Foobar can do that.

Be careful here bibi01, as you seem to be saying that the UPnP/DLNA media server software is streaming an audio signal to the UPnP/DLNA renderer, so by implication actually doing the music playback.

 

This is not the case. The UPnP renderer does the music playback using music file data that it has requested from the UPnP media server and so the UPnP server has nothing to do with the audio signal that's produced during playback The UPnP renderer itself decodes the music file data into the audio signal, to pass to the DAC. It is the renderer that's the 'streamer', not the UPnP server.

 

John

[Cebolla]

Now my question is, which software should I use to transfer files to a renderer?

Giuseppe,

 

Strictly speaking two items of software are required to get the UPnP renderer to play a music file. Like a Bibo1, says, you require a UPnP media server to supply the music file. You also require a UPnP control point to control the playback, ie instruct the UPnP renderer which music files to play and where they are located on the network so that the renderer can request them from the media server. In effect the UPnP control point is the user interface. It also contains the playback navigation functions (eg pause, stop, pay, seek, etc) used to control the renderer.

 

In some cases the UPnP renderer box itself contains the control point and these devices are known as UPnP/DLNA players.

 

The CA Academy has a good article on how the various UPnP/DLNA devices operate:

Computer Audiophile - The Complete Guide To HiFi UPnP / DLNA Network Audio

 

 

 

 

HQPlayer should not support it, right?

Interesting question and TBH I've no idea - only someone in the know like Miska can answer that. It would be really good if the HQPlayer (or at least the relevant functions like filters, DSP, etc) could be used in a UPnP media server for these UPnP renderers. Of course it'll need to deal with supplying (hopefully corrected) music files accessable to the renderer, rather than proprietary audio data that it supplies the NAA with. Also, it'll need to be able to be accessed by a UPnP control point, rather than controlling the playback itself.

[Audio_ELF]

So, if I well understood a renderer is a kind of "closed box" with its own Player capability.

 

Now my question is, which software should I use to transfer files to a renderer? HQPlayer should not support it, right?

People have already said this probably but...

 

You need two things in addition to the UPnP renderer. A server and a control point.

 

The server often runs on a NAS device but can also run on a separate computer. Some common servers include MinimServer Twonky Serviio media server and Synology Audio Station. In addition software such as JRiver Media Center software and foobar2000 include UPnP server capabilities (either built in or as an add on).

 

The second part of the equation is the Control Point. Typically this will run on a tablet (or phone) but can also run on a laptop. Again some common examples include Kinsky (from Linn), BubbleUPnP, Lumin and Lightning DS applications. J.River and Foobar can also work as a kind of control point when also working as a server (I don't think either work as pure control point).

 

To add a little to the complication of UPnP, Linn created various extensions to the basic specification and released it (Open Source afaik) which allow for on-renderer playlists so that multiple controllers can edit a playlist and then turn the control point off.

 

Hopefully this helps you a little...

[Audio_ELF]

A network audio rendered is like an ethernet-to-DAC interface.

Personally I would say that this is exactly what a network renderer ISN'T.

 

A renderer is a music player which sits on the end of the network rather than being a (general purpose) computer.

[bibo01]

Interesting question and TBH I've no idea - only someone in the know like Miska can answer that. It would be really good if the HQPlayer (or at least the relevant functions like filters, DSP, etc) could be used in a UPnP media server for these UPnP renderers. Of course it'll need to deal with supplying (hopefully corrected) music files accessable to the renderer, rather than proprietary audio data that it supplies the NAA with. Also, it'll need to be able to be accessed by a UPnP control point, rather than controlling the playback itself.

In its Embedded version, HQPlayer can act as renderer. Although slightly complicated, one has MinimServer streaming signal to HQPlayer Embedded on Linux and BubbleUNPN as control.

[bibo01]

Personally I would say that this is exactly what a network renderer ISN'T.

 

A renderer is a music player which sits on the end of the network rather than being a (general purpose) computer.

You probably use a better definition than me, but I did not say that it is "a (general purpose) computer". In order to explain better I gave two examples of similar products which disappeared from your quote. How come?

[Superdad]

Hello,

can someone please explain the difference between an NAA (Network Audio Adapter) and a UPnPTM AV/DLNA Media Renderer device (or streamer)?

 

Giuseppe:

NAA (Network Audio Adapter) is the term that Miska--Jussi Laako of Signalyst in Finland--coined for his network audio daemon software which runs under Debian Linux on either Intel or ARM processor devices. It is a closed system in that the only desktop player that can feed it a music stream is Signalyst HQ Player. All processing of the music file (sample rate conversion, DRC, multi-channel, etc.) takes place on the computer running the desktop player, and that is the machine which needs some processing power.

The computer/device running Linux/NAA can be any Ethernet connected unit with a USB, S/PDIF, HDMI. or other audio output, and while it needs to have a clean power supply, it does not need a powerful processor or much RAM. Many people configure small ARM computers like CuBox-i or BeagleBone as an NAA, and some firms, notably Sonore and SoTM offer small ARM computers with a Linux and s/w preloaded to configure as either an NAA or as a DLNA renderer.

 

Anyway, if you see the term NAA here at CA, it means running HQ Player on one machine and a minimal Linux and audio daemon s/w on another to receive the stream. Both from Signalyst and no one else.

 

Eloise does not like me, so I am sure she will find something in the above to tear me a new one about.

[Audio_ELF]

You probably use a better definition than me, but I did not say that it is "a (general purpose) computer". In order to explain better I gave two examples of similar products which disappeared from your quote. How come?

Sorry we are arguing definitions here but...

 

You said "A network audio rendere[r] is like an ethernet-to-DAC interface."

 

That statement is (in my opinion) wrong and misleading. It is not purely an interface ... it is a computer running a player.

 

Your two examples were irrelevant as both of these examples are UPnP streamers which do not (IMO) fit your definition of "an ethernet to DAC interface".

 

Eloise

[Audio_ELF]

Eloise does not like me, so I am sure she will find something in the above to tear me a new one about.

I do like you :-)

[granosalis]

Gentlemen,

thanks a lot to all of you, now I have a better understanding of the matter.

This renderer unit in fact, surprise me a lot. I have one under test and I love it.

Initially I tough it was just another box with the Ethernet input in place of the USB one: false (thanks Eloise)!

Personally I don't like using computer in my audio setup and with a renderer I have the possibility to remove it from the chain, at least from the play chain (still required for ripping or download). So the most obvious choice (for me) looks like the synology NAS (what do you think about DiskStation DS415play ??? ) with it's built in music server.

 

I have summarized here the positive aspects (from my point of view) of using a renderer, please feel free to add/remove and comment.

 

Good:

- Computer is out of the loop at least for playing purpose.

- USB is out of the loop (probably the worst interface for audio transmission ?)

- Software players are out of the loop. The player is inside the renderer and I have not to worry about which is better between: A+, HQ, Jriver, etc.

 

Bad:

- A music server is required to store music library (minor: becasue using a music server allow me to keep the music ordered, back-upped and all in one place)

- An home network is required (minor: most of us have it)

- Building an home music network can be complex for some

 

 

Best Regards,

Giuseppe

[Superdad]

I do like you :-)

 

Sweet of you to say so, thanks!

[Superdad]

This renderer unit in fact, surprise me a lot. I have one under test and I love it.

 

May we know which one your are testing?

[granosalis]

May we know which one your are testing?

 

Bel Canto Ref Stream

[wappinghigh]

^ but G, this is not an NAA. It will not stream HQ player. Right?

[Superdad]

Bel Canto Ref Stream

[ATTACH]15334[/ATTACH]

 

I can't find any information about that product on the Bel Canto website. Can you post a link about it please?

[granosalis]

^ but G, this is not an NAA. It will not stream HQ player. Right?

 

Correct.

[granosalis]

I can't find any information about that product on the Bel Canto website. Can you post a link about it please?

 

Information are not yet available on BC web site, I guess they will update it soon.

[Superdad]

Information are not yet available on BC web site, I guess they will update it soon.

 

Strange, even a Google search turns up not even a hint of this product. Maybe I'll phone up my old friend Matt Krammer (I think he is still their sales director) and see what he can tell me about it.

[granosalis]

Hi Superdad, you can see the news here: Bel Canto REF Stream Ethernet Renderer and DAC 2.7 | Stereophile.com

[rodrigaj]

Gentlemen,

thanks a lot to all of you, now I have a better understanding of the matter.

This renderer unit in fact, surprise me a lot. I have one under test and I love it.

Initially I tough it was just another box with the Ethernet input in place of the USB one: false (thanks Eloise)!

Personally I don't like using computer in my audio setup and with a renderer I have the possibility to remove it from the chain, at least from the play chain (still required for ripping or download). So the most obvious choice (for me) looks like the synology NAS (what do you think about DiskStation DS415play ??? ) with it's built in music server.

 

I have summarized here the positive aspects (from my point of view) of using a renderer, please feel free to add/remove and comment.

 

Good:

- Computer is out of the loop at least for playing purpose.

- USB is out of the loop (probably the worst interface for audio transmission ?)

- Software players are out of the loop. The player is inside the renderer and I have not to worry about which is better between: A+, HQ, Jriver, etc.

 

Bad:

- A music server is required to store music library (minor: becasue using a music server allow me to keep the music ordered, back-upped and all in one place)

- An home network is required (minor: most of us have it)

- Building an home music network can be complex for some

 

 

Best Regards,

Giuseppe

 

This is a very informative thread and one that I finally got around to reading. I would add two things to your "Bad" list:

 

-Inability to use any DSP or Player.

-Inability to stream with services such as Qobuz or Tidal (Wimp).

 

I know that you listed this under "Good" (with regards to players) because of the simplicity involved in such a system. However, the inability to use DSP is a significant caveat.

 

I personally believe that the use of a NAS / renderer is a good way to get into digital audio. It allows for future upgrade because a computer with DSP can be added to the chain at a later date.

[Superdad]

Hi Superdad, you can see the news here: Bel Canto REF Stream Ethernet Renderer and DAC 2.7 | Stereophile.com

 

Thanks for the link. Nice that it has ST Fiber output as well. Functionality is similar to Sonore Rendu except that the Be Canto only goes to 24/192 and it converts all DSD to 24/176.4 PCM.

I know the Rendu Signature is VERY well done, but John Stronzer at Bel Canto is a smart guy too. Maybe someone will do a head-to-head between the two units.