Qnap: Ts251

[Albrecht]

Hi,

Apologies if this has been discussed, - a search didn't show an adequate answer. I am about to pull the trigger on 4GB version of the TS251. My plan is to use one of the Ethernet ports to connect with optical directly to my NAA.

 

My non-audiophile colleagues are taking the piss for what they call overkill on the 4GB model. (I am an IT infrastructure manager). I have about 31,000 songs AIFF on my current Iomega NAS which the QNAP will be replacing.

 

The QNAP is going to be in another room 30FT from the audio rack. And, - I'm not going to use the video distribution features. But I am thinking of installing LMS and possibly HQPlayer.

 

Already, it's getting expensive with 4GB and 2 WD 3 TB drives, - but I am wondering if you all think that I should buy even more RAM and load it up with 8GB? Especially considering the RAM looks like it's a PITA to install.

 

Sorry for the long ramble leading up here, but there's a significant body of compelling evidence (in my mind) that overkill on RAM and processor speed yields better SQ. I have a friend who has installed LMS on his Synology NAS with 512 MB RAM with a similar size library and it is failing miserably.

[Paul R]

The new QNAP TS251 is a sweet little NAS device. However, if you happen to have a spare PC of just about any stripe, and it has a nice fast processor in it and a reasonable amount of RAM, it is likely to serve you better.

 

While I don't hear any *audible* difference between NAS or networking devices, I do understand that other people have heard differences. What I do find almost unbearable is the agonizingly slow response speed of some NAS devices, and the terrifically slow copy speeds.

 

-Paul

[Albrecht]

The new QNAP TS251 is a sweet little NAS device. However, if you happen to have a spare PC of just about any stripe, and it has a nice fast processor in it and a reasonable amount of RAM, it is likely to serve you better.

 

While I don't hear any *audible* difference between NAS or networking devices, I do understand that other people have heard differences. What I do find almost unbearable is the agonizingly slow response speed of some NAS devices, and the terrifically slow copy speeds.

 

-Paul

 

Hiya, - Thanks for your reply. I hear you on slow copy speeds, - I have seen this on other NAS devices.

 

Cheers,

[davide256]

The new QNAP TS251 is a sweet little NAS device. However, if you happen to have a spare PC of just about any stripe, and it has a nice fast processor in it and a reasonable amount of RAM, it is likely to serve you better.

 

While I don't hear any *audible* difference between NAS or networking devices, I do understand that other people have heard differences. What I do find almost unbearable is the agonizingly slow response speed of some NAS devices, and the terrifically slow copy speeds.

 

-Paul

 

No NAS response issues here... but then I bought with an eye on best NAS CPU I could get at the price point vs more drive bays. Copy speeds are typically 5-7m over "G" Wifi adaptor and 55m over wired Ethernet. And its not a "Fix Or Repair Daily" type experience like a PC... always ready when I need to use it.

[davide256]

Hi,

Apologies if this has been discussed, - a search didn't show an adequate answer. I am about to pull the trigger on 4GB version of the TS251. My plan is to use one of the Ethernet ports to connect with optical directly to my NAA.

 

My non-audiophile colleagues are taking the piss for what they call overkill on the 4GB model. (I am an IT infrastructure manager). I have about 31,000 songs AIFF on my current Iomega NAS which the QNAP will be replacing.

 

The QNAP is going to be in another room 30FT from the audio rack. And, - I'm not going to use the video distribution features. But I am thinking of installing LMS and possibly HQPlayer.

 

Already, it's getting expensive with 4GB and 2 WD 3 TB drives, - but I am wondering if you all think that I should buy even more RAM and load it up with 8GB? Especially considering the RAM looks like it's a PITA to install.

 

Sorry for the long ramble leading up here, but there's a significant body of compelling evidence (in my mind) that overkill on RAM and processor speed yields better SQ. I have a friend who has installed LMS on his Synology NAS with 512 MB RAM with a similar size library and it is failing miserably.

 

Yea, running OS operations and directory retrieval off disk swapfile usually slows things down. You don't need the memory size of a home use PC because the device isn't supporting a graphics card. 2Gig seemed to be the standard for PC's back when graphics cards could only use a small fixed amount of system memory

[Paul R]

No NAS response issues here... but then I bought with an eye on best NAS CPU I could get at the price point vs more drive bays. Copy speeds are typically 5-7m over "G" Wifi adaptor and 55m over wired Ethernet. And its not a "Fix Or Repair Daily" type experience like a PC... always ready when I need to use it.

 

I tend to use SAN devices here, which operate much faster than SMB or other file sharing protocols, but even with that, the little QNAP devices are impressive. The FORD problem is exactly why I tend to gravitate towards Macs or Linux computers these days.

 

You might want to check out iSCSI sometime - performs better than NAS for me here, without the annoying delays and much less network chatter.

 

-Paul

[Albrecht]

Yea, running OS operations and directory retrieval off disk swapfile usually slows things down. You don't need the memory size of a home use PC because the device isn't supporting a graphics card. 2Gig seemed to be the standard for PC's back when graphics cards could only use a small fixed amount of system memory

 

Thanks for your comments. I can't see myself either moving the NAS to the audio rack, - or running a long video HDMI off to the TV.

But, I will likely install LMS and HQPlayer on it, - and I will be running a direct fiber cable from Ethernet1 to the NAA on the audio rack. I want the convenience of having to not maintain a traditional PCs or MACs as NAS, and have that device accessible for up to 9 other varying music players in our Bldg/duplex. I will be isolating the fiber exclusively to the NAA/File player in the main rig, as the building is only wired RJ45 Cat6. Your post(s) have been helpful, - Thanks, - further convincing me to just stick with the 4GB version. I can always buy 4 more later if I really need to.... IME, at least with some of these players processing digital files, the more RAM, - the better the sound. But, - on the NAS, - LMS should not be that intrusive, - and I could always just leave LMS alone and run it from a separate iMAC.

 

Cheers,

[tboooe]

Just curious how you intend to connect the nas via fiber? As I understand the Qnap only has 2 regular Ethernet ports. Are you going to use an FMC?

[Albrecht]

Just curious how you intend to connect the nas via fiber? As I understand the Qnap only has 2 regular Ethernet ports. Are you going to use an FMC?

 

Hi,

Yes, two TpLink FMCs, and two short RJ45 to the two devices. And, (oh-my-gosh), LPSs for the TPLinks. Several people have reported improved SQ doing such, and, it's cheap: so I'm giving it a go. Besides, I have all my cables hidden away in tracks, and the thinner fiber cable will allow me to fit the RJ45 cables that are bulging out of the darn thing. :-)

 

Cheers,

[tboooe]

Got it. Thank you. I am doing the same with my Qnap and adding a fiber switch to connect my pc and wireless bridge. Hope this yields some improvement.

[wanta911]

I'm considering one of these after my old base model Synology failed recently.

 

As this model has upgradeable RAM & supports SSD caching, I am thinking about trying it out by using a WD Red HDD in one bay and a 250 or 500gb SSD in the other. I have read a lot of posts about SSD vs HDD in NAS devices but I don't recall anything about using a HDD with an SSD cache? Anyone have any experience with this?

[r_w]

I have the 6gb TS-253 (almost the same but extra RAM and quad core), it works flawlessly with the Aurender N100 and Aries Mini.

 

It isn't overkill (your mates are probably just envious), it will serve you for years and plugging in a USB disk will enable simple automatic backup of everything.

 

I managed to get a 6Gb WD Red TS-253 Pro (2Gb RAM) for £500 from Dabs, which at the time was way lower than anywhere else.

 

Adding extra RAM is primarily for loading operating systems and turning it into a PC, so you could just add more RAM later if you need this.

 

 

Hi,

Apologies if this has been discussed, - a search didn't show an adequate answer. I am about to pull the trigger on 4GB version of the TS251. My plan is to use one of the Ethernet ports to connect with optical directly to my NAA.

 

My non-audiophile colleagues are taking the piss for what they call overkill on the 4GB model. (I am an IT infrastructure manager). I have about 31,000 songs AIFF on my current Iomega NAS which the QNAP will be replacing.

 

The QNAP is going to be in another room 30FT from the audio rack. And, - I'm not going to use the video distribution features. But I am thinking of installing LMS and possibly HQPlayer.

 

Already, it's getting expensive with 4GB and 2 WD 3 TB drives, - but I am wondering if you all think that I should buy even more RAM and load it up with 8GB? Especially considering the RAM looks like it's a PITA to install.

 

Sorry for the long ramble leading up here, but there's a significant body of compelling evidence (in my mind) that overkill on RAM and processor speed yields better SQ. I have a friend who has installed LMS on his Synology NAS with 512 MB RAM with a similar size library and it is failing miserably.

[r_w]

Yes that's a great, cheap and simple SQ upgrade - I've done it and will not ever revert back to copper.

 

 

 

Hi,

Yes, two TpLink FMCs, and two short RJ45 to the two devices. And, (oh-my-gosh), LPSs for the TPLinks. Several people have reported improved SQ doing such, and, it's cheap: so I'm giving it a go. Besides, I have all my cables hidden away in tracks, and the thinner fiber cable will allow me to fit the RJ45 cables that are bulging out of the darn thing. :-)

 

Cheers,

[tboooe]

Yes that's a great, cheap and simple SQ upgrade - I've done it and will not ever revert back to copper.

 

There has been discussion on the Network Isolation thread that using a passive network isolation device like the ones offered by EMO systems yielded better results than fiber via FMC. The reasoning is the addition of all the required LPS to power the FMCs. I must admit that this is my concern as well. There are a lot of extra devices required to implement a fiber solution (extra ethernet cable, fiber cable, power supply, FMC).

 

At this point, I am not sure which way I am leaning. For sake of simplicity I like the EMO Systems isolators but my nerd side wants to try out the fiber and all the cool gadgets!

[davide256]

I'm considering one of these after my old base model Synology failed recently.

 

As this model has upgradeable RAM & supports SSD caching, I am thinking about trying it out by using a WD Red HDD in one bay and a 250 or 500gb SSD in the other. I have read a lot of posts about SSD vs HDD in NAS devices but I don't recall anything about using a HDD with an SSD cache? Anyone have any experience with this?

 

SSD's have a more limited read/write life than a HD... for PC I turn off swap file on my OS SSD drive and run it on the HD file drive. You also need two like drives to run a RAID. Significant use of a swapfile on NAS seems unlikely... you don't run games or MSAccess locally off a NAS, applications that routinely access larger files than available RAM.

[Audio_ELF]

Hi,

Apologies if this has been discussed, - a search didn't show an adequate answer. I am about to pull the trigger on 4GB version of the TS251. My plan is to use one of the Ethernet ports to connect with optical directly to my NAA.

If I read / understand you correctly you plan to connect one port to a fibre converter to then to your NAA; and the second will be converted to your main network.

 

Be aware that out of the box there is no bridging of networks supported by the QNAP so the NAA network won't see the main network and vice versa. You will need to edit configuration files at the command line to get bridging to work.

 

That's not to say you can utilise it in this manner, but it's not something QNAP support (nor Synology nor Thecus in their equivalent units).

 

If you are looking at this option, you may find building a Linux (or FreeBSD) "server" running BTRFS or ZFS may be a better option and more versatile (though harder to manage)

[misterspense]

Or, less complicated, use an ethernet switch. The ts251 does indeed not act as a switch, and can utilize its 2 ports to connect with higher speed to the network, not to connect to a streamer or computer or so. For that a simple ethernet switch will suffice.

[lmitche]

Good news, Qnap looks to support virtual switch capability in the next QTS release version 4.2.1 . Just yesterday, I downloaded the beta and tried it on my HS-251. The virtual switch can be configured in the GUI. I assigned a static IP address to the switch, connected the internet connection to port 1 and my audioPC to port 2. The virtual switch was easy to configure and worked as expected running my audiopc PXE boot and iscsi scripts without incident with wireless connectivity to my IPad for Minimserver/Minimstreamer MPD/DLNA playback control.

 

Way cool. Kudos to Qnap!

[jabbr]

There has been discussion on the Network Isolation thread that using a passive network isolation device like the ones offered by EMO systems yielded better results than fiber via FMC. The reasoning is the addition of all the required LPS to power the FMCs. I must admit that this is my concern as well. There are a lot of extra devices required to implement a fiber solution (extra ethernet cable, fiber cable, power supply, FMC).

 

At this point, I am not sure which way I am leaning. For sake of simplicity I like the EMO Systems isolators but my nerd side wants to try out the fiber and all the cool gadgets!

 

The fiber is cheap enough that you can compare the two and see what you prefer on your own system. I have used battery supplies for my FMCs. Using a fiber switch and fiber NICs eliminates the extras. Regarding isolators, since I haven't used the EMO systems, I can't comment on this in specific, but note that all copper Ethernet are isolated per specification with isolation transformers.

[tboooe]

Yes, using a fiber nic and switch would help reduce the number of FMCs required. To deal with the power supplies I was going to get a single lps powerful enough for all of the FMCs.

 

As for the ethernet isolator, I am afraid I shave yet read up enough on fiber to understand how it is better than the isolation transformers.

[lmitche]

You may want to be careful with a single power supply. The power connections could break the galvanic isolation and create a ground loop. I'd recommend separate power supplies one each for each FMC. Nevertheless, Jabbr is right. Single and dual port fiber nics powered from the pcie bus are likely to be the best option and cost equal or less then the FMCs plus LPS solution.

[Albrecht]

I have the 6gb TS-253 (almost the same but extra RAM and quad core), it works flawlessly with the Aurender N100 and Aries Mini.

 

It isn't overkill (your mates are probably just envious), it will serve you for years and plugging in a USB disk will enable simple automatic backup of everything.

Adding extra RAM is primarily for loading operating systems and turning it into a PC, so you could just add more RAM later if you need this.

 

Thanks a lot for your comments, and experiences with the TS-253. I do plan on trying LMS right on the NAS, as well as perhaps, HQPlayer: wouldn't these two apps suck up some RAM? I guess that LMS doesn't use up too many resources on the iMAC that we run in our basement, - whose primary task is serving up LMS, ITunes, and Plex, to a bunch of users/devices.

 

Cheers,

[r_w]

I just bought 8Gb of RAM (specified for QNAP TS-x53) from Kingston.

 

Have a look on the Kingston memory site below... 8Gb RAM for QNAP TS-x51 NAS is £40, 'max it out' and save a small fortune.

 

QNAP NAS TS-251 Server Memory Upgrades | Kingston

 

;-)

 

 

Thanks a lot for your comments, and experiences with the TS-253. I do plan on trying LMS right on the NAS, as well as perhaps, HQPlayer: wouldn't these two apps suck up some RAM? I guess that LMS doesn't use up too many resources on the iMAC that we run in our basement, - whose primary task is serving up LMS, ITunes, and Plex, to a bunch of users/devices.

 

Cheers,

[Albrecht]

If I read / understand you correctly you plan to connect one port to a fibre converter to then to your NAA; and the second will be converted to your main network.

 

 

If you are looking at this option, you may find building a Linux (or FreeBSD) "server" running BTRFS or ZFS may be a better option and more versatile (though harder to manage)

 

Hi,

Yes, - that's exactly correct. I will connect the NAA to the switch, - and research whether I can connect the NAA to the NAS while isolating Ethernet Port1 via the script, - while connecting Ethernet 0 to the switch: ONLY while running HQPlayer on the NAS.

 

Running HQPlayer, - (not even sure if it's possible without installing a Windows VM), - {which I don't want to do}, - on the NAS may STILL not see the NAA properly.

 

Thanks for your post...

[Albrecht]

Thank you again!!

Cheers,