[AudioLifer]

Hi
I'm new to this forum (and all forums, really) but not new to audio. Since I haven't really seen a thread on this subject on any BDP-1-related forums (although I haven't raked through all of them), I thought I'd share the result of an experiment I conducted yesterday in archiving CDs onto a flash drive vs an external hard drive. Bottom line, I preferred the flash drive. There was simply more clarity, bottom end foundation and image solidity compared to the hard drive's softer, more indistinct presentation. Now I only used two brands of such products, namely a Kingston flash drive and a Seagate Extension hard drive, so I can't say for sure whether this experiment may have been brand-dependent, but I somehow doubt it considering the only function required of these products was to store identical information. So how to explain the difference? My theory is that the USB umbilical cord from the HD is at fault, introducing some form of compression (loss) in the transfer of music files.
I realize that TAS's Karl Schuster arrived at a different conclusion, that the hard drive outperformed the flash drive, but I call it as I heard it, at least in my system.
Also, my final assessment of sound quality was in no way due to 'wishful thinking'. I spent more money on the HD than the FD and had already archived 30 CDs on it prior to doing my test, so I would have preferred that the HD outperform the FD. That didn't happen, and I have started to re-archive my music onto the FD.
What with BDP-1 owners undoubtedly wanting to get the most out of this wonderful component, I think it's important to know what method of musical storage sounds best. I'm curious to hear other people's opinions on actual A/B testing of these storage methods, and see whether or not we can arrive at a standard-setting consensus that could pave the way for all present and future BDP-1 owners.

[skunark]

My theory is that the USB umbilical cord from the HD is at fault, introducing some form of compression (loss) in the transfer of music files.

If the data was modified due to a bad cable, you would have all sorts of disk failures and eventually would be unmounted and reported as a disk failure.   There's a number of additional ways to check out a drive and the cable, but a quick test is to review the actual file size to see if the match up with the original file.  A better method is to checksum each duplicated file and compare it to the original, something like Microsoft SyncToy will ensure that. It's also a great way to synchronize folders whether they are local or across a network.

There have been other comparisons of thumbdrive vs usb hdd drives reported on this forum and some felt there was a difference and others don't notice a difference.    Since the files are the same between devices about all you could say here is that the HDD might be adding more electrical noise than the thumb drive.   I haven't noticed a difference between the various thumbdrives I have vs the WDC bus-powered hdd I use.   

Did you mean Seagate "Expansion" vs Extension?   Are you using a wallwart with the usb drive?  That could be a source of noise, but an easy way to check is have both the thumbdrive and usb drive connected, if you feel there still is a difference then perhaps request a second opinion on your test.

Also, some might suggest to try placing the HDD in a different location, perhaps another shelf...

Jim

[AudioLifer]

If the data was modified due to a bad cable, you would have all sorts of disk failures and eventually would be unmounted and reported as a disk failure.   There's a number of additional ways to check out a drive and the cable, but a quick test is to review the actual file size to see if the match up with the original file.  A better method is to checksum each duplicated file and compare it to the original, something like Microsoft SyncToy will ensure that. It's also a great way to synchronize folders whether they are local or across a network.

There have been other comparisons of thumbdrive vs usb hdd drives reported on this forum and some felt there was a difference and others don't notice a difference.    Since the files are the same between devices about all you could say here is that the HDD might be adding more electrical noise than the thumb drive.   I haven't noticed a difference between the various thumbdrives I have vs the WDC bus-powered hdd I use.   

Did you mean Seagate "Expansion" vs Extension?   Are you using a wallwart with the usb drive?  That could be a source of noise, but an easy way to check is have both the thumbdrive and usb drive connected, if you feel there still is a difference then perhaps request a second opinion on your test.

Also, some might suggest to try placing the HDD in a different location, perhaps another shelf...

Jim

Yes, I meant Expansion and not Extension. Thanks for clearing that up.

Actually, I wasn't referring to a 'bad' cable, but just the cable's existence itself, and whether or not its limited bandwith may be affecting the quality of the music being transfered (as opposed to a flash card, which seems to offer a more direct signal path). Also, my HD isn't plugged into the wall, but simply into the BDP-1's USB input, so a/c-related noise wouldn't be an issue.

Thanks, Robert

[skunark]

If there were any bandwidth issues, you would be noticing dropouts of the audio, not a change in quality.   Perhaps you are confusing this with what YouTube, Netflix or other solutions that stream media with the ability to adjust the quality to ensure constant playback.  This is is not the case for the BDP.

A good cable won't impede a USB drive and if you would peek inside of the BDP (or any desktop computer) you will notice the front USB ports are connect with a cable.   

The BDP USB 2.0 ports have a maximum data rate of 480Mbps and this is significantly faster than both thumb drives (240Mbps) and sdhc flash cards (class 10 is 80Mbps).   A USB HDD or SSD drive can easily transfer 480Mbps clearly faster than most thumb drives and flash cards.  There are a few SSD drives that are essentially thumb drives that can also hit the limits of USB 2.0, those start around $150 for 30GB though. 

Also consider a five minute file of uncompressed lossless audio file is about 50MB, and that would take less than five seconds to transfer a file from a class10 flash card or less than a second for an external USB drive. 

(btw: B=bytes b=bits 1B=8b)

[AudioLifer]

But could it be that, somehow, no USB cable (flash drive) is better than anything with a cable? That's really what I'm trying to find out as a general rule, and what could explain my own experience testing both storage devices. Or, if the cable is not the culprit, what could account for the differences (if there are, as I believe, differences)?

I believe James Tanner also prefers a flash drive over an external HD, and maybe he could shed light on why he thinks so (or maybe he just prefers the FD for convenience's sake, I dunno.) Did he and the Bryston team compare the two methods? If so, and they came to a definite conclusion, then I think all BDP owners could benefit from such knowledge.

Here's a link to a review that supports the FD contingent (I know it's a subjective review, but what the hell):

http://www.hifinews.co.uk/news/article.asp?a=9387

Has anyone on AudioCircle heard a difference IN FAVOR of an external hard drive? Or vice-versa?

Cheers, Robert

[skunark]

If there is a difference most likely it's something to do with noise from the HDD itself as it still has switch-mode regulators to convert the 5V from the USB cable to lower voltages.  Thumb drives might not even have one or would have fewer regulators.     

If you still feel it's the cable, you can actually test this yourself using an USB extension cable with the thumb drive.  Or just use one of the front ports as the internal USB cable might actually be longer than the HDD's cable.  It doesn't hurt to ask a buddy to compare as well.   I haven't heard a difference though.

I think James mostly like them for convenance factor but hopefully him and others can respond.   I know Werd felt that the thumb drive was better than his self-powered usb drive.  In his case, perhaps it was the wall wart for the HDD causing the difference. 

[AudioLifer]

Skunar, I might try a USB extension like you suggest but I think you might be on to something about the switch-mode regulator inside the HD (which I didn't know was there.) As a mechanical device, it could absolutely introduce noise into the music stream and degrade the sound. It's just one extra thing, or complication, it has over the FD.

As to the front USB inputs, I tried them and heard no difference between them and the ones on the back, but then again it wasn't an exhaustive test. That gets boring quickly. 

Cheers, Robert

[unincognito]

Hi guys,

I'd just like to point out that the bdp-1 uses an open source program called mpd to handle the management and play back of your audio files.   Also that we configured mpd to buffer the entire song into main memory before playback.  With a small library of 30 albums the bdp-1 would still have about 120MB of system memory available to buffer music. As a 48k flac file comes in at around 8MB (I think, maybe 30MB).  The system still has plenty of memory to buffer the song.  I would say that what you r hearing would be the moving parts in the drive or an dc to dc c

[unincognito]

Hi guys,

I'd just like to point out that the bdp-1 uses an open source program called mpd to handle the management and play back of your audio files.   Also that we configured mpd to buffer the entire song into main memory before playback.  With a small library of 30 albums the bdp-1 would still have about 120MB of system memory available to buffer music. As a 48k flac file comes in at around 8MB (I think, maybe 30MB).  The system still has plenty of memory to buffer the song.  I would say that what you r hearing would be the moving parts in the drive or an dc to dc converter that might be in the power circuit.  As far as preference goes, for storage it hard to beat a 2.5" bus powered drive for cost and they r pretty darn quiet.  Flash drive are useful if your bud comes over or if you have a handful of song you like to listen to as you can quickly begin playback of the songs via the front panel.  Would comment further but you caught me on a treadmill sweating my large ass off.

Cheers,
Chris

From an iPhone

[skunark]

Hi guys,

I'd just like to point out that the bdp-1 uses an open source program called mpd to handle the management and play back of your audio files.   Also that we configured mpd to buffer the entire song into main memory before playback.  With a small library of 30 albums the bdp-1 would still have about 120MB of system memory available to buffer music. As a 48k flac file comes in at around 8MB (I think, maybe 30MB).  The system still has plenty of memory to buffer the song.  I would say that what you r hearing would be the moving parts in the drive or an dc to dc c

Chris,

From what is listed in the mpd.conf it only buffers 2048KiB and only 50% is required to start playback.

from mpd.conf
# MPD Internal Buffering ######################################################
#
# This setting adjusts the size of internal decoded audio buffering. Changing
# this may have undesired effects. Don't change this if you don't know what you
# are doing.
#
#audio_buffer_size      "2048"
#
# This setting controls the percentage of the buffer which is filled before
# beginning to play. Increasing this reduces the chance of audio file skipping,
# at the cost of increased time prior to audio playback.
#
buffer_before_play      "50%"
#

from the mpd.conf man page

audio_buffer_size <size in KiB>
This specifies the size of the audio buffer in kibibytes. The default is 2048, large enough for nearly 12 seconds of CD-quality audio.

Jim

[Marius]

Chris,

From what is listed in the mpd.conf it only buffers 2048KiB and only 50% is required to start playback.
......
audio_buffer_size <size in KiB>
This specifies the size of the audio buffer in kibibytes. The default is 2048, large enough for nearly 12 seconds of CD-quality audio.

Jim

Would this be the reason for the BDP1 to start sounding like an off-station fm tuner when writing files to the attached HD's? Happens all the time  in my situation, I just can not play a decent track when writing to the BDP1 and updating it.

Marius

[unincognito]

Would this be the reason for the BDP1 to start sounding like an off-station fm tuner when writing files to the attached HD's? Happens all the time  in my situation, I just can not play a decent track when writing to the BDP1 and updating it.

Marius

Hi Skunark,

What version of the firmware are you running?  You know what after reading this post I immediately re-read the man file for mpd's config file i have completely misinterpreted the man file, thanks for catching this.  As for my drive recommendation nothing has changed the fact is you can't get a better "bang" for your buck if you go with a hard disk drive.

Cheers,
Chris

[Sasha]

Hi
I'm new to this forum (and all forums, really) but not new to audio. Since I haven't really seen a thread on this subject on any BDP-1-related forums (although I haven't raked through all of them), I thought I'd share the result of an experiment I conducted yesterday in archiving CDs onto a flash drive vs an external hard drive. Bottom line, I preferred the flash drive. There was simply more clarity, bottom end foundation and image solidity compared to the hard drive's softer, more indistinct presentation. Now I only used two brands of such products, namely a Kingston flash drive and a Seagate Extension hard drive, so I can't say for sure whether this experiment may have been brand-dependent, but I somehow doubt it considering the only function required of these products was to store identical information. So how to explain the difference? My theory is that the USB umbilical cord from the HD is at fault, introducing some form of compression (loss) in the transfer of music files.
I realize that TAS's Karl Schuster arrived at a different conclusion, that the hard drive outperformed the flash drive, but I call it as I heard it, at least in my system.
Also, my final assessment of sound quality was in no way due to 'wishful thinking'. I spent more money on the HD than the FD and had already archived 30 CDs on it prior to doing my test, so I would have preferred that the HD outperform the FD. That didn't happen, and I have started to re-archive my music onto the FD.
What with BDP-1 owners undoubtedly wanting to get the most out of this wonderful component, I think it's important to know what method of musical storage sounds best. I'm curious to hear other people's opinions on actual A/B testing of these storage methods, and see whether or not we can arrive at a standard-setting consensus that could pave the way for all present and future BDP-1 owners.

I do not think it has anything to do with USB cable.
I have build my own dedicated PC based transport (my version of BDP-1 if you will) and I believe you have experienced the same issue on BDP-1 that you would ( and I did) on any PC based transport. Do not forget that BDP-1 is exactly that, a PC with sound card running Linux OS and it is susceptible to the same kind of problems. And those problems are related to the load you place on its PSU, USB, the interference a device with motor (hard disk, fan, etc.) can induce on data lines, all of which ultimately leads to your sound card producing more jitter at such times.
This is why people go to extreme length to minimize OS footprint, disable all non essential HW and SW components, develop schemes to isolate sound card from bus power, etc. when building performance focused (not feature rich) PC based transports.
BDP-1 has very good PSUs and isolation but still it is a PC, and still it is susceptible to the described influences. Of course such problems do not impact data integrity, PCs do not drop bits for any of such reasons, but such problem do impact operation of devices such as sound card that essentially has to collect data, create frames of appropriate format, package them into blocks, time them and send them out on its digital output. It is here that all that nastiness comes to play and impacts the amount of jitter. And it is the jitter that you hear and describe as “softer, more indistinct presentation”. At the time I was building my PC I could easily reproduce this phenomena that was clearly audible, for example even by simply going between minimized footprint OS and OS with unrelated components not taken out, let alone HW components with spinning motors.

[Sasha]

Would this be the reason for the BDP1 to start sounding like an off-station fm tuner when writing files to the attached HD's? Happens all the time  in my situation, I just can not play a decent track when writing to the BDP1 and updating it.

Marius

Writing is more resource intensive operation, and as I explained in reply to OP, any such event will result in more jitter produced in the sound card’s digital output.

[AudioLifer]

I do not think it has anything to do with USB cable.
I have build my own dedicated PC based transport (my version of BDP-1 if you will) and I believe you have experienced the same issue on BDP-1 that you would ( and I did) on any PC based transport. Do not forget that BDP-1 is exactly that, a PC with sound card running Linux OS and it is susceptible to the same kind of problems. And those problems are related to the load you place on its PSU, USB, the interference a device with motor (hard disk, fan, etc.) can induce on data lines, all of which ultimately leads to your sound card producing more jitter at such times.
This is why people go to extreme length to minimize OS footprint, disable all non essential HW and SW components, develop schemes to isolate sound card from bus power, etc. when building performance focused (not feature rich) PC based transports.
BDP-1 has very good PSUs and isolation but still it is a PC, and still it is susceptible to the described influences. Of course such problems do not impact data integrity, PCs do not drop bits for any of such reasons, but such problem do impact operation of devices such as sound card that essentially has to collect data, create frames of appropriate format, package them into blocks, time them and send them out on its digital output. It is here that all that nastiness comes to play and impacts the amount of jitter. And it is the jitter that you hear and describe as “softer, more indistinct presentation”. At the time I was building my PC I could easily reproduce this phenomena that was clearly audible, for example even by simply going between minimized footprint OS and OS with unrelated components not taken out, let alone HW components with spinning motors.

Great response! I'm no engineer or computer genius but your explanation sounds perfectly valid to me. Different memory devices can create different kinds of problems to the sound card, which in turn affects jitter. It would certainly explain my findings in the differences I heard. Thanks for making it so clear. 

Robert

[skunark]

Hi Skunark,

What version of the firmware are you running?  You know what after reading this post I immediately re-read the man file for mpd's config file i have completely misinterpreted the man file, thanks for catching this.  As for my drive recommendation nothing has changed the fact is you can't get a better "bang" for your buck if you go with a hard disk drive.

Cheers,
Chris

Hello Chris,

The FW version for my BDP is S1.16 2011-07-15.     Yeah totally agree HDD is the bigger bang for the buck.  Even allowed me to set up a cron job/script to rsync files between the mac and mpd, it's very convienent solution all the way around.

Jim