[rif]

So this summer I'm going to rip my CDs.  I'd like to be able to access the flacs from multiple devices - android tablets, ipads, macbooks, win7.  I don't know yet what device to use on my 2 channel system.

Is a NAS the correct device to house all the music (and some regular files too)?  Whenever i read up on it, i get confused since the info quickly turns to plex, xbmc, others.

Thanks!

[jonbee]

I think it is the cheapest, most flexible solution. For me, the easiest to set up is Synology. You pay a bit more than others, but their software and support is very extensive and well executed. It is actually pretty easy to set up. Once wired to your router you run the cd on a computer on the network and it walks through the set up. You access it through the router either wired (which I prefer for non-mobile clients) or wirelessly. Afterword you can administer it from any device on the network using a web browser.
I found it to be one of the least painful experiences in networking.
I recommend getting a 2 drive or larger (model # starting w/2). There are a number of models. You can work through the features you need.

[Odal3]

There are many options to store the music files. A NAS could be anything from a special NAS box, to an old computer, an external hardrive, etc. A NAS is definitely recommended if you have a lot of music and video files (we are talking TB), but it can also come handy since it makes it easier to access the files from any device.

Plex, etc and other movieservers are only needed if you plan to rip your movies as well. This is just software running on the NAS (or server) and require a little bit more computer power.

Some people also use external hardrives that they connect to the home network via wifI or cable to the router.

How much will you store?

[rif]

Lets say 1 Tb. Music and files, no movies really.   A dedicated NAS is so inexpensive, at least on amazon, its not worth my time to create one from a small/leftover computer. 

After i posted this, i looked at synology.  They have a few under $300. And drives are cheap too (wd red).

If a nas is what i need, shoukd i go synology or qnap, or go more cinsumer with wd and netgear.  My gut says synology.

[srb]

A dedicated NAS is so inexpensive, at least on amazon, its not worth my time to create one from a small/leftover computer.

The dedicated NAS will be more efficient and doesn't require the larger power supply that many computers have to power video cards and other peripherals.  Most NAS can also be configured to automatically power down and back up on a set schedule.

If a NAS is what i need, should i go Synology or QNAP, or go more consumer with WD and Netgear.  My gut says Synology.

I've owned a Synology for 6+ years and that would still be my recommendation.  They're reliable and the OS is well thought out.

Steve

[Odal3]

Sounds like one of the synology, qnap boxes will be perfect for you. Go for the one that looks to be easiest to set up. Important: Don't forget to have a backup strategy for your precious Flac files. Even if you get a NAS, make sure to also get an external hardrive that you backup regularly and keep at a remote location (different house).

[Big Red Machine]

Since I already have 3 large hard drives, can I fool the Synology into thinking the external drive attached is its internal hard drive so I don't have to buy more hard drives?

[rif]

A quick bit of research and I'm looking at the Synology DS216j ($170) and the DS216play ($250).  The 216play has muchmuch better hardware specs.  I need to do some research on any functionality differences.  Haven't done any research on other brands

While im at it, is it better to get 2x XXTB drives or a single with the same TB,  i know raid adds redundancy, etc but is it really needed with modern drives in a home setting?

[jpm]

A quick bit of research and I'm looking at the Synology DS216j ($170) and the DS216play ($250).  The 216play has muchmuch better hardware specs.  I need to do some research on any functionality differences.  Haven't done any research on other brands

While im at it, is it better to get 2x XXTB drives or a single with the same TB,  i know raid adds redundancy, etc but is it really needed with modern drives in a home setting?

My recollection is that the chief advantage of the "play" models is their ability to transcode files on the fly, usually movies, for playback on hand held devices. If you don't foresee this scenario in your use case, your $ is probably better spent allowing for future expansion via a model that can use more than 2 drives. 

The benefit of RAID 0 or 1 is in speed. These are configurations preferred by gamers in their PCs.  If you opt for a 2 drive model, I would pass entirely on RAID 1 and add an external drive to back up the data. For example, 2  x 4TB drives should run you ~$100 each giving you 8TB of usable storage.  Seagate make an 8TB external drive that's regularly available on sale for close to $200, the catch is that this 8tb drive is for archiving and not suitable as a primary use drive. It's purpose, archiving, makes it ideal for backups. 

Buy internal drives that are certified as compatible my the NAS hardware manufacturer.  Pass on WD Red or others that are "designed for NAS" - they're just more expensive and not the best use of any limited budget while the ~$50 per 4tb drive you save is half the cost of the 8TB backup drive, a far more meaningful component of your setup.

If you can step up to a 3+ drive NAS, you can start to benefit from RAID 5 configurations which only require that one drive of your set be a parity drive. Further reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_RAID_levels

If you  think there's a possibility that you might want to rip DVDs or Blu-Ray's and stream them from your NAS at some point, seriously consider spending the extra money to enable you to expand storage for future PLEX use.  Quality NAS devices will enable you to expand an existing RAID array by adding more drives, as long as you have empty drive bays and choose a file format which supports this when you first set up the NAS. You cannot use external drives to expand a RAID array, only for backup. Lastly, and probably most importantly, make sure you connect your NAS to a UPS (uninterruptible power supply) - that $50 and up can save a lot of heartache!

I have found Synology to provide excellent and timely support for their products.

God luck, have fun!

[Hikmer]

A quick bit of research and I'm looking at the Synology DS216j ($170) and the DS216play ($250).  The 216play has muchmuch better hardware specs.  I need to do some research on any functionality differences.  Haven't done any research on other brands

While im at it, is it better to get 2x XXTB drives or a single with the same TB,  i know raid adds redundancy, etc but is it really needed with modern drives in a home setting?

I have the equivalent of the DS216j (DS215j) running with two 3TB WD Red drives mirrored.  It makes little sense to buy this device if you don't mirror your drives for redundancy...otherwise, just buy an external hard drive.  Faster drive IO will not typically translate into better sounding music.  Make it redundant for peace of mind....and forget about trying to run some fancy RAID 5, etc....I see these kinds of posts all the time and not sure what planet people are from who suggest anything but mirroring for the average user.

[rif]

jpm - that sounds feasible but is complete overkill for my needs

Hikmer - thats also some sound advice.

I'm now also looking at the ds116.  The only downside is its a 1 drive system.  But compared to the ds216, it has more ram and a higher clocked cpu.

[Phil A]

I have a 716+ in Raid 1. I still use local Oyen Digital drives attached to my music servers where I do more serious listening. Sounds better in my set-ups (not just my opinion - have had multiple people over).

[rif]

I really need a networked drive - i need access on several tablets, laptops, phones, other devices

[Odal3]

Highly recommend at least a two drive option  even if you don't need it today. I think with most NAS boxes you can start out with one drive and add the second later.

As JPM said, this will allow you to keep one drive for your media and the second for backups of all your songs, videos, pictures, other computers, etc.

No need to use RAID5, etc. (I don't and I have a server) if you keep external backups instead. RAID is not a backup solution.

[Hikmer]

I really need a networked drive - i need access on several tablets, laptops, phones, other devices

The Synology is your perfect choice...it has a ton of built in software that continually gets updated.  File sharing, tablet apps (that work!), remote access, automated backup, DNLA streaming, support for third party music servers like Minimserver, etc.  USB 3.0 and Hard wired network (only downside is doesn't come with built in wireless but leverage your router for this function anyway). 

It does far more than just a backup drive...in reality it has changed the way I deal with media from top to bottom.  I no longer use physical media except in rare cases I cannot rip something to FLAC or DSD.

[srb]

Highly recommend at least a two drive option even if you don't need it today.

I have an older DS110j.  It has served me well for audio and PC backup even with only an 800MHz processor and 128MB RAM.  But now I could use some more storage and would like to add a drive but it's only a single drive model.

I should have bought the 2 drive model for not that much more.

BTW, I don't think RAID is a necessity for home use.  In a business setting, any downtime costs big money and keeping the unit running is mandatory.  For home use, I have no problem with the time required to replace a drive and restore data from the backup drive.

I've also seen a few cases of a RAID 1 mirror that encountered data corruption on one drive that was mirrored to the other drive, so it's not a foolproof strategy.

Steve

[Hikmer]

I have an older DS110j.  It has served me well for audio and PC backup even with only an 800MHz processor and 128MB RAM.  But now I could use some more storage and would like to add a drive but it's only a single drive model.

I should have bought the 2 drive model for not that much more.

BTW, I don't think RAID is a necessity for home use.  In a business setting, any downtime costs big money and keeping the unit running is mandatory.  For home use, I have no problem with the time required to replace a drive and restore data from the backup drive.

I've also seen a few cases of a RAID 1 mirror that encountered data corruption on one drive that was mirrored to the other drive, so it's not a foolproof strategy.

Steve

While not foolproof, the situation you are describing is an outlier occurrence.  It would be akin to saying that one would have died in a car crash if they HAD worn a seat belt...which actually happened to me but still to this day I do not drive around thinking that it is safer to not wear my seat belt.  It was just a random occurrence that shouldn't be thought of as the normal advice...use two drives, mirror them, backup to cloud (or insert whatever technology you find most practical here).  That is the text book answer. 

[jonbee]

I have the equivalent of the DS216j (DS215j) running with two 3TB WD Red drives mirrored.  It makes little sense to buy this device if you don't mirror your drives for redundancy...otherwise, just buy an external hard drive.  Faster drive IO will not typically translate into better sounding music.  Make it redundant for peace of mind....and forget about trying to run some fancy RAID 5, etc....I see these kinds of posts all the time and not sure what planet people are from who suggest anything but mirroring for the average user.

I also use a 215j, w/ 2x3tb Seagate NAS drives. I'd use one of the better WD drives, though, if I did it again. Read reviews on amazon. I use a raid 1.
Because of the raid redundancy the available 3TB holds up to 400 movies and 1100 CDs in full size uncompressed files. When my drives get old I'll probably move to 4 TB drives.
Backups are key; I use an external Seagate 3tb drive. I think a basic raid 1 is important; drives do die spontaneously at times, and a raid in the synology makes that close to a non-event.
For your purposes synology offers a full menu of options for use, from simple file service to highly developed specialty servers, all very well documented, with very fast support from synology, too.  As to performance, I play only non-compressed mkv video and wav music files and I've never been aware of any quality issues from the NAS. I don't play content wirelessly anymore, as I found wireless to be unreliable, even with my high speed router and  short transmission distances. This may be due to electrical interference on the wireless channels, not anything related to the NAS.
Have fun! I've found the project to be a rewarding and not very painful experience. It is reliable and trouble free, w/ very little maintenance, besides backups.I'm very pleased with it, I'd never give it up.

[rif]

So in addition to the nas, i need another drive for backup?  Would that be a drive in a usb case that hooks up directly to the nas?  So if i go with 2x 2Tb drives in the nas, i need a 4Tb for the external backup?

[jonbee]

So in addition to the nas, i need another drive for backup?  Would that be a drive in a usb case that hooks up directly to the nas?  So if i go with 2x 2Tb drives in the nas, i need a 4Tb for the external backup?

If you use a raid 1, you'd need one 2tb drive. Usb 3.0 drive is best, backups are quite fast. If you use no raid, then 4 TB. The backup drive can be cheaper, as it gets little use.