Bryston BDP-1 Sneak Peak for Audiocircle

Napalm · « **Reply #180 on:** 5 Jul 2010, 09:26 pm »

Quote from: srb on 5 Jul 2010, 09:20 pm

I have only had mine in service for about 6 months so I can't speak to long-term reliability, but it has been perfect in its operation so far and at this point I would purchase the brand again.

My model only has external USB, it does not have eSATA. They have a nice product matrix to compare features: http://www.synology.com/enu/products/compare_spec.php

Steve

Hi Steve,

Did you try this backup function? My understanding is that the USB drive used for the backup would be directly readable by a PC computer (i.e. the backup works by copying the directories/files, not by creating some proprietary huge backup file). This is absolutely great since if the NAS fails you can continue your work immediately by connecting the backup drive to your PC via USB and accessing those files. Is my understanding correct?

Thanks,
Nap.

werd · « **Reply #181 on:** 5 Jul 2010, 09:36 pm »

Quote from: Napalm on 5 Jul 2010, 09:26 pm

Hi Steve,

Did you try this backup function? My understanding is that the USB drive used for the backup would be directly readable by a PC computer (i.e. the backup works by copying the directories/files, not by creating some proprietary huge backup file). This is absolutely great since if the NAS fails you can continue your work immediately by connecting the backup drive to your PC via USB and accessing those files. Is my understanding correct?
Thanks,
Nap.

probably not!!!!

srb · « **Reply #182 on:** 5 Jul 2010, 09:53 pm »

Quote from: Napalm on 5 Jul 2010, 09:26 pm

Did you try this backup function? My understanding is that the USB drive used for the backup would be directly readable by a PC computer (i.e. the backup works by copying the directories/files, not by creating some proprietary huge backup file). This is absolutely great since if the NAS fails you can continue your work immediately by connecting the backup drive to your PC via USB and accessing those files. Is my understanding correct?

No, I haven't tried it (I don't have an external USB drive). I am actually using mine for daily file backup of my PC as well as archiving of TV shows and movies that I don't care if I loose.

The backup software I am using is installed on my PC (Synology Data Replicator 3) and it backs up individual directories and files. The backup software that the NAS uses to back itself up is internal to the NAS, and I would assume also makes individual directory and file copies.

So I believe your understanding is correct, but I can't verify for sure. Maybe a good time to test Synology support through email or forum.

Steve

Napalm · « **Reply #183 on:** 5 Jul 2010, 11:59 pm »

Now this one is really tempting:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/networking/display/synology-ds409slim.html

http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2009/10/slim-is-in-laptop-drives-come-to-nas.ars

Nap.

Napalm · « **Reply #184 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 12:54 am »

I eventually settled for the DS209.

It's setting up as we're speaking. Now James has to hurry up with the BDP-1.

That parity check takes forever.

Nap.

Napalm · « **Reply #185 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 01:07 am »

Mhhh looking at how fast it goes the BDP-1 will hit the stores before that parity check finishes.....

Nap.

Aramys · « **Reply #186 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 09:40 am »

I hope the BDP-1 will support HD-AAC. Being backward compatible (for its lossy part) with all the current AAC enabled devices and softwares, I see it as a very serious contender for the future in the world of lossless audio formats.

http://www.iis.fraunhofer.de/EN/bf/amm/products/hdaac.jsp

James Tanner · « **Reply #187 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 10:42 am »

Quote from: Aramys on 7 Jul 2010, 09:40 am

I hope the BDP-1 will support HD-AAC. Being backward compatible (for its lossy part) with all the current AAC enabled devices and softwares, I see it as a very serious contender for the future in the world of lossless audio formats.

http://www.iis.fraunhofer.de/EN/bf/amm/products/hdaac.jsp

No I am sorry the only lossless we will support initially is FLAC. The purpose of the BDP-1 is to go in combination with our external DAC (BDA-1) and play 'native' high resolution digital files (AIFF, WAVE). We like FLAC because it is open and does not require any corporate approvals. 20 years from today you will still be able to play a FLAC file.

james

Napalm · « **Reply #188 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 11:06 am »

Quote from: James Tanner on 7 Jul 2010, 10:42 am

We like FLAC because it is open and does not require and corporate approvals. 20 years from today you will still be able to play a FLAC file.

Nap.

Aramys · « **Reply #189 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 12:03 pm »

Time will tell

HD-AAC is based on open standards (but I agree about corporate approvals).

Aramys

Quote from: James Tanner on 7 Jul 2010, 10:42 am

No I am sorry the only lossless we will support initially is FLAC. The purpose of the BDP-1 is to go in combination with our external DAC (BDA-1) and play 'native' high resolution digital files (AIFF, WAVE). We like FLAC because it is open and does not require any corporate approvals. 20 years from today you will still be able to play a FLAC file.

james

Napalm · « **Reply #190 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 01:27 pm »

Quote from: Aramys on 7 Jul 2010, 12:03 pm

HD-AAC is based on open standards.

According to which definition of "open standards". It there any patent related to it?

Nap.

P.S. Just checked their site. Quote: "Fraunhofer IIS offers reliable, high-quality HD-AAC softwareimplementations. Fraunhofer licenses its codecs [...]". Why would anyone want to store his data in a format that is just *licensed* to him.

Aramys · « **Reply #191 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 01:36 pm »

I'm no specialist about licensing but it should be the same as MP3 for example. HD-AAC is based on MPEG4-SLS. You can see the link I gave in a previous post if you need further informations.

Aramys

Quote from: Napalm on 7 Jul 2010, 01:27 pm

According to which definition of "open standards". It there any patent related to it?

Nap.

Napalm · « **Reply #192 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 01:41 pm »

Quote from: Aramys on 7 Jul 2010, 01:36 pm

I'm no specialist about licensing but it should be the same as MP3 for example. HD-AAC is based on MPEG4-SLS. You can see the link I gave in a previous post if you need further informations.

Aramys

Have you never seen US corporations abusing patent and copyright laws in the most despicable ways? To the extent of making it unbelievably ridiculous but very damaging to the victims?

Why would I want to expose myself in any way to this s**t? After more than 2 decades of Microsoft & RIAA (Apple is just playing catch up with their iPhones/iPads) we should know better?

Cautious Nap.

Napalm · « **Reply #193 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 01:44 pm »

Quote from: Napalm on 5 Jul 2010, 09:26 pm

My understanding is that the USB drive used for the backup would be directly readable by a PC computer (i.e. the backup works by copying the directories/files, not by creating some proprietary huge backup file).

Confirmed. The backup is a rsync-like job and the USB disk used as a backup target can be directly used by a PC.

Nap.

Aramys · « **Reply #194 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 02:11 pm »

Let the market decide.

Aramys

Quote from: Napalm on 7 Jul 2010, 01:41 pm

Have you never seen US corporations abusing patent and copyright laws in the most despicable ways? To the extent of making it unbelievably ridiculous but very damaging to the victims?

Why would I want to expose myself in any way to this s**t? After more than 2 decades of Microsoft & RIAA (Apple is just playing catch up with their iPhones/iPads) we should know better?

Cautious Nap.

Napalm · « **Reply #195 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 04:14 pm »

Quote from: Aramys on 7 Jul 2010, 02:11 pm

Let the market decide.

Aramys

"The market" decided "iPod" "iTunes" and "Bose".

We're in a small minority here.

Nap.

Aramys · « **Reply #196 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 07:38 pm »

Yes, exactly. That's why I believe in HD-AAC for the future. It could become the "standard" chosen by Apple for iTunes the day they'll launch a real lossless offer because HD-AAC files are compatible with all the current Apple's players and software (the lossy part of the file). As I said previously, time will tell.

Quote from: Napalm on 7 Jul 2010, 04:14 pm

"The market" decided "iPod" "iTunes" and "Bose".

We're in a small minority here.

Nap.

Napalm · « **Reply #197 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 08:27 pm »

Quote from: Aramys on 7 Jul 2010, 07:38 pm

Yes, exactly. That's why I believe in HD-AAC for the future. It could become the "standard" chosen by Apple for iTunes the day they'll launch a real lossless offer because HD-AAC files are compatible with all the current Apple's players and software (the lossy part of the file). As I said previously, time will tell.

AAC is such a winner but I still don't have a single AAC file on my computer or elsewhere......

Nap.

P.S. And by the way what was wrong with AIFF? Can't that be used for high res? Why a new format? Hint: they need a bunch of fresh patents as the old ones might expire. So voila, new format with new patents.

Aramys · « **Reply #198 on:** 7 Jul 2010, 11:34 pm »

Neither do I because it's lossy. Nevertheless, HD-AAC looks promising to me (because of its ability to carry both the lossy part "backward compatible with millions of ipods and alike" for the majority + the lossless part of the signal for us the minority) and if a major player of the online audio distribution decides to use it, I believe I'll quit ALAC and take that train. But we're speaking about the future here. We'll see.

Aramys

Quote from: Napalm on 7 Jul 2010, 08:27 pm

AAC is such a winner but I still don't have a single AAC file on my computer or elsewhere......

Nap.

P.S. And by the way what was wrong with AIFF? Can't that be used for high res? Why a new format? Hint: they need a bunch of fresh patents as the old ones might expire. So voila, new format with new patents.

James Tanner · « **Reply #199 on:** 8 Jul 2010, 12:11 am »

By the way - anyone know where I can pick up some Beta tapes?

james