[firedog]

http://www.olive.us/products/music_servers/olive3hd/compare.html

Interesting. Does 24/192. Essentially like the $2500 unit, with 3 differences:

only 500 GB HD
no wireless networking, only ethernet
connectivity limited: only analogue out, but no digital ins or outs

I think this is a smart marketing move. This really turns the Olive into a hi-fi "appliance". No network to setup, just plug it into line in and play. I don't think you actually need the ethernet for anything other than file transfer or OS update, or Internet radio.

But if you just want to insert and rip your CDs, this seems like a good option. With the price, I think this will be preferred by many potential users to the Logitech Touch. Pretty much an HD appliance, no "hassle" of adding external drive, loading software, etc. No need for extenal DAC.

[launche]

All the things you mentioned it doesn't have are all the things I'd like to have.
I don't see a lot of success for this product.  I think people expect much more connectivity options that this unit provides.  When 1-2TB drives are becoming the norm, offering a modest 500GB unit seems doomed from the start.  Memory is cheap, why hold it hostage?

[kgturner]

I have a Touch and don't really see a comparison between these two. The Olive is nice for what is, but I don't wanna be chained to only a 500GB drive and no option for an external DAC. I don't care for wireless, so the ethernet only option is fine with me. Sure the Touch is more involved to get up and running, but for a $700 savings compared to the Olive, I'm sure many will accept the "hassle". How do they compare "soundwise" because "spec-wise" I'm not seeing a lot of value.

Kevin T

[eclein]

I agree with you guys, I just don't see how this unit will compete with much cheaper and more flexible solutions. I currently use a DUET with and external DAC/Pre and have over a TB of storage for less then half of this units price combined, they do look very nice but for 1K I think you can do better with other alternatives.

[kgturner]

I can see to a degree how the Olive could be cost effective compared to say a Touch plus $1k external DAC. However, with the Olive you're locked to their DAC and a pitifully small (by today's standards) HD. With the Touch, you can roll your own DAC til your hearts content and the sky is the limit as far as storage goes.

Kevin T

[Stu Pitt]

Does it have some sort of lossless space saving format like FLAC or Apple Lossless?   If not, the memory is less than it seems. 

If I were an Olive designer, I'd make a product with 1TB internal memory, a lossless compression format like FLAC and/or Apple Lossless, no internal DAC (digital out only), and controllable by an iPhone, Touch, etc.

That would be the most efficient and useful product for most people like us IMO.  Maybe I'm wrong.  Wouldn't be the first or last time. 

[Phil A]

Does it have some sort of lossless space saving format like FLAC or Apple Lossless?   If not, the memory is less than it seems. 

If I were an Olive designer, I'd make a product with 1TB internal memory, a lossless compression format like FLAC and/or Apple Lossless, no internal DAC (digital out only), and controllable by an iPhone, Touch, etc.

That would be the most efficient and useful product for most people like us IMO.  Maybe I'm wrong.  Wouldn't be the first or last time.

I agree totally.  I recently got the Touch which I use with the Bryston DAC which I already owned.  I paid $180 for the Touch new with a coupon.  It gives me much more flexibility.  The new Marantz unit looks interesting (I think it is $700 list and has other DAC inputs), internet radio too.

[roscoeiii]

Yeah, the lack of a digital output is a surprise. Really liked the RWA modded Olive Symphony I had until I was home for enough of the day that the battery supply wasn't working for me. But my preference was for an external DAC. And I loved having the option of an external drive for that unit (which had only an 80GB HD). Their units also seem to no longer have the A/D converter that earlier Olives had. The earlier units were nice one box (or one box and a DAC) solutions, but it seems that they are stripping functionality that earlier units had, rather than adding functionality to new models. And wow. $1500 difference between models?

Maybe reviews will reveal these to be fabulous units, but based on specs, and even compared to the functionality of previous models...

[Vincent Kars]

The earlier models where rebadged Hifidelios’s
The bankrupt of the manufacturer forced Olive to develop their own.
They are not really stripping but building from scratch.
Some user experience: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1091695&page=4
The Hifidelio still exist but there is hardly any development: http://www.hifidelio.org/

In general I do think these music servers are rather expensive for what in essence is a PC with a soundcard: http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/HW/HD_players.html

[firedog]

I think you guys are missing the point.

I don't know if the Olive units are really any good, but the target market is all the people who haven't even heard of a DAC (about 99% of the population), and want computer audio, but only if it has use and setup similar to a traditional audio component: hook up 2 RCA cables and turn it on. No mention of usb, DAC, drivers, usb to SPDIF converters, ripping software, playback software, optimizing computer setup, etc., etc.

Basically, they want their iPod, but in a format that fits with their home audio/HT system and looks like something that belongs in their living room, and replaces the traditional CD player in terms of sound. The last thing they want is an additional box (such as DAC or external drive) and more cables.

The Olive units support FLAC. As far as HD size, they make a more expensive audiophile model with 1-2TB and more connectivity options. The iPhone/iPod Touch option already exists for both models.

But again, let's deal with the real world: how many people own more than 300 CD's? An exceedingly small part of the population. I bet only a small minority even have 200. 500GB of FLAC  is something like 750 albums. So that also takes care of about 99% of the population.

Not everyone is a computer audiophile, guys.

[low.pfile]

All excellent points firedog!!

And even I want one box, but it has to sound like the five I have.

[JEaton]

I think you guys are missing the point.

I think you're right about one thing... Somebody has definitely missed the point.  Either it's Olive or it's everyone posting above.

Not everyone is a computer audiophile, guys.

I don't know if the Olive units are really any good, but the target market is all the people who haven't even heard of a DAC (about 99% of the population), and want computer audio, but only if it has use and setup similar to a traditional audio component: hook up 2 RCA cables and turn it on. No mention of usb, DAC, drivers, usb to SPDIF converters, ripping software, playback software, optimizing computer setup, etc., etc.

I think the actual target market is very different from this.  The Olive customer is an audiophile, but isn't very knowledgeable about computers and wants to get into 'computer audio' with the least fuss.  He's looking for an all-in-one system, doesn't want to deal with ripping software, hard drives, computer networks and all the rest.

Basically, they want their iPod, but in a format that fits with their home audio/HT system and looks like something that belongs in their living room, and replaces the traditional CD player in terms of sound. The last thing they want is an additional box (such as DAC or external drive) and more cables.

No, I'm afraid that the price points are just out of line with this theory.  That customer doesn't spend $1000 on an audio component.

The Olive units support FLAC. As far as HD size, they make a more expensive audiophile model with 1-2TB and more connectivity options. The iPhone/iPod Touch option already exists for both models.

I think the limitations are somewhat arbitrary and designed to push the "audiophile" into the much higher priced unit.  They'd have a very tough time selling a $2500 component if it had the same capabilities as the $1000 model.  They certainly didn't save anything to justify a $1500 price difference just by leaving out WiFi, digital outs and a larger hard drive.

But again, let's deal with the real world: how many people own more than 300 CD's? An exceedingly small part of the population. I bet only a small minority even have 200. 500GB of FLAC  is something like 750 albums. So that also takes care of about 99% of the population.

I think the hard drive is the least of the entry level unit's problems.  That's more like 1400 albums in FLAC.  But the HDD size choice is rather odd, when for a minimal difference in cost it could have been twice that size.  Again, it seems designed only to make someone consider the much higher priced model.  It's hard to imagine that they couldn't easily drop a larger hard drive into the unit as drive prices fall, but I don't suppose that they want to.

I think Olive has simply missed the mark with their 'entry level' server. It's the type of mistake made by many companies.