Computer Audio Asylum

Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies.

Return to Computer Audio Asylum

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?

71.46.92.55
Posted on July 5, 2015 at 07:04:34
spons
 Is there a reason one of these protocols would sound better than the other when streaming from the same Windows 7 PC using ALAC files?

(1) JRiver streaming via DLNA
(2) iTunes streaming via AirPlay

I have two receivers that have both AirPlay and DLNA capabilities - a Marantz NR-1603 and a Yamaha RN301 - and I would swear one of these protocols sounds a lot better than the other on both receivers, which have wired ethernet connections. The streaming PC is also connected via wired ethernet.

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
If you have both, try it and report back..., posted on July 5, 2015 at 08:12:53
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001
 Do you need an Apple Computer to stream via AirPlay?

Have no idea as I haven't owned a Windows machine in years.

My next attempt at wireless streaming involves trying to set up an 'Apple TV' for audio streaming only via AirPlay using the digital optical port on the Apple TV directly into my OPPO HA-1 DAC/Headphone amp.

What are the chances of that actually working?

Anyone care to comment?


First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 5, 2015 at 08:36:00
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46280
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
 AirPlay transcodes everything to CD quality Apple Lossless but packs a number of other conveniences and features in addition to audio streaming. It works great for secondary systems around the home but I would not use it in your primary setup especially if have 'hi-res' music files.



 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 5, 2015 at 08:56:39
spons
 I guess I wasn't clear in my initial post. I currently have both iTunes/AirPlay and JRiver/DNLA streaming setups running in parallel and have convinced myself that one of them sounds better than the other.

I just wondered why. And I did not want to bias any answers by saying which I prefer.

I have JRiver configured to stream my ALAC files with no conversion, and as Abe notes, AirPlay should be just passing along ALAC files that are not hi-res.

I'll give a hint and say that the sonic results are not what I would have expected.

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 5, 2015 at 11:20:39
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46280
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
In each case, what are you streaming to? Why don't you tell us which sounds better.

Personally, I use AirPlay sometimes for videos, movies, music, or to 'mirror' the screen from my iPad/iPhone to secondary systems in the family room or bedrooms. It works quite nicely, reliably, and with no fuss.




 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 5, 2015 at 11:43:20
spons
 I'm streaming to a receiver - either a Marantz NR-1603 (family room) or a Yamaha RN301 (office).

These receivers both have built-in DLNA and AirPlay capabilities, so each shows up as a possible media renderer when using JRiver or iTunes/AirPlay.

It's the AirPlay stream that sounds much better to me on both receivers. More detailed, but yet smoother treble, and better definition in the bass and midbass.

I just wish I had an idea of why that would be the case.

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 5, 2015 at 11:51:39
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46280
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
Don't know why iTunes/Airplay sounds better. Maybe better integration between the two vs JRiver/DLNA ? Who knows but if Airplay sounds better and it works for you, why not.



 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 5, 2015 at 12:05:29
spons
 It must be that the AirPlay implementation in the receivers is somehow better than the DLNA implementation.

The superiority of the AirPlay was surprising to me. In the past (when I had better hi-fi systems) I have used AirPlay to stream to Airport Express and AppleTV devices, and the resulting sound quality was pretty flat and lifeless, even when using the TOSLINK outputs into a decent DAC. Suitable for background music, but not for critical listening.

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 5, 2015 at 12:18:07
Roseval
Audiophile

Posts: 1845
Joined: March 31, 2008
 If I remember correctly, in the past JRiver downsampled everything to MP3 to save band width.
I wonder if ALAC is supported by DLNA as it has been a proprietary protocol for long.
If not, it is probably converted by JRiver to MP3
You might check JRivers DLNA settings.


The Well Tempered Computer

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 5, 2015 at 14:48:49
spons
 I have the JRiver server set to stream without doing any transcoding. I can confirm no transcoding is happening since the receiver's output screen shows the file being played is ALAC with the same bit-rate as the original file.

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 5, 2015 at 15:02:28
Roseval
Audiophile

Posts: 1845
Joined: March 31, 2008
 If this is the case, DSP like format conversion can't explain the perceived differences.
The Well Tempered Computer

 

If you're into some extreme entertainment - post this on JRiver forum., posted on July 5, 2015 at 16:23:36
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 7181
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 I'd be REALLY interested to see what happens.

You know, like those Discovery Channel videos, where pack of hyenas feed, biting each other and pushing each other away, on an animal that's still alive...

 

Actually, posting it here is a pretty bold move..., posted on July 5, 2015 at 17:40:12
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001
 From one hyena to another, just sayin'.




First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 6, 2015 at 03:42:08
Dave_K
 I know that on MacOS, AirPlay audio goes through the OS audio chain and therefore may be subject to mixing, volume control, and format conversions. But I have no idea how AirPlay on Windows works.

On my system, AirPlay streaming from my MacBook Air doesn't sound as good as streaming CDs via DLNA from my NAS. But YMMV.

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 6, 2015 at 05:24:57
spons
 Dave_K,

Thanks for your comments. I would certainly trust comparisons done on your system more than mine.

Are you streaming wirelessly from the MacBook Air? Maybe that explains the difference. I have never tried wireless streaming on my system. I'm just using the Remote app to control iTunes on a dedicated HTPC.

I know that the amplifier section of my cheap Marantz receiver is sort of fat and squishy, so I have a better external amp on order (Odyssey Khartago). I wonder if I will still prefer AirPlay over the DLNA after the system upgrade.

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 6, 2015 at 13:40:07
Gordon Rankin
Manufacturer

Posts: 2928
Joined: June 9, 2000
 spons,

The biggest problem with DLNA is setup. Compared to Airplay it's a freaken nightmare. I think DLNA originators could have nailed down the specs a little more and it would be easier.

Anyway...

JRiver you need to specify to push data to the renderer. Also you need to set JRIver up so that it is sending PCM data.

If the renderer has to decode the files and pull them from the server then all bets are off and the sound will be miserable. Setting those options will make it sound better. I cannot recall were these settings are.

Thanks,
Gordon
J. Gordon Rankin

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 6, 2015 at 17:50:51
spons
 Gordon,

Thank you very much for your advice. I re-configured the JRiver DLNA server to transcode to PCM 16 and we have a new ballgame.

Based on a brief listening session consisting of my favorite "test tracks", the DLNA stream now easily bests AirPlay in all areas - size and depth of image, detail retrieval, air around individual instruments, and smoothness.

I think I have now been set free from the nasty iTunes program!

Andy

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 04:55:32
Dave_K
 Yes, Airplay is going via wireless from the laptop to my wireless router, and then wired Ethernet from the router through a LAN switch to the player. Whereas DLNA is going via wired Ethernet from the NAS to the switch to the player. I mainly use Airplay when browsing YouTube for new music. I only tried streaming CD rips from iTunes as a test.

Given that you are using iTunes on Windows and I was using it on MacOS, my guess is that our experiences differ because the Airplay audio chain is different on these two platforms.

 

and this is why I hate DLNA, posted on July 7, 2015 at 06:43:23
Gordon Rankin
Manufacturer

Posts: 2928
Joined: June 9, 2000
 Andy,

Really, there are over 2B DLNA devices in the world. Less than 0.00038% of them are used and of those, how many do you think are setup correctly or even know about J River?

To me DLNA is going to go to the wayside like Firewire did. There is no strength behind the protocol and you have 3 pieces that don't have to do anything other than pay a fee to have recognition as a DLNA device.

I have a number of these upscale protocol converters I guess you would say that either serve as a DLNA endpoint and stream to dacs via SPDIF or USB and they all do a terrible job.

But writers write glowing reviews about them and they are not bit perfect at all. Go figure, I guess you get paid to write, you better write something.

G.
J. Gordon Rankin

 

DLNA implementations not bit perfect?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 08:22:00
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46280
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
Would bit perfect DLNA depend on how it's configured? Is there any way to know for sure if one's DLNA setup is bit-perfect or are you left in the dark?



 

gapless?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 08:43:28
Tony Lauck
Audiophile

Posts: 13629
Location: Vermont
Joined: November 12, 2007
 Bit perfect includes gapless. Last I heard, DLNA was not gapless, except for certain combinations of tweaked products. (In other words, there was no specification that says if X talking to Y isn't gapless then there is a document which resolves either X or Y to be violating the DLNA agreement.)

This may have changed, as I looked into this some while ago.

Tony Lauck

"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar

 

RE: gapless?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 10:21:57
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Never had a gapless issue with dozens of DLNA compliant devices. What you noted is a thing of the past.

 

RE: gapless?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 11:06:27
Tony Lauck
Audiophile

Posts: 13629
Location: Vermont
Joined: November 12, 2007
 A little Googling shows that the problem still existed with some DLNA products as of November, 2014. Perhaps you were just lucky not to run into incompatible or unsupporting products. I believe it also depends on particular system configurations, e.g. how functions are being distributed between the separate network nodes.


Tony Lauck

"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar

 

RE: gapless?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 11:11:57
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Any manufacturer or server software developer that did not address the gapless issue by that time should not be taken seriously. I don't think I was getting lucky, it more than likely those who did come across were unlucky. :)

 

RE: gapless?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 13:53:57
Dave_K
 The UPnP standard includes the call SetNextAVTransportURI which is used by the control point to send the URL of the next track to the renderer. Renderers which support this feature can preload the next track and provide gapless playback. However, this feature is not universally supported by UPnP control points or renderers.

Also, Linn developed a set of extensions to the DLNA/UPnP standards and accompanying software stack. They released it as an open source project called OpenHome. It's main feature is on-device playlists which allow the player to be managed from multiple control points, to continue playback after a control point closes/disconnects, and support gapless playback. Most of the mainstream consumer electronics manufacturers have ignored it (Samsung, Sony et. al.) but several high end streaming audio manufacturers and control point apps have adopted it (e.g. Linn, Lumin, Auralic).

 

RE: gapless?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 14:19:35
Bob_C
Audiophile

Posts: 2667
Location: NY
Joined: July 31, 2000
 b'ut several high end streaming audio manufacturers and control point apps have adopted it (e.g. Linn, Lumin, Auralic)."

JPlay also uses the OpenHome standard...

 

RE: DLNA implementations not bit perfect?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 14:46:00
Dave_K
 The transport used for DLNA audio streaming is plain old http-get, which uses TCP and is bit perfect.

I kind of agree with Gordon on one thing, there are still a lot of half-assed implementations of DLNA out there. And JRiver is one of them. But there are good implementations too. I have a house full of DLNA stuff and it all pretty much just works as advertised.

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 15:51:58
pbarach
Audiophile

Posts: 3306
Location: Ohio
Joined: June 22, 2008
 On my system (Denon x4000 with AirPlay, iPhone 5 or 6+) the volume setting on the phone's music-playing app (whichever one you're sending over AirPlay) and the Denon's volume control are both in the circuit.

Using the same CD-quality WAV files, I get much clearer highs and better dynamic range listening to those files over DLNA than I do via AirPlay.

 

I would love to ditch JRiver..., posted on July 7, 2015 at 15:58:50
spons
 Dave_K,

Can you recommend better DLNA server software for Windows? I would use it for my ~35,000 ALAC music files only.

Or maybe a network device or NAS that could act as a server?

Thanks.
Andy

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 18:03:25
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Funny how a industry member whose livelihood depends on USB spews venom against DLNA and networked audio.

 

RE: I would love to ditch JRiver..., posted on July 7, 2015 at 18:31:05
Bob_C
Audiophile

Posts: 2667
Location: NY
Joined: July 31, 2000
 Runs on almost any platform.

 

And yet, despite all of that..., posted on July 7, 2015 at 18:52:31
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001
 he seems to have solved the original poster's problem.

From the link below:

"Thank you very much for your advice. I re-configured the JRiver DLNA server to transcode to PCM 16 and we have a new ballgame."

Amazing what an 'industry member' can accomplish irrespective of the technology on which their livelihood might depend, huh?




First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 19:09:27
Bob_C
Audiophile

Posts: 2667
Location: NY
Joined: July 31, 2000
 Were you dropped on your head as an infant???

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 19:18:27
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Somebody should have dropped you. Maybe you would not have turned out to be an argumentative, tight a$$d, trolling shill.

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 19:32:33
Bob_C
Audiophile

Posts: 2667
Location: NY
Joined: July 31, 2000
 Posting to ones self is a sign of early onset dementia.

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 19:59:59
Tony Lauck
Audiophile

Posts: 13629
Location: Vermont
Joined: November 12, 2007
 "Funny how a industry member whose livelihood depends on USB spews venom against DLNA and networked audio."

I know that Gordon spent big bucks for test equipment to isolate incompatibilities reported by customers. I'll bet that some of these were caused by s*** USB cables sold at outrageous prices by crooked cable vendors. I'll bet that others were software problems due to poorly conceived, specified, implemented and tested network audio software, including DLNA.

If you've escaped problems, that's probably because you're lucky and skillful.



Tony Lauck

"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 20:02:47
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Lucky and Skillful?...You flatter....:)

I heard it is better to be lucky than good.

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 7, 2015 at 20:17:38
Tony Lauck
Audiophile

Posts: 13629
Location: Vermont
Joined: November 12, 2007
 My talent is to read documentation and then intuitively configure the equipment so that it encounters a design bug. When the product concept is ill thought out, it can be difficult or impossible for a tech writer to produce a clear manual. I think that's how I zero in on potential problem areas. Fun to do, if one likes puzzles. Unfortunately, with audio the problems can result in subtle sonic degradation and these can be devilish to ferret out.

Getting the design of mixed signal equipment right is a very tough problem requiring multiple scarce engineering skills and there aren't many first rate designers with the needed skills in high end audio. The market is too small. There is more money to be made in computers, elecommunications and military electronics. Also, these other marketplaces generally have customers that are more technically competent than audiophiles. High end audio manufacturing is not a market I would want to go into. However, if I were a good snake oil salesmen and con man, then perhaps I would feel otherwise.



Tony Lauck

"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar

 

RE: I would love to ditch JRiver..., posted on July 8, 2015 at 04:31:13
Dave_K
 For a music-only DLNA server to be installed on a Windows PC, the two most popular options are MinimServer and Asset UPnP. If you Google MinimServer vs. Asset you will find a lot of threads discussing them.

MinimServer is free. It requires Java. One downside is that you have to manually tell it to rescan when you modify your music collection. It is also a bit unforgiving of metadata issues & inconsistencies, which can either be looked at as a good thing (it will make it obvious there is something to fix) or a bad thing (you will have a bunch of uncatalogued files if you don't fix them).

Asset has a free version and a $26 premium version. It's from the same developer as dBpoweramp. The premium version has a number of nice features that make it better than MinimServer IMHO.

Another free music-only server is Linn Kazoo server. It is a bit simpler than the others in that it has a fixed set of 5 views and doesn't support transcoding.

If you want to serve more than just music files, e.g. videos and photos, then I suggest Twonky. Only downside to Twonky is that in Folder view it sorts album tracks alphabetically rather than in track order, but that can be changed.

I have been using a NAS (and now a home server) for about 5 years and I can't imagine going back to the days before I had it. But I use it for everything. If you're just going to put music on it to serve via DLNA, I'm not sure it would be worth the investment.

 

RE: DLNA implementations not bit perfect?, posted on July 8, 2015 at 05:10:03
Roseval
Audiophile

Posts: 1845
Joined: March 31, 2008
 The transport used for DLNA audio streaming is plain old http-get, which uses TCP and is bit perfect.

Correct but this doesn't guaranteed bit perfect audio as the server or the renderer might do transcoding.
When DLNA devices discover each other on the network, they exchange their properties (indeed pretty much like USB device enumeration).
If these properties don't match, the server is supposed to do the transcoding to a format the renderer does understand.
Part of the DLNA standard is that all should be able to handle raw PCM.
This is probably ones best bet.
Configure the server to output raw PCM only (must be done anyway to feed a DAC) and probably most renders will play it.
Of course it might be that a renderer don't support 24 bit or is limited in sample rate.
A nice tool is the Media Renderer Analyser by Whitebear

Anyway DLNA servers like Minim or Asset UPnP allows you to configure them.
With a lot of DLNA servers you are completely in the dark what they are doing and no way to configure them.

DLNA is a great concept, all kind of devices communicating with each other without any user interference needed. Say USB style connectivity over the network.
Practice is not as bad imho as some are suggesting.
A couple of years ago it was a disaster, indeed very bad implementations. Today it is reasonable mature.

My feeling is that for high quality audio over the network a AES67 style protocol like e.g. Ravenna is a better choice.

The Well Tempered Computer

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 8, 2015 at 06:47:39
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 "....these other marketplaces generally have customers that are more technically competent than audiophiles."

For their sake, and ours, I certainly hope so.

 

AES67/Revenna, posted on July 8, 2015 at 08:23:47
Tony Lauck
Audiophile

Posts: 13629
Location: Vermont
Joined: November 12, 2007
 "My feeling is that for high quality audio over the network a AES67 style protocol like e.g. Ravenna is a better choice."

This may be, especially if one purchases very expensive high quality devices. However, be warned. The protocol is much like AES/EBU in regard to flexibility of clocking. It can be run with clocking in the transport, clocking at a separate node, and clocking at the DAC, depending on how the network is set up (within the limitations of individual products). If clocking is at the transport the situation will be like AES or SPDIF, and jitter on the cables may possibly affect jitter at the digital to analog conversion. The cable will be in the signal path and even if there is complete noise suppression in the DAC there may still be a timing effect.

The clocking in AES67/Ravenna is very complex, as it depends on network time synchronization (NTP protocol). In principle this can be made to work well, but the situation is much more complex than the previous generation of digital wiring for studios. The lowest jitter clocks are not variable or synthesized, they are fixed crystal oscillators and these can't be used with Ravenna unless they are the clock master or unless the DAC itself is using an asynchronous sample rate converter. {All this complexity is needed in studios to allow for multiple channels with multiple boxes of ADCs and DACs. None of this complexity is necessary or appropriate for typical audiophile systems where there is one box that performs a DAC function for all the available channels. In addition, studios require very low latency to make overdubbing possible, something that is irrelevant with usual music playback, although it is relevant if the same equipment is used for teleconferencing.)


Tony Lauck

"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar

 

RE: AES67/Revenna, posted on July 8, 2015 at 10:45:07
Roseval
Audiophile

Posts: 1845
Joined: March 31, 2008
 Good points
Back to DLNA :)
The Well Tempered Computer

 

Marantz works well, Yamaha does not, posted on July 8, 2015 at 12:19:35
spons
 To prove Gordon's point about the bugginess of DLNA:

I listened for a few hours last night to the Marantz in the family room fed by JRiver transcoding to L16 (PCM 16 bit) and it sounded great and operated flawlessly.

Today in my office I found that the Yamaha plays about five seconds of noise (like at end of a record if you don't pick up the needle) before each track. Sounds great after that, but the track info is all messed up.

I'm going to try a new server program tonight. Either JRiver or the Yamaha may have to go bye-bye.

I still have dreams of getting a higher-end system in my office where I listen at least nine hours a day and currently have the $250 Yamaha RN301 receiver and a pair of 50-year-old Fisher XP-1's. It won't take much to make me sell the Yamaha and put the speakers back in the closet.

 

Agreed, posted on July 8, 2015 at 14:13:23
Dave_K
 AES67 and similar protocols are for real time audio distribution where low latency and time synchronization are design drivers. DLNA is just a file streaming protocol.

 

RE: Marantz works well, Yamaha does not, posted on July 8, 2015 at 14:38:53
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Do your self a favor..dump Jriver and the yamaha and get a SOtM-1000 or a Bryston BDP-2. Or even a Simaudio MiNd, or the new $499 Auralic Aries Mini

You will be done with the angst. It will just work. Every file format.

http://www.sotm.sonore.us/SOtM2.html

http://www.bryston.com/products/digital_audio/BDP-2.html

http://www.simaudio.com/en/mind.html

There are others to choose form also.

http://www.audiostream.com/content/auralic-ariesmini#p51dWBFgmlpcDE2c.97

the Marantz NA8005 is also a proven entity.

 

Thanks for the advice. I just downloaded and set up Asset UPnP., posted on July 8, 2015 at 15:03:40
spons
 I'm using PlugPlayer as the remote control.

Asset UPnP is configured to output L16.

Operationally, pretty good so far on both the Marantz and Yamaha systems. No static between tracks anymore, but occasionally a track starts, plays a few seconds, and then restarts. This has happened a couple times on both systems.

The surprise is the improvement in sound quality on the Marantz system. Increased clarity, detail retrieval, and bigger, better-defined soundstage. Bass lines also seem a lot easier to follow with no loss of fullness.

I sure don't mind spending $26 on Asset UPnP just for the increase in fidelity, let alone the elimination of the static.

Now, is there an iOS remote control better then PlugPlayer that I should be using?

 

RE: AirPlay vs. DLNA Streaming - Which is better?, posted on July 8, 2015 at 15:06:34
spons
 Looks like you already knew what I didn't - that streaming WAV or PCM is best. I guess the idea is to make decoding as easy as possible for the renderer.

 

Do you even need a server program?, posted on July 8, 2015 at 15:17:49
pbarach
Audiophile

Posts: 3306
Location: Ohio
Joined: June 22, 2008
 I use SMB shares on a Windows 7 machine, and there is no server program such as JRiver needed. With my Oppo 103 as the player for these files (including DSD-64), streaming is problem-free unless my virus/malware protection program gets pissed off and blocks the sharing--hasn't happened for a while.

I also have the paid version of Asset uPnP, the latest version of which will send DSD files without transcoding. But on the Oppo, it's buggy--it will unpredictably stop in the middle of a file and jump up several levels of folders to the list of available servers on my home network.

 

Bubble UPnP, posted on July 8, 2015 at 16:04:40
Dave_K
 I used to use PlugPlayer 5 years ago because there weren't a lot of choices, but it was buggy then and still buggy two years ago when I gave it another try.

BubbleUPnP is the best general purpose, non-brand-specific control point app I've used.

If you're using an iPad, check out the Lumin app. It has a completely different, richer interface. Some love it, some hate it.

Also check out BubbleUPnP server. It is not a DLNA server so it doesn't replace Asset, it acts as a proxy between DLNA servers and renderers to provide extra features. I use it to turn my non-OpenHome renderers into OpenHome renderers, mainly to have persistent playlists.

 

RE: Do you even need a server program?, posted on July 8, 2015 at 16:20:59
Dave_K
I also have the paid version of Asset uPnP, the latest version of which will send DSD files without transcoding. But on the Oppo, it's buggy--it will unpredictably stop in the middle of a file and jump up several levels of folders to the list of available servers on my home network.


I also have an Oppo 103 and I've seen this happen when other DLNA servers are discovered on the network after I've already started playing something. Typically it's a Windows PC showing up a minute or so after my NAS. However, this only seems to happen when using the Oppo's on-screen browser, which is how I browse & stream movies from my NAS. I don't usually stream music to the Oppo anymore since I have another device for that, but back when I was playing music via the Oppo I was using a control point app (usually BubbleUPnP) and did not have the same problems. So if you are using the Oppo's browser, try a proper control point instead. It's also a heck of a lot more convenient to use a touch screen control point app then browse with the Oppo.

 

PlugPlayer is still too buggy to be of any use., posted on July 8, 2015 at 18:23:18
spons
 Looks like I need to get an Android device for the BubbleUPnP app. I think I'll pick up a little Android tablet tomorrow to use for remote duty.

 

RE: Bubble UPnP, posted on July 9, 2015 at 03:42:17
Dave_K
 Oops. I forgot you said iOS. My wife has an iPad Mini and I use it occasionally as a control point. The Lumin and Linn Kazoo apps are the ones I use on iOS, but they only work with OpenHome renderers. For a non-OpenHome renderer, I know you can use Kinsky but it's not the prettiest app. I know there are lots of other iOS control point apps, but I just haven't used anything else in years.

 

Page processed in 0.047 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]