INTERACT FORUM

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: NAS, Ripping Appliance or ......  (Read 2678 times)

down4jazz

  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 65
NAS, Ripping Appliance or ......
« on: September 10, 2012, 05:50:35 pm »

Currently using a single 2tb usb hd and one for back up. The 2tb is about 75% full and have been thinking NAS or ripping appliance or something like it (really don't know what's new out there). I love J River and I'm looking for compatibility. Would be looking for over 3tb storage for sure and back up. What are the current recommendations?

Both my music laptop and home pc are on ethernet. I rip on the PC to my USB hd connected to my laptop.

Asus laptop (dedicated for music)
Win 7 pro
Ayre QB9

Logged

psam

  • World Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
Re: NAS, Ripping Appliance or ......
« Reply #1 on: September 11, 2012, 12:42:56 am »

Currently using a single 2tb usb hd and one for back up. The 2tb is about 75% full and have been thinking NAS or ripping appliance or something like it (really don't know what's new out there). I love J River and I'm looking for compatibility. Would be looking for over 3tb storage for sure and back up. What are the current recommendations?

Both my music laptop and home pc are on ethernet. I rip on the PC to my USB hd connected to my laptop.

Asus laptop (dedicated for music)
Win 7 pro
Ayre QB9


I've been spending some time doing almost the same thing on my system. The library was on a 2TB e-SATA hard disk which ran out of space.

First I tried a Raidsonic Icybox NAS5520 with two HD bays.

It was a disaster, partitions being deleted on their own account, poor support and so on. I returned it and got me a Synology 212j. Again two HD bays, connected to my Ethernet GB switch so it can be accessed from any device on the network.

I installed a 3TB hd for Audio and a 2TB hd for video. So far, so good.

It seems to work fine with JRiver, with some glitches.

a) it seems the current firmware sucks, so transfer speeds are low (10-16 Mbytes/sec).
This is enough for playing even FullHD Blueray content, but moving the library from the old hd to the new one has been a frustrating job....
b) even after the library is moved to the NAS, some JRiver functions take a long time. For example when I autoimport the library (to update changes on the directory tree or new folders) , this is again a very long (hours) job. Updating the thumbnails and such requires a rather intensive data transfer between the PC and the NAS, and with such low transfer speeds it is a tedious task.

I assume the Synology people will improve the low speed of this firmware version soon. With reasonable speeds of 40-50 Mbytes/sec, I suppose the delays will become bearable.

Hope this helps!


Logged

preproman

  • Galactic Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 311
Re: NAS, Ripping Appliance or ......
« Reply #2 on: September 11, 2012, 06:30:43 am »

Currently using a single 2tb usb hd and one for back up. The 2tb is about 75% full and have been thinking NAS or ripping appliance or something like it (really don't know what's new out there). I love J River and I'm looking for compatibility. Would be looking for over 3tb storage for sure and back up. What are the current recommendations?

Both my music laptop and home pc are on ethernet. I rip on the PC to my USB hd connected to my laptop.

Asus laptop (dedicated for music)
Win 7 pro
Ayre QB9



WOW - your using the QB9!!!  That's a bad Mama Jama  ;D

I use unRAID.  It's fantasitc - I have not lost any data sense I had it for 3 something years now.  Check it out - lots of information to read.

http://lime-technology.com/forum/
Logged

Listener

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
Re: NAS, Ripping Appliance or ......
« Reply #3 on: September 11, 2012, 12:44:59 pm »

down4jazz,

If your files will fit on a single 3TB USB drive when you finish ripping all of those files, I'd suggest just buying a 3 TB drive to store your files and one or more 3 TB drives for backup.

Keeping your files on a NAS adds complexity and as pasm said, may limit performance on tasks that involve many files.  In particular, stay away from RAID unless you really understand how you will get the system up and running after a drive fails.

If you have more than one hard drive in a NAS box, noise and cooling will become an issue.  Be sure you understand how noisy a NAS box will be and whether that will be acceptable in your application.

Bill
Logged

psam

  • World Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
Re: NAS, Ripping Appliance or ......
« Reply #4 on: September 11, 2012, 02:37:16 pm »

down4jazz,

If your files will fit on a single 3TB USB drive when you finish ripping all of those files, I'd suggest just buying a 3 TB drive to store your files and one or more 3 TB drives for backup.

Keeping your files on a NAS adds complexity and as pasm said, may limit performance on tasks that involve many files.  In particular, stay away from RAID unless you really understand how you will get the system up and running after a drive fails.

If you have more than one hard drive in a NAS box, noise and cooling will become an issue.  Be sure you understand how noisy a NAS box will be and whether that will be acceptable in your application.

Bill

Bill, your comments are very much to the point.
I have not gone down the RAID path.
RAID1 is better suited for applications demanding constant backing up of data. It brings redundancy in case of a hd failure. On the other hand, both disks are spinning all the time, syncing with each other.
For our use, an incremental back up solution is the way to go.

I believe that data storage requirements will keep growing fast for all of us, so sooner or later we will be moving to NAS servers. Right now my DAC (Antelope Zodiac) accepts PCM up to 192kHz, but with this DSD trend soon the storage capacity for our music will increase.

Regarding noise and heat, both the Raidsonic and the Synology units are very quiet.
Logged

Vincent Kars

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 1154
Re: NAS, Ripping Appliance or ......
« Reply #5 on: September 11, 2012, 03:25:10 pm »

Over the years I have used different methods.

I started with a dedicated audio PC. Data on the local HD.
As I do have a NAS for backup, the audio was backed up to the NAS as well.
NAS is backed up using remote replication to a NAS at my sister’s house.

Most of the time I use my laptop for ripping, tagging, downloads, etc.
I had to transfer to the audio PC.
This can be done by file sharing with the audio PC but this was a bit annoying.
I reversed the procedure. Audio data on the NAS and a backup to the dedicated audio PC.
Now both access the same data.

Using a simple Qnap T110 performance is not as crisp as a local HD but not slow either.

I had the problem of having a library on each so how so keep the tagging consistent because I do correct on both. The auto import should take care of it but I had the ‘feeling’ I lost edits in the process. JRiver keeps tags and lib in sync but who comes first? The content of the library or the tags in the audio files?

Then I decided to run JRiver on the laptop and using the media network to connect to it from the dedicated audio PC. It works but somehow it does not appeal to me.

I decided to do file sharing again. This time the JRiver on the audio PC simply uses the library on the laptop, data on the NAS. You have to close JRiver on the laptop but now it is guaranteed that there is only 1 library and only 1 user maintaining it.

Wonder what my next architecture will be  :)
Logged

down4jazz

  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 65
Thanks to all....and
« Reply #6 on: September 11, 2012, 08:01:50 pm »

I'll diffenately check out the unraid.

I've gotten feedback elsewhere that I should simply just stick to larger USB drives for now....at least until firmware/software gets somewhat less buggy. Wow, there is so much stuff out there, all promising uncompromising performance, blah blah blah. I can't afford to experiment much.

Yes! the QB9 is simply GREAT at it's price point. I know it's been said before, but it's like listening to everything for the first time. It actually bettered my Wadia 301, which I sold to afford the DAC.  Now, I can't wait to come home and just listen to music. I was able to audition the QB9 a couple weekends in a row which sealed the deal. I tried to go cheaper with DAC's I'll leave unnamed and although they sounded decent, the QB9 blew them away.

Thanks again,
Jeff
Logged

csimon

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 1686
Re: NAS, Ripping Appliance or ......
« Reply #7 on: September 12, 2012, 06:11:46 am »

If your files will fit on a single 3TB USB drive when you finish ripping all of those files, I'd suggest just buying a 3 TB drive to store your files and one or more 3 TB drives for backup.

Keeping your files on a NAS adds complexity and as pasm said, may limit performance on tasks that involve many files.  In particular, stay away from RAID unless you really understand how you will get the system up and running after a drive fails.

If you have more than one hard drive in a NAS box, noise and cooling will become an issue.  Be sure you understand how noisy a NAS box will be and whether that will be acceptable in your application.

Sorry, but I think this paints a rather unfairly negative picture of NASes!

My NAS doesn't add complexity.

Also, look at Synology units for how they implement RAID. If one drive fails, you simply take it out and replace it, and the volume rebuilds itself automatically.  How easier can it be to replace a failed disk without losing any data?

Cooling and Noise are definitely not issues these days.  OK, they might be, but simply don't buy a noisy box that runs hot!  Check the specs.  Synology units are extremely quiet and cool. Especially if you put SSDs in them.  Look at the DS411slim for an extremely small and quiet box that can hold up to four 2.5" disks.

Hard disks are extremely fast these days, and SSDs even more so.  Yes, I suppose even a gigabit network can't match the speeds of a directly-connected USB 3.0 device, however when we're talking about these sort of speeds, how many times are you or anyone else going to be frequently doing extremely large and complex operations on thousands of files at the same time, enough to warrant the difference in speed between a USB 3.0 device and a gigabit ethernet device?

Sorry, I don't want to make this sound like an advert for Synology, they do have their quirks too which I don't like, but as far as I'm concerned your description of problems associated with NAS units just does not sound like my experience at all and are largely irrelevant.  It also makes it easier to share data across the network to multiple devices.
Logged

down4jazz

  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 65
Thanks CSIMON
« Reply #8 on: September 12, 2012, 09:42:31 am »

NOT being proficient as a PC tech, I do want to keep it simple. I can obviously see the benefit of a NAS. Synology seems to be the NAS of choice for this type of application. Any helpful hints or tricks would be appreciated.
Logged

Listener

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
Re: NAS, Ripping Appliance or ......
« Reply #9 on: September 12, 2012, 12:39:01 pm »

Sorry, but I think this paints a rather unfairly negative picture of NASes!

I responded to the OP with his circumstances in mind.  You seem to feel that I dissed NAS products in general.

> My NAS doesn't add complexity.

I think it does.  Store your audio files on a NAS and now more things can go wrong.

Recently, after a cable internet outage, my wired router / firewall failed.  That router was supplying NAT and DHCP functions for my home network.  I re-configured my network so that an Apple wireless router now performed the NAT and DHCP functions (it had not done those functions before.)  Those settings are buried in an advanced setting menu that I had not touched in several years.  Once I got the Apple router re-configured, all our computers had a working internet connection.  However, several days later when I wanted to transfer files from my personal PC to the dedicated MusicPC, I discovered that no other computers were visible in Windows Explorer.  A bit of poking around indicated that Windows 7 decided that my personal PC was now connected to a new network.  It marked that network as a public network and turned off discovery and file sharing.  Easy to fix if you have the knowledge and troubleshooting skills.

This wasn't a problem with a NAS itself but it is a problem that may come up if you access audio files across a network.  Windows file sharing, firewall s/w in the PC and the router you use all require setup and potentially troubleshooting later when you use a NAS to store your files.

> Also, look at Synology units for how they implement RAID.
> If one drive fails, you simply take it out and replace it, and the volume rebuilds itself automatically. 
> How easier can it be to replace a failed disk without losing any data?

My wife supervised disaster recovery preparation in her company for years - mainframe, network, PCs and other communications.  One tenet of such planning is that you have to rehearse the recovery process to find the glitches and showstoppers before you have a real disaster.

csimon, if you have actually removed a hard drive from your NAS, inserted a fresh drive and seen your NAS rebuild the array perfectly, then congratulations to you.  If you have not done that, you have just proved that you can read web pages.

>  Especially if you put SSDs in them.  Look at the DS411slim for an extremely small and quiet box that can hold up to four 2.5" disks.

Did you read the OP at all?  down4jazz is running out of room on a 2 TB USB drive.  SSDs have no relevance to his situation (unless he is really cost insensitive) and four 2.5" drives don't seem relevant either. 

> Cooling and Noise are definitely not issues these days. 

Bullshit! If the OP wants more than 2 TB of storage, only 3.5" drives seem relevant.  Cooling and noise are very relevant with 3.5" drives.  Western Digital Green drives are pretty quiet but not silent.  Seagate and Fijitsu drives are considerably noisier.  What kind of drives is your NASA vendor using this month?

Put two 3.5" drives in a compact case and you should probably have a fan.  So how big is that fan and how fast does it turn?  (A large diameter fan turning slowly is more likely to be quiet than a small diameter fan spinning at a much higher speed.)  More for a careful consumer to think about.

> OK, they might be, but simply don't buy a noisy box that runs hot!  Check the specs. 
> Synology units are extremely quiet and cool.

I certainly agree that the OP should be a careful, informed consumer.  That requires the OP to learn more.  Complexity again.

> however when we're talking about these sort of speeds, how many times are you or anyone else going to be frequently
> doing extremely large and complex operations on thousands of files at the same time,
> enough to warrant the difference in speed between a USB 3.0 device and a gigabit ethernet device?

The word backup comes to mind.  Auto-import is next.

A gigabit connection may be slower that a USB 3 connection but low end NAS boxes often have really low throughput.  Another thing for a careful consumer to check.

Doing a full backup on 2TB plus takes a long time.  Speed matters.

> Sorry, I don't want to make this sound like an advert for Synology, they do have their quirks
> too which I don't like, but as far as I'm concerned your description of problems associated
> with NAS units just does not sound like my experience at all and are largely irrelevant.
>  It also makes it easier to share data across the network to multiple devices.

I advised the OP to avoid the extra complexity unless he understands why he needs the functionality. 

A controlled use of Windows file sharing gives me just the right amount of sharing without adding complexity or exposing my music files over my home network.  down4jazz, think about your functional requirements and pick a simple, cost effective solution that meets those requirements.

Bill

Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up