Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Popspin]

Hi;
Before I download MC I wanted to understand something;
I keep my music on a NAS (Synology 213).  I want to use MC to play music from the NAS.
Will MC use my NAS as a source for music files or will it duplicate the music database I have on my NAS inside MC?
Thanks!
popspin

[Matt]

It will use the music on your NAS.

It will store a database of information about what's on the NAS locally, but that's really small.  It's just a copy of the artist, album, etc.

[glynor]

More information:
http://wiki.jriver.com/index.php/Library

[csimon]

When you say you have a "database" on the NAS, do you mean that you have switched on its media server and it has indexed the files, therefore you are using a DLNA device or Audio Station at the moment to play the music? If so, and you import the media into MC by pointing it at the network share on the NAS ( by setting the directories in the Import options) then yes it will create its own database too as it is also a media server. You will have two media servers with their own databases. But it doesn't duplicate the source files

However, if you have turned on the NAS's DLNA server then you can instead tell MC to load that instead of importing the media (Load Library) and in this case it won't create its own database but will use the NAS's instead remotely.

But if you haven't turned on the NAS's media server then in fact you haven't got a database as such on the NAS, it's just a collection of files held on an external disk. So you then proceed by importing into MC as in the first paragraph.

A collection of source files on a disk isn't a database, it's just a set of stored files. A database (library) is created when you get an application to scan, import and index and catalogue the files, and consists of just the catalogue entries and not the files themselves.

[csimon]

PS when you first install MC and run it be sure to look at the bottom left corner as within 45 seconds it will automatically scan for and import media files on your local hard disk. You should cancel this before it starts and then decide whether you want to set up the import to look at the NAS or whether just to load the NAS's
Library remotely as described above.

[Popspin]

csimon;
DLNA is turned on.  The NAS is currently being accessed using Synology's software on the PC and phone and through a DVD player in an audio system.
According to what you said MC will use what's on the NAS.  Great to know that.
Thanks!
popspin

[blgentry]

My experience with DLNA is very limited, so forgive me if this is off base.

Isn't using MC as a DLNA client (controller or renderer) inherently limiting?  Do you lose the ability to use all of JRiver's views, tagging, expressions, etc?  My questions are based on thinking that JRiver's local database won't get used if it's getting access to the music by pulling from a DLNA server.

If so, isn't it better in pretty much every measurable way to point MC at the NAS file share(s) instead?

I've never understood why NAS boxes are trying to do all of this extra stuff that doesn't belong on them.  But that's just me being the "keep it simple" computing guy. 

Brian.

[aysil]

Brian,
The only advantage of running a server app within the NAS is not having to turn your computer on if you have a DLNA (or UPnP) client device in your music system.

However, once your MC is running it is simply great that it can play all three distinct functions of a DLNA system ('server', 'controller', and 'client') separately or together.
 
It it is 'playing from' a separate server (eg within NAS) it will show a library, in all its views, as it was organized by that other server.

If it is 'playing from' its own library (that means when it is functioning as 'server') it will show the library with its own organization and tags.

It can also be used as a 'controller', to "send" music to other 'clients' within the network.
Have I understood everything correctly 

[flexmyfoil]

ignore!

[csimon]

It it is 'playing from' a separate server (eg within NAS) it will show a library, in all its views, as it was organized by that other server.

I think MC ignores the cataloguing of the external DLNA server and organises the views internally, the external DLNA server simply delivers the metadata in that respect and MC creates its own views.

I'm in two minds about that...

[csimon]

According to what you said MC will use what's on the NAS. 

Your files are on the NAS, so MC will always use what is on the NAS.  The difference is whether you import the files into MC, so creating a second database within MC which is completely independent, or use Load Library instead to connect to the NAS's DLNA server, when it won't create its own database (apart from a cached copy) it's on the NAS where you'd have to do your importing and tagging etc.

The choice is yours as to what MC does, so make sure you pick the right option!

[csimon]

My experience with DLNA is very limited, so forgive me if this is off base.

Isn't using MC as a DLNA client (controller or renderer) inherently limiting?  Do you lose the ability to use all of JRiver's views, tagging, expressions, etc?  My questions are based on thinking that JRiver's local database won't get used if it's getting access to the music by pulling from a DLNA server.

If so, isn't it better in pretty much every measurable way to point MC at the NAS file share(s) instead?

I've never understood why NAS boxes are trying to do all of this extra stuff that doesn't belong on them.  But that's just me being the "keep it simple" computing guy.  

Brian.

NAS boxes can run lots of things these days besides file sharing, they are mini servers, so why wouldn't a DLNA server, along with other services, belong on them?

The big advantage of using a NAS's internal server is that you don't need a PC (or several PCs) switched on all the time in order to play music, unlike MC.

As I understand it, MC doesn't behave like a traditional DLNA client when connected to an external server in that it ignores the cataloguing of the server and organises its own views, so in fact you are not losing the power of MC's view system when using a DLNA server.  But I assume you could then only use the tags that the external DLNA server uses.  However if you want to keep it simple by having one DLNA server serving everything in the same way then MC throws a spanner into the works by having different views which you have to configure separately.  It has pros and cons.

[blgentry]

NAS boxes can run lots of things these days besides file sharing, they are mini servers, so why wouldn't a DLNA server, along with other services, belong on them?

Based on my experience in computing, I tend to like to separate functionality.  In my mind, things like transcoding are done in a purposeful way, not on demand on a network device.  The DLNA functionality might work fine.  It just seems like an unnecessary complication to me because JRiver is already so sophisticated and feature complete.  Why add a "spanner to the works" ?  I like to keep my computing architectures as straight forward as I can.  If all of this sounds like some guy who's stuck in old ways, then just ignore me. 

As I understand it, MC doesn't behave like a traditional DLNA client when connected to an external server in that it ignores the cataloguing of the server and organises its own views, so in fact you are not losing the power of MC's view system when using a DLNA server.  But I assume you could then only use the tags that the external DLNA server uses.  

Interesting information.  Exactly the kind of info I was looking for in asking my questions.  Thank you.

Brian.

[csimon]

Based on my experience in computing, I tend to like to separate functionality.  In my mind, things like transcoding are done in a purposeful way, not on demand on a network device.  The DLNA functionality might work fine.  It just seems like an unnecessary complication to me because JRiver is already so sophisticated and feature complete.

A contradiction?  MC does indeed do a great many things but it's not functionally separate.  You can't hive the database off to a database server. You can't put transcoding onto an application server. You can't move database maintenance to a utility PC.  You can't move the player UI to a remote (Theater View is getting there but still not completely usable).  You are correct, this is the way to go, which is why it makes sense to put the server onto a NAS, as serving is what they are designed to do.

I think, if your files are stored on a NAS (which is not an unreasonable thing....) it's actually complicating things by having to switch a PC on too in order to play a piece of music.  The NAS itself should serve the files to whatever player you are using, it shouldn't need an extra device to do that.  Or are you advocating that you should always put your data storage on the same machine where your end-user applications are running in order to simplify things?

What do you mean by transcoding being done in a purposeful way, not on demand?

[blgentry]

We are sort of off topic, which is my fault.  But you're a good guy so I'll keep going for now.

A contradiction?  MC does indeed do a great many things but it's not functionally separate.  You can't hive the database off to a database server. You can't put transcoding onto an application server. You can't move database maintenance to a utility PC.  You can't move the player UI to a remote (Theater View is getting there but still not completely usable).  You are correct, this is the way to go, which is why it makes sense to put the server onto a NAS, as serving is what they are designed to do.

I just meant that JRiver is a great media player and server.  NAS *is* a well known function that I've been using in one form or another for 20+ years, so I agree that it's a decent architecture for a big music system.  Of course it adds complexity too...

I think, if your files are stored on a NAS (which is not an unreasonable thing....) it's actually complicating things by having to switch a PC on too in order to play a piece of music.  The NAS itself should serve the files to whatever player you are using, it shouldn't need an extra device to do that.

That's a stylistic decision tempered with how much you trust your players to do it as well as JRiver does.  For casual music listening, this makes sense to me.  But if I had a dedicated music server, I'd just keep it on 24/7 and probably run JRiver on it.  Like an ID for example.

Or are you advocating that you should always put your data storage on the same machine where your end-user applications are running in order to simplify things?

If possible, absolutely.  But I totally understand that this doesn't make sense in a system where you have several clients, possibly of different types.  If possible, you'd want to use JRiver for the whole thing and probably "drive" it all with JRiver as the controller, just using network players are DLNA renderers.  Which makes them just sort of "dumb receivers" as far as my understanding goes.

What do you mean by transcoding being done in a purposeful way, not on demand?

When transcoding video or audio from one format to another a lot of decisions get made.  Some programs do it better than others.  All require you (or the program) to decide what parameters are used in doing so.  If I'm going to change the format of (almost) any part of my collection, I want to control it.  "On the fly", real time transcoding from a NAS box makes me think that it's probably not doing the best quality job.  It's certainly not letting me control the parameters.  If I'm going to transcode video, I want to do it offline with specific parameters to control video quality.  Audio I would never transcode purposefully unless there is a specific need to.  For example converting DSD to high sample rate PCM because my DAC can't play DSD.  I trust JRiver to do this job correctly because it's known to do it well.  I wouldn't let the NAS box touch that job.  I hope that makes sense.

Brian.

[csimon]

That's a stylistic decision tempered with how much you trust your players to do it as well as JRiver does.  For casual music listening, this makes sense to me.  But if I had a dedicated music server, I'd just keep it on 24/7 and probably run JRiver on it.  Like an ID for example.

Yeah....it's a personal configuration choice at the end of the day I guess.  But I'm talking about the serving only really. You could still serve from a NAS and make MC your player client on whatever device you fancy, without having a dedicated or multi-purpose PC on as well.

If possible, you'd want to use JRiver for the whole thing and probably "drive" it all with JRiver as the controller, just using network players are DLNA renderers.  Which makes them just sort of "dumb receivers" as far as my understanding goes.

Yes!

When transcoding video or audio from one format to another a lot of decisions get made.  Some programs do it better than others.  All require you (or the program) to decide what parameters are used in doing so.  If I'm going to change the format of (almost) any part of my collection, I want to control it.  "On the fly", real time transcoding from a NAS box makes me think that it's probably not doing the best quality job.  It's certainly not letting me control the parameters.  If I'm going to transcode video, I want to do it offline with specific parameters to control video quality.  Audio I would never transcode purposefully unless there is a specific need to.  For example converting DSD to high sample rate PCM because my DAC can't play DSD.  I trust JRiver to do this job correctly because it's known to do it well.  I wouldn't let the NAS box touch that job.  I hope that makes sense.

Yes, basically you mean converting video in advance to formats you know your players can play natively, or having MC do the transcoding on the fly for things like DSD.  But...transcoding is a grey area that is sort of between server and client player.  It sits at the "application server" level.  If you had a NAS as a database/library server (and it was a built-in DLNA server that you don't trust to do the transcoding, or it wasn't powerful enough to do it anyway) then you'd simply use JRiver as your client player to do the transcoding, which is then sent onwards to the DAC.  (MC connects to the DLNA library, sends audio to a USB zone that you set up with the output parameters that you want). Again, I think this is functionally separate from a library server.

[JimH]

Choose the first option.