MinimServer comparison with Synology Media Server

[david]

(10-03-2014 23:00)simoncn Wrote:  Thanks for letting me know about this. Have you tried switching between test mode and normal mode? You should be able to stop a song, switch the mode, and then play the same song again in the other mode. If you keep the log window open while you are doing this, you should see a message "Writing stream using test mode" to indicate when you are using test mode.

Note: You can't switch modes when you pause and resume a song. You need to play the song again from the start.

Can you hear a consistent difference when you do this switching?

Hi Simon,

I just performed a more extensive test, listening to the same track in 4 ways:
1. Minimserver buffered (test mode)
2. Minimserver unbuffered (standard mode)
3. Synology media server transcoding aiff to wav (accidentally turned on, but still included in the results for the sake of completeness)
4. Synology media server (no transcoding)

Generally speaking Minimserver seems to offer a more "controlled" sound than Synology regardless of the test mode.
Options 2 and 4 result in the most "open" sound. Option 3 I would describe as fuzzy, option 1 as somewhat flattened compared to 2.
Options 2, 3 and 4 give the deepest sound (bass). Option 1 does seem to miss some strength in the lower frequencies.

This now results in a preference for the unbuffered Minimserver over the Synology. And that's somewhat different than the outcome of my first test. I can see a number of reasons for that:

1. Between 1st and last observations I upgraded my DAC
2. During the first observation my streamer was fairly new, so it might still have been warming up.
3. Synology does sound far from bad, as I said less controlled, but it still has a very detailed and firm sound. This might have the effect of a "Pepsi challenge" where usually the sweetest coke is preferred in the first moment, but after a glass or two it becomes "boring", compared to other tastes.

I hope this helps.

Best regards,

David

[simoncn]

(22-03-2014 10:59)david Wrote:  Hi Simon,

I just performed a more extensive test, listening to the same track in 4 ways:
1. Minimserver buffered (test mode)
2. Minimserver unbuffered (standard mode)
3. Synology media server transcoding aiff to wav (accidentally turned on, but still included in the results for the sake of completeness)
4. Synology media server (no transcoding)

Generally speaking Minimserver seems to offer a more "controlled" sound than Synology regardless of the test mode.
Options 2 and 4 result in the most "open" sound. Option 3 I would describe as fuzzy, option 1 as somewhat flattened compared to 2.
Options 2, 3 and 4 give the deepest sound (bass). Option 1 does seem to miss some strength in the lower frequencies.

This now results in a preference for the unbuffered Minimserver over the Synology. And that's somewhat different than the outcome of my first test. I can see a number of reasons for that:

1. Between 1st and last observations I upgraded my DAC
2. During the first observation my streamer was fairly new, so it might still have been warming up.
3. Synology does sound far from bad, as I said less controlled, but it still has a very detailed and firm sound. This might have the effect of a "Pepsi challenge" where usually the sweetest coke is preferred in the first moment, but after a glass or two it becomes "boring", compared to other tastes.

I hope this helps.

Best regards,

David

Thanks for doing this. I don't understand why 1 would sound worse than 2. Are you able to conduct a "double blind" test to confirm that you can conistently tell the difference between these?

I would also welcome any feedback on whether anyone else can hear a difference between default mode and test mode.

[tarnkappe]

Hello,

replying to the intial question why minimserver is better than the standard synology media server:

Besides the three things I had listed here http://forum1613.minimserver.com/showthr...43#pid7443 (btw: still hoping for ogg support ) there is another advantage in cover art handling:

I am using the folder view a lot. If you step into an artist's folder you see the list of albums of this artist, each with its own directory. The original synology media server does not attach the album cover to these directories while minimserver does. The synology server does only show the cover art for the tracks inside the album directory. (The cover is located in a separate file in this album directory.)

Also minimserver tries to use any image file inside a directory as cover art, while the synology media server requires a constant list of image names that are tried to being loaded. So you have configured e.g. "folder.jpg, cover.jpg", but in a folder exists an "Front CD Cover.jpg" only. minimserver does use this as cover (at least if I am not wrong now), but the synology server does not (for sure).

Greetings,
Gert

[simoncn]

(23-03-2014 15:16)tarnkappe Wrote:  Hello,

replying to the intial question why minimserver is better than the standard synology media server:

Besides the three things I had listed here http://forum1613.minimserver.com/showthr...43#pid7443 (btw: still hoping for ogg support ) there is another advantage in cover art handling:

I am using the folder view a lot. If you step into an artist's folder you see the list of albums of this artist, each with its own directory. The original synology media server does not attach the album cover to these directories while minimserver does. The synology server does only show the cover art for the tracks inside the album directory. (The cover is located in a separate file in this album directory.)

Also minimserver tries to use any image file inside a directory as cover art, while the synology media server requires a constant list of image names that are tried to being loaded. So you have configured e.g. "folder.jpg, cover.jpg", but in a folder exists an "Front CD Cover.jpg" only. minimserver does use this as cover (at least if I am not wrong now), but the synology server does not (for sure).

Greetings,
Gert

MinimServer uses a list of image file names (see this section for details) and it also looks inside the files in the folder for embedded images. From what you have said, I think MinimServer is probably finding an embedded art image.