Server software

Mark,

There are quite a few options available in the Windows environment which have a significant following: Media Monkey, Winamp, J River, and Foobar2000 being perhaps the most prominent. I'm not sure you'd get a very strong consensus for one of those over another, but I'd say that the people who have been into this computer audio thing for a long time, and have tried everything, like our Vincent Kars and Chris Connacker of Computer Audiophile - and I'd put myself in that category, too - tend to gravitate toward J River. Here's a roughly prioritized list of things I look for in music library manager and playback software:

1. Good support for bit perfect output. This means two things to me: automatic detection and output of native sample rate and bit depth, and ability to bypass the system audio mixer through support of WASAPI, ASIO, and/or WaveOut protocols.

2. The ability to define and easily edit a broad range of tags. The larger and more eclectic your music collection is, the more important it becomes to consistently categorize it in the ways to want to browse and search it. This means being able to define the categories (tags) you want, and easily edit them.

3. Related to point 2, be able to easily define and select various "views" of those tags to use in browsing your music collection. Can you define simple, cover-based views for just scanning your collection, or easily switch to very specific views designed to browse, say, chamber music? When your collection gets to 1000s of CDs, this gets very important.

4. Good performance with large libraries. Most libraries now have good performance with 50,000 to 100,000 tracks - but not all.

5. Good remote control support.

6. Support for a broad range of audio formats. For an audiophile, the "must have" format support is, IMO, FLAC, WAV, AIFF, MP3, Apple Lossless, and AAC. WMA lossless and WMA are nice to have. You can always use various converter programs to convert into the formats your player supports, but it is inconvenient. Given the broad availability of free library code to support these formats, lack of support indicates either laziness or deliberate attempt at locking customers to a format for business reasons.

7. Good internet integration. This means support for various internet radio stations, and ability to retrieve information related to the artist, album, etc you are playing from such diverse sources as WikiPedia, Amazon, Last.FM, AMG, etc.

8. Support for high quality DSP manipulations, such as oversampling, equalization, and convolution (used in room correction, for one). At minimum, it is nice to have the player directly support "VST" plugins, of which there are many available in all of the above categories. Foobar2000 is probably the king of this category.

9. Some history that suggests this is a long-term, sustainable company that won't suddenly leave you without support or enhancement.

J River scores well against all of those criteria, and stands above in 2) and 3). Foobar2000 is the Swiss Army knife of DSP audio manipulation, but the interface is less than stellar for me. WinAmp and Media Monkey have their adherents; I'm not fond of the MM interface personally, and WinAmp offers little for me that J River doesn't do as well or better.

You'll notice that sound quality has no place in my list. See this thread for why:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?2703-Do-media-players-have-a-sound

I've found that, under truly rigorous comparison (listening to the same track dozens of times over, through different players, focusing on different subtle details each time), different bit-perfect players sound identical to me, even on very high resolution stereo and headphone systems. And any differences between them must originate in the first order with hardware, and switching to new hardware requires far less investment of time and learning than switching players, once you've really gotten to the point of fully utilizing a particular player.

As an aside, iTunes scores mediocre to poor against all of my criteria. This is a primary reason I use PC instead of Mac for music server hardware - in a music server, your media software pretty much IS your operating system. And there just aren't substantially better alternatives to iTunes on OSx at present, although the open source Songbird has some significant advantages.

Thanks, Scott. That is a very well reasoned reply.

I do recommend J River too, and I have both installed in my system. Unfortunately, I find Foobar sounds better - chalk that up to expectation bias as intellectually I cannot believe that two bit-perfect players outputting WASAPI can sound different.

However, I would add one more thing - if your DAC has a native resolution rate other than 44.1kHz (like some of the cheaper M-Audio models), then Foobar2000 with the SoX sample rate converter will be far better than J River with the Windows SRC.

garylkoh said:

However, I would add one more thing - if your DAC has a native resolution rate other than 44.1kHz (like some of the cheaper M-Audio models), then Foobar2000 with the SoX sample rate converter will be far better than J River with the Windows SRC.

Click to expand...

You can try JRMC's own SRC (DSP studio > Output format)
All DSP in JRMC is done in 64 bit.

garylkoh said:

Thanks, Scott. That is a very well reasoned reply.

I do recommend J River too, and I have both installed in my system. Unfortunately, I find Foobar sounds better - chalk that up to expectation bias as intellectually I cannot believe that two bit-perfect players outputting WASAPI can sound different.

However, I would add one more thing - if your DAC has a native resolution rate other than 44.1kHz (like some of the cheaper M-Audio models), then Foobar2000 with the SoX sample rate converter will be far better than J River with the Windows SRC.

Click to expand...

J River actually uses its own SRC algorithm, which it claims is "audiophile quality" without further elaboration (you can find in it under Options->Audio->DSP and output format). I doubt it has the same level of technical excellence as SoX, but I haven't tried it.

W.R.T to SoX, there are quite a few settings which could potentially impact the SQ, primary among them the choice of anti-aliasing filter. I'm curious to know which one you use? In theory, software-based oversampling can accomplish the same kind of results that Meridian, Ayre, Berkeley, PS Audio, et al are getting from their recent developments in "minimum phase" and/or "apodising" filters, but it seems the devil is in the details when it comes to getting the best SQ from these algorithms ...

Edit: to elaborate a bit, what you are doing by oversampling in software is, in effect, taking over the anti-aliasing filter job from the external DAC. (actually, the external DAC will still anti-alias, but at a higher frequency much further from the audio range and thus outside the normal boundaries of speaker and ear transducers).

It requires the $300 Touch hardware, but the Squeezebox server software meets several of those criteria for the Mac. I'm not so down on the iTunes interface, and the SB software addresses my major gripe of automatic sample/bit rate switching. It will also handle many formats iTunes will not.

ScottB said:

J River actually uses its own SRC algorithm, which it claims is "audiophile quality" without further elaboration (you can find in it under Options->Audio->DSP and output format). I doubt it has the same level of technical excellence as SoX, but I haven't tried it.

Click to expand...

I have not tried J River's own SRC - but given the care with the rest of the software, it may well be pretty transparent.

W.R.T to SoX, there are quite a few settings which could potentially impact the SQ, primary among them the choice of anti-aliasing filter. I'm curious to know which one you use? In theory, software-based oversampling can accomplish the same kind of results that Meridian, Ayre, Berkeley, PS Audio, et al are getting from their recent developments in "minimum phase" and/or "apodising" filters, but it seems the devil is in the details when it comes to getting the best SQ from these algorithms ...

Click to expand...

With the Foobar plug-in, there is no choice of anti-aliasing filter. The anti-aliasing is far more important and audible with up-sampling than down-sampling. In this case, the only reason I use SoX is when I am driving my M-Audio Transit, and I doubt that you can hear a difference with the choice of anti-aliasing filter on that cheap DAC - especially since I'm using it at 96kHz off optical driving a Monarchy DIP jitter-reduction then AES/EBU to a Benchmark DAC1 for my wife's kitchen system.

rblnr said:

It requires the $300 Touch hardware, but the Squeezebox server software meets several of those criteria for the Mac. I'm not so down on the iTunes interface, and the SB software addresses my major gripe of automatic sample/bit rate switching. It will also handle many formats iTunes will not.

Click to expand...

Yes, once you get into the realm of software server/hardware client audio, your options expand. I find the SB to be the best of this genre. I have two, plus a Transporter - as I said, I've tried almost everything I find the interface, as with iTunes, well suited to casual browsing and Popular music, but not so much so for Classical or even Jazz. I've not tried the new SB Touch, though.

For context, I'm a software developer and CTO by background, and am thus pretty demanding of software. The potential of music library software is to make your music collection more accessible, more discoverable, more pleasurable. Probably the ultimate realization of this is Sooloos - it seems that every single person who's ever reviewed a Sooloos has fallen in love with it, precisely because it best accomplishes that goal of transforming your music collection. There is no reason, technically, that we could not have an equally effective interface uncoupled from expensive, closed, proprietary hardware. The foundations of such an interface are 1) comprehensive, consistent metadata (tags) and 2) good UI design. I'd say that my favored software combination (dbPowerAmp for ripping, J River for management/playback) is no more than halfway to the goal of Sooloos-level interface, but its as good as you can get in an open, non-proprietary system, and it offers some advantages you can't get with Sooloos (>96K support, support for DSP plugins, more remote control options). So, dbPA/J River is my choice, but only provisionally.

ScottB said:

For context, I'm a software developer and CTO by background, and am thus pretty demanding of software. The potential of music library software is to make your music collection more accessible, more discoverable, more pleasurable. Probably the ultimate realization of this is Sooloos - it seems that every single person who's ever reviewed a Sooloos has fallen in love with it, precisely because it best accomplishes that goal of transforming your music collection. There is no reason, technically, that we could not have an equally effective interface uncoupled from expensive, closed, proprietary hardware. The foundations of such an interface are 1) comprehensive, consistent metadata (tags) and 2) good UI design. I'd say that my favored software combination (dbPowerAmp for ripping, J River for management/playback) is no more than halfway to the goal of Sooloos-level interface, but its as good as you can get in an open, non-proprietary system, and it offers some advantages you can't get with Sooloos (>96K support, support for DSP plugins, more remote control options). So, dbPA/J River is my choice, but only provisionally.

Click to expand...

I would LOVE some software company to create a Sooloos not tied to the proprietary hardware. And to make it not cost 8500 dollars!

I think we are going to be seeing some really cool things in music 'discovery' technology over the next few years as massive databases of user preferences and predictive algorithms being used by people like Netflix find an application in the music world. If any body is interested I would love to talk more about this stuff.

mep said:

Thanks guys. I'm using the E-MU 0404 DAC which can accept up to 24bit/192kHz if any of that matters. There is software that controls the bit rate/sample rate for the E-MU DAC. Is there anything I am supposed to turn on or turn off in windows or Media Monkey that can affect the sound? I just have this nagging feeling that something is amiss or maybe I just don't like the DAC and need something better.

Click to expand...

The EMU 0404 comes with a software disc that contains a proprietary ASIO. I don't know if it will work with Mediamonkey, but I know that it works well with Foobar on WinXP and I have not yet made it work with Foobar on Win7. Here's how to get ASIO working with Mediamonkey (but I have not tried it):
http://www.mediamonkey.com/wiki/index.php/ASIO_Output_Plugins

I'm sure that Vincent has "things to turn on/off in Windows" on his website. Here's mine:
http://www.genesisloudspeakers.com/newsletter/Newsletter_RMAF2010.pdf
Page 3

Good guide Gary.
I have some tweaks on my website but not as exhaustive as you have in your manual.
I must admit I’m not impressed by disabling system services.
Most of them do something at start-up and then go to sleep.
I often set them to manual instead of disabled.
If they are really needed they will start.

Disabling the page file is a must when using memory playback otherwise you will read the track from the HD and Win will write it to the page file. Effectively increasing the I/O!
However, the HD keeps on spinning; you only get rid of head movements.
They can cause spikes on the power rails but a defragmented disk does the job too.

I disable all the UPnP. It will always scan the entire audio at start-up.

Mep
Try J River
Good sound quality, you can try a couple of drivers.
You might try running the EMU with the standard Win USB drivers
You might check elementary USB settings (desktop speaker or full range does make a difference….)
This gives you some reference.
IMHO drivers often have a substantial impact
I’m not really impressed by most OS tweaks.
Maybe because I use an outboard DAC with reasonable jitter rejection (Benchmark DAC1)
Maybe they don’t have such an impact.
Maybe gear, ear, etc.

That really is a thorough guide, Gary. I wish I'd had a guide that good back when I was "rolling my own"

I think a lot of the focus on system services, etc can go away by focusing on isolating the server from the rest of the system - use a DAC with good jitter rejection, or an async USB/Firewire DAC or interface, and good power conditioning. One thing a lot of people don't get about power conditioning is that much, if not most, of the "junk" in an A/C supply actually comes from the other components in your system. Good conditioners effectively prevent most of the crap from being backfed into the rest of the system.

One difference in my configurations is that I actually like to have a monitor and keyboard available. I tend to use them to do my browsing, searching, etc, then queue up the music I'm going to play. I then use my fanless netbook or iPad just to pause, play, and monitor "now playing" information.

mep,

J River has a 30 day free trial. If you try it, make sure to set up audio for bit perfect output (Tools->Options->Audio->Output Mode, then ASIO or WASAPI).

According to the manual, the EMU 404 should allow you to use it as a pure DAC with SPDIF input. From the manual:

S/PDIF to Analog / Analog to S/PDIF converter

The 0404 USB can be also used as a standalone S/PDIF -> Analog or Analog ->
S/PDIF converter.

Analog Input to S/PDIF: Attach analog device to Dock A/B (Left/Right); enable
direct monitoring (set to S/PDIF). Analog input will be mirrored to S/PDIF out.

S/PDIF to Analog: Attach a S/PDIF source, power cycle the device, and set direct
monitor to “Main”.

The moment a USB device is connected to a PC all kind of things happen
One is the device enumeration, the device tells what its properties are.
It might tell the PC to be an audio device in adaptive mode.
It might tell it is an audio device in asynchronous mode.

In principle any USB device like a USB to SPDIF converter will work.
If it will work on all occasions with all kind of audio drivers is a different matter.
Check user forums for the device you have in mind.

garylkoh said:

However, I would add one more thing - if your DAC has a native resolution rate other than 44.1kHz (like some of the cheaper M-Audio models), then Foobar2000 with the SoX sample rate converter will be far better than J River with the Windows SRC.

Click to expand...

JRMC has had build in upsampling for years. Both JRMC and Foobar support ASIO, WASAPI exclusive mode and kernel streaming. I don't see why the using the Windpows SRC would be any more necessary for JRMC than Foobar.

J. River went to 64 bit float for their DSP operations recently. If your experience with JRMC upsampling is more than a few months old, try upsampling in JRMC 15/16 again. My opinion of JRMC upsampling went from same or slightly worse for upsampling to 176/192 KHz with the older DSP section to same/slightly better with the new DSP section. (I'm not a believer in upsampling as a magic bullet but it does minimize the effect of the over/up sampling and digital filtering function in the actual DAC chip.)

Bill

Old Listener said:

JRMC has had build in upsampling for years. Both JRMC and Foobar support ASIO, WASAPI exclusive mode and kernel streaming. I don't see why the using the Windpows SRC would be any more necessary for JRMC than Foobar.

J. River went to 64 bit float for their DSP operations recently. If your experience with JRMC upsampling is more than a few months old, try upsampling in JRMC 15/16 again. My opinion of JRMC upsampling went from same or slightly worse for upsampling to 176/192 KHz with the older DSP section to same/slightly better with the new DSP section. (I'm not a believer in upsampling as a magic bullet but it does minimize the effect of the over/up sampling and digital filtering function in the actual DAC chip.)

Bill

Click to expand...

Thanks, Bill. I have not tried JRMC sample rate converter for over a year. I'll have to see if I can download the latest JRMC and see if my old licence still works. The only reason to use SRC is if the DAC has a non-native rate - like 48kHz or 96kHz and I want to play 44.1kHz files.

I mentioned SoX because it's the best resampler I've encountered recently and it's free. Foobar allows use of all sorts of resamplers that you can download. I don't think that JRMC does.