Music PC

[regeHA]

On the complete other end of the spectrum, I placed an order for Google Chromecast Audio. This device is very intriguing as a media streamer and Squeezebox replacement. It has 2GB RAM, a dual core Cortex A7 processor, will do analog and digital (optical) out, an AKM AK4430 based DAC if you want to use its inbuilt DAC, supports up to 24-bit / 96KHz high resolution audio. It even has enough gain (2V) to be a viable headphone amp.

And it costs a royal $35. It is headless and you control it from your smart phone or tablet using Google's Chromecast extension (which is now supported by a lot of audio software players and radio players).

Interestingly enough, if you have it stream from your (say) SAN or computer, it will bypass the smartphone entirely and will directly stream from the source (SAN or computer or internet radio service) to Chromecast Audio device to your DAC or preamp/amp. So your phone is just a controller, not a pass-through.

https://support.google.com/chromecast/answer/6279377?hl=en

https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Chromecast+2015+Teardown/50189

Some of the anecdotal examples and reviews in other forums sound very positive as well.

I've been using it for 3 months now (3 of them). Its unparalleled in what it can do. I stream from a NAS to 3 different rooms and can have the same song/album or different songs/albums playing at the same time (caveat though is you will need multiple control apps/smartphones). The internal DAC is pretty decent though I use Toslink and external DACs myself.

Another huge plus from its addition is the discovery that wireless streaming rocks. It pretty much kills all other traditional connections especially if the source is isolated. Even my AVRs sound pretty musical because of CCA.

Highly recommend it.

I'd also recommend the addition of a Raspberry Pi and a Linux distro or a dedicated PC with Daphile.

 

[square_wave]

I'm surprised so many folks are defending the Bug and that too so vehemently.

Isn't it the antithesis of an audiophile? Audiophiles typically focus on 2 things... high-fidelity sound reproduction and the creation or setting of actual live music.

The Bug is anything but that. It's great, but its still DSP on steroids with a specific sound signature that some folks will like.

Of course, I'm not saying that its ok to trash talk a programmer, but I cannot imagine anyone would defend JRiver, Foobar, JPlay, etc. Of the lot, Foobar is the closest to an actual audiophile player, disable all addons and processing and its pretty much the closest to bitstreaming that anyone can get in a PC setup.

Just to clarify, I am not supporting anything. Bughead is another player out there and it has caught the fancy of many seasoned audiophiles. It may or may not stand the test of time.

Why not winamp ? Why foobar ? Winamp also does kernel streaming, wasapi etc..

One gets to form a user opinion only after one has experienced it well enough.

One gets to form a developer opinion only after one has understood the development process well as the thought process behind the development process and software.

 

[ranjeetrain]

It would have been nice if you had compared the bughead to other players and posted your findings
Disparaging comments like this about someones work serves no purpose.

I have. It didn't live up to the hype.

It boosts specific frequency bands and applies DSP algorithms. The processing it applies can subjectively improve the sound or degrade it, depending on several factors, such as original recording quality, gear it is being heard through, the listener's own sound preferences, ability to discern minute aspect of sound and so on.

The attempt to make sound subjectively better has been made many times in past by various players. Many experienced listeners have adopted such better sounding players only to give it up later for a more neutral sounding one. It depends on the personal preference. There really is no need for anyone to shove his/her personal favorite player down others' neck.

If all you want to hear is praise about a certain player, you should head to a thread dedicated for it's praise. If you can't take it's criticism it's better to stay away from threads that are not meant for it's praise

This is a thread for general discussion about a music-pc and let it be so.

 

[regeHA]

Just to clarify, I am not supporting anything. Bughead is another player out there and it has caught the fancy of many seasoned audiophiles. It may or may not stand the test of time.

Why not winamp ? Why foobar ? Winamp also does kernel streaming, wasapi etc..

One gets to form a user opinion only after one has experienced it well enough.

One gets to form a developer opinion only after one has understood the development process well as the thought process behind the development process and software.

And yes I have formed a "user opinion" after using it quite decently over a period of 3 weeks.

However, by the looks of it nobody is supposed to have a negative opinion about the Bug. Not even a negative "user opinion" the way some folks are going about it.

You like it, cool. Someone does not like it, be cool with that too.

 

[ranjeetrain]

Just to clarify, I am not supporting anything. Bughead is another player out there and it has caught the fancy of many seasoned audiophiles. It may or may not stand the test of time..

Flavour of the season! Who doesn't like some novelty?

I also enjoyed Bug Head for a few days. But within a few days boosted highs started sounding too much. I will take it as a fun peppy player to use as a change. But in it's current form I won't make it my primary music player. And I really don't care about what "other seasoned audiophiles" think of it, I don't listen to my music to please others

 

[square_wave]

However, by the looks of it nobody is supposed to have a negative opinion about the Bug. Not even a negative "user opinion" the way some folks are going about it.

I never implied that

From what I understand, with bughead, one really needs to live with it for a while to experience it and do comparisons. If one has done that, the opinion really counts.

A statement like the one below is also true

" From the way some folks go about it, they stand far away and contemplate how a product is designed and the thoughts behind it and form an opinion based on their predispositions "

 

[ranjeetrain]

On the complete other end of the spectrum, I placed an order for Google Chromecast Audio. This device is very intriguing as a media streamer and Squeezebox replacement. It has 2GB RAM, a dual core Cortex A7 processor, will do analog and digital (optical) out, an AKM AK4430 based DAC if you want to use its inbuilt DAC, supports up to 24-bit / 96KHz high resolution audio. It even has enough gain (2V) to be a viable headphone amp.

And it costs a royal $35. It is headless and you control it from your smart phone or tablet using Google's Chromecast extension (which is now supported by a lot of audio software players and radio players).

Interestingly enough, if you have it stream from your (say) SAN or computer, it will bypass the smartphone entirely and will directly stream from the source (SAN or computer or internet radio service) to Chromecast Audio device to your DAC or preamp/amp. So your phone is just a controller, not a pass-through.

https://support.google.com/chromecast/answer/6279377?hl=en

https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Chromecast+2015+Teardown/50189

Some of the anecdotal examples and reviews in other forums sound very positive as well.

It's really an exciting time. This 35 buck "computer stick" is 1000x faster than my first "desktop computer". How the life changes

What I like best about this "cast" vs other "xxxxcast" devices is that it frees the "controller" after the player has started. So it really becomes a two-tier system afterwards.

Arun, post listening impressions. This can be useful specifically for bedroom systems.

 

[venkatcr]

Computer Audiophile - Basic Bit Perfect Testing Of The $35 Chromecast Audio

 

[ranjeetrain]

Computer Audiophile - Basic Bit Perfect Testing Of The $35 Chromecast Audio

Reviewer doesn't seem happy. Too many ifs and buts. This format, this resolution, this compression level and so on. I doubt an average user will bother to test so many combinations. For them it either plays their media or it doesn't.

Hopefully Google releases firmware to fix the issues. It seems to be such nice little nifty thing.

 

[venkatcr]

Reviewer doesn't seem happy. Too many ifs and buts. This format, this resolution, this compression level and so on. I doubt an average user will bother to test so many combinations. For them it either plays their media or it doesn't.

I am not sure this will work for some serious listening. Will suit casual listening well with convenience. Maybe the reviewers assumptions were wrong.

Have to see how it pans out.

Cheers

 

[regeHA]

Reviewer doesn't seem happy. Too many ifs and buts. This format, this resolution, this compression level and so on. I doubt an average user will bother to test so many combinations. For them it either plays their media or it doesn't.

Hopefully Google releases firmware to fix the issues. It seems to be such nice little nifty thing.

I am not sure this will work for some serious listening. Will suit casual listening well with convenience. Maybe the reviewers assumptions were wrong.

Have to see how it pans out.

Cheers

It works perfectly fine for audio CDs and upto 24/96 including serious listening. Just don't use its DAC, but an external DAC. Use digital output and it works purely as transport and gives DACs and older devices Wi-Fi capability.

Google has released/updated the f/w and fixed the issues.

I'm using it for the past 3 months without any issues. I stream my local FLACs from NAS and also Tidal, Spotify, and AT40.

Only caveat is its limited to Toslink and that's a strict no to some folks who want USB and higher sampling/resampling rates. 99% of my music is audio CDs and 16/44.1 as are all of my FLAC rips.

Unless you are into DSD or have a DAC with only USB input, I'd recommend the Chromecast Audio highly.

 

[asliarun]

Initial impressions of Chromecast Audio are very positive. It sounds as good as the Squeezebox. I am currently playing it as a pure streamer, i.e. via optical out. My DAC situation is a bit suboptimal as my Marantz AVR is basically doing DAC duty. I do miss my Audio GD DAC now. Nonetheless, the streamer is really good. I have no complaints at all about sound quality.

Only minor grouse was that this one has a different optical port, the round one not the rectange one. So i had to buy a optical port adapter to make it work with existing cables.

I also have the older first gen Chromecast, and this one is a seriously better implementation. The first gen's audio was actually quite bad. This one is really focused on audio quality above all else.

I also like the fact that for such little money, you get a headless streamer. Besides the fact that it directly streams from source to preamp/dac.

Will post detailed impressions later. I also plan to do an a/b of cca's dac quality vis a vis at least the Marantz AVR i currently have.

Rege, it would be nice if you could post more impressions too, especially about CCA's DAC, especially since you have a really nice closed form r2r dac.

 

[venkatcr]

Yes, a serious review by you and Rege would be immensely helpful. I am planning to set up a whole home audio using the Chromecast Audio if things work out well. I am contemplating between the Chromecast Audio and the Fon Gramofon. I plan to have simple inexpensive amps in each room connected to reasonably good speakers such as the Aperion Audio or Andrew Jones.

Thanks

 

[sam9s]

^^ Venket I would suggest LMS and Picore player combo for the kind of multiroom setup you planning over chromecast audio. Picore player running on Rpi connected to a decent USB DAC will provide far better multiroom experience than chromecast audio. not only in terms of audio, but control over music streams with independent audio over different zones with the ability to sync between zones ....

 

[rikhav]

^^ Venket I would suggest LMS and Picore player combo for the kind of multiroom setup you planning over chromecast audio. Picore player running on Rpi connected to a decent USB DAC will provide far better multiroom experience than chromecast audio. not only in terms of audio, but control over music streams with independent audio over different zones with the ability to sync between zones ....

I would second that as I myself am a LMS user
One can stream music from LMS by multiple squeezebox devices and setup is just too easy
Picore player is based on Squeezebox software so essentially its squeezebox player for LMS


For LMS even a PC with Pentium PC would do with 2 GB RAM

Ofcouse you need a HDD with storage capacity as big as your data

 

[venkatcr]

^^ Venket I would suggest LMS and Picore player combo for the kind of multiroom setup you planning over chromecast audio. Picore player running on Rpi connected to a decent USB DAC will provide far better multiroom experience than chromecast audio. not only in terms of audio, but control over music streams with independent audio over different zones with the ability to sync between zones ....

A stupid question. What do I use for transporting from the servers to the nodes?

Thanks

 

[rikhav]

A stupid question. What do I use for transporting from the servers to the nodes?

Thanks

LMS will auto detect the players by itself

 

[ranjeetrain]

Initial impressions of Chromecast Audio are very positive. It sounds as good as the Squeezebox. I am currently playing it as a pure streamer, i.e. via optical out. My DAC situation is a bit suboptimal as my Marantz AVR is basically doing DAC duty. I do miss my Audio GD DAC now. Nonetheless, the streamer is really good. I have no complaints at all about sound quality.

Only minor grouse was that this one has a different optical port, the round one not the rectange one. So i had to buy a optical port adapter to make it work with existing cables.

I also have the older first gen Chromecast, and this one is a seriously better implementation. The first gen's audio was actually quite bad. This one is really focused on audio quality above all else.

I also like the fact that for such little money, you get a headless streamer. Besides the fact that it directly streams from source to preamp/dac.

Will post detailed impressions later. I also plan to do an a/b of cca's dac quality vis a vis at least the Marantz AVR i currently have.

Rege, it would be nice if you could post more impressions too, especially about CCA's DAC, especially since you have a really nice closed form r2r dac.

So it seems it's not a rebadge of the original Chromecast then. Google has taken it seriously.

It's indeed a great news if it serves the purpose of a headless streamer. After all a whole lot of people are looking for a "Squeezbox replacement".

Btw, it would be nice to hear impressions on the internal DAC of the CCA as well. Is it any good?

 

[ranjeetrain]

For LMS even a PC with Pentium PC would do with 2 GB RAM

Ofcouse you need a HDD with storage capacity as big as your data

That's where a good NAS with DLNA comes in. It's much simpler that way. Works out of the box.

 

[regeHA]

Rege, it would be nice if you could post more impressions too, especially about CCA's DAC, especially since you have a really nice closed form r2r dac.

Yes, a serious review by you and Rege would be immensely helpful. I am planning to set up a whole home audio using the Chromecast Audio if things work out well. I am contemplating between the Chromecast Audio and the Fon Gramofon. I plan to have simple inexpensive amps in each room connected to reasonably good speakers such as the Aperion Audio or Andrew Jones.

Thanks

Btw, it would be nice to hear impressions on the internal DAC of the CCA as well. Is it any good?

Sharing about the internal DAC of the CCA, to give everyone a fair idea.

It hands down beats everything Bluetooth. If you are comparing to Bluetooth speakers with DAC or even an entry level Bluetooth DAC the CCA is a better performer.

I've quite a few BT speakers and all of them have benefited from using the CCA as DAC with the 3.5 mm stereo cable for analog output. This is the yellow cable that is included along with the Chromecast Audio.

Do note that BT is limited to 300kbps and FLAC rips are usally 800 to 1100kbps so when using CCA you are also overcoming the limitation of BT. My FLACs stutter when using BT, but no such issues with CCA and wireless. I use for 10-14 hours daily with no dropouts and stuttering.

Now to other equipment.

I have a Sony RDP-XF300iPN that also has only a 3.5 input (same yellow CCA cable in use) and no digital inputs other than iPad/iPhone lightning connector. It was in fact bought for use with iPad. The CCA again wins over the internal DAC of the Sony. Apples to oranges comparison of course as digital is limited to iPad and iPhone, and analog is open to external DACs. But I've been using this boombox for a few years now, so I'm extremely familiar with the sound and since adding the CCA and using the internal DAC of the CCA the SQ has improved. This is for all content from my local FLAC rips to Spotify and AT40. In every instance, the CCA and its internal DAC wins and that's quite a feat when you consider the CCA cost me $35, while the Sony dock cost me around $250.

My pet peeve Sonos.

I've a Sonos 5, a couple of Sonos 1s and obviously the Sonos Connect (wifi bridge plus DAC). I'm not a fan of Sonos, but it was bought back when nothing like CCA was available in the market and I wanted the convenience of wireless and portability as well as the functionality of a single unit that also streamed the likes of Spotify. I don't like the sound of Sonos, and the Sonos speakers have a big role to play here, but considering even a decent Sonos setup will cost over $1000, more near to $1500, I'd say the $35 CCA is a huge win when you can spend that money on better speakers, amp, and DAC.

Where it fails...

Pretty much any decent AVR or DAC will perform better than the CCA. I've a 6-year-old (or older) Onkyo AVR without HDMI or wireless. But its DAC is still way better than the DAC of the CCA. I use Toslink to connect to this AVR and the SQ is way better than when using 3.5 mm analog cable and the CCA DAC.

I've also tested with entry level HTIBs from both Onkyo and Yamaha and again the HTIBs actually have the better DAC. Of course they cost 30-35K but it shows how much DAC chips have improved as for 30K you can get a decent 5.1 setup with amp and a pretty good onboard DAC in the AVR. I use the Onkyo AVR to power a pair of JBL pro bookshelves and its a very musical setup for the price $35. I've repurposed old equipment and given it wireless functionality without spending on a new DAC or AVR.

Primarily though I use an external DAC (except in the case of the Sony dock and BT speakers) with a mini Toslink to Toslink cable. But the internal DAC of the $35 CCA is nothing to be ashamed of especially if you are looking at a low budget setup or a 2nd or 3rd setup for other rooms in the house.

If you guys need more specific info let me know. No need to do AB testing between my more expensive DACs and the CCA, we all know how that will go.

In ending I will say the $35 CCA will really shine with the addition of another $35 device, the Raspberry Pi. Put something like moOde, Rune, or MinimServer and the 2 $35 devices will actually make a huge difference. Trust me on this. They will hands down beat any PC, and especially a Windows PC.