Seeking advice in selecting Solid state drives to store music (external drives)
- Thread starter Analogous
- Start date
The cloud storages are mostly blob-based you won't be able to play directly from them. Use the cloud storage as Primary backup and use the HDD/SSD for playback.
I was talking about oem nvme drives, in case, you are okay with used options. Oem drives comes with laptop, and many people sell these pull out drives. Else get a new adata s11 nvme, which as good as samsung.
I am out of my depth here WRT this technological details. I do get that I can not play files directly from cloud storage. A pity though, it would have been an elegant solution. Thanks for clarifying
First time I am hearing about NVME. It sounds like a good solution. Thank you for suggesting this. I wouldn’t mind a used one 2TB at a reasonable cost if it’s in good form. I will reach out to my patient tech guru @shyamv to help answer my dumb questions.
I would not recommend using NVME drives for USB music playback. NVME drives as external drives are power hungry. They require upwards of 5W depending on drive size and needs an USB C current compliant device than can supply upwards of 3A. Typical audio devices (for ex your Bluesound Node 2i) to which you would connect an external drive are USB 2.0/3.0 hosts and can supply a max of 0.5A(2.5W) at worst or 0.8A(4W) at best. This would mean that the NVME drive would not get enough juice to even power up or at best would run in an extremely throttled mode.
As I said before stick to an self-powered HDD drives for USB music, as you are already doing now.
I dont know which online article states that, but most of this is not correct. I never used a nvme+ usb enclosure on a streamer/dac and dont know how they effect sound, if any, but nvme+usb enclosure works like charm on any pc and laptop and almost any tv. I have been using it instead of wd mypassport external hdd, since many years now. And they work on usb 2.0/3.0, so, you need thunderbolt only if you need higher rate of transfer, but usb 3.0 have 5GBps bandwidth which should be more than enough for music.
It's not an issue with Laptops, PCs, TVs or even newer mobiles as these have power supplies in excess of 15V 3A. Streamers usually have a 5V/1A output and mostly cannot supply more than 0.5-0.8A current over USB. I don't think that be enough to power up these NVME drives consistently. One can always try but it is an expensive experiment.
I recently purchased the Samsung 970 Pro NVMe stick from Amazon. With an aftermarket USB adapter, it has no problem working on my laptop or PC using either USB2.0 and 3.0.
But, you would rather use a conventional HDD (WD preferred) with an adapter and have a backup SSD for music. Just my two cents.
But, you would rather use a conventional HDD (WD preferred) with an adapter and have a backup SSD for music. Just my two cents.
How much storage do you need ?
I have 175GB of music, which is stored on my PC and backed up on my NAS.
But for playback, I use a USB stick. Bought a 256GB USB stick, and my entire music collection fitsocmfortably on it.
I just plug it into my amp, and I have my entire music collection available to play.
I have 175GB of music, which is stored on my PC and backed up on my NAS.
But for playback, I use a USB stick. Bought a 256GB USB stick, and my entire music collection fitsocmfortably on it.
I just plug it into my amp, and I have my entire music collection available to play.
Thanks everyone. I think I have enough information on the relative advantages and disadvantages of the various storage options now to think and decide. It has been a interesting learning experience and I am grateful to each one of you for your thoughtful suggestions. Hope other FMs in similar circumstances found/find this useful too.
bluesound node comes with usb 3.0, which can give 900mA and it should be enough for powering nvme drive,although it wont run at full bandwidth due to usb interface and lower power input.
I have been using regular HDDs for the last 30 odd years and have not lost a single byte of data. The only HDD that ever failed was an internal 1TB HDD of a Dell Laptop. Since I had partitioned the drive as C and D drives, I was able to recover all my data from the D drive. In most cases what happens is that the first few tracks and sectors get corrupted, and that screws up the filing DB system. You can always use external resources to recreate the filing system and recover 99.99% of your data.
My AudioPC has 8TB of HDDs - all internal. I am moving away from external drives excepting using them as backup for my operational data. Backing up audio files is not worth it. If I do lose some files, I just re-rip the CD and I am up and about again. There are also other ways of getting lost audio files. In terms of noise and other 'factors', I have not faced any issue whatsoever. Mind you, I use only internal drives. Moved away form using external drives of any kind for regular usage. The SATA vs USB conundrum? I vote for SATA any day.
I am slowly moving away from hoarding movie files. Just dont have the time after using Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hotstar and others. I have a small set of my favourite movies to be re-watched on my HT system. Am also slowly moving to keeping 2K and 4K version of these favourite movies. These do take up a huge space. So another 8-10TB for movies. Sigh!!
Regular HDDs are perfectly safe. As long as you don't physically abuse them, they can last a life time.
SSDs will replace HDDs in time. But for that, they have to be manufactured in larger numbers till the pricing reaches the same level per byte of storage. Today SSDs are 20 cents per GB, while HDDs are 2 cents per GB. Here is an interesting article on SSDs vs HDDs. Unless your requirements are critical and require high performance, SSDs are still not cost-effective.
Again, unlike HDDs where the technology is common amongst multiple manufacturers and the form factor are just two, SDDs are still evolving and are subject to demands of computer and smartphone manufacturers in terms of size and form factor.
Cheers
My AudioPC has 8TB of HDDs - all internal. I am moving away from external drives excepting using them as backup for my operational data. Backing up audio files is not worth it. If I do lose some files, I just re-rip the CD and I am up and about again. There are also other ways of getting lost audio files. In terms of noise and other 'factors', I have not faced any issue whatsoever. Mind you, I use only internal drives. Moved away form using external drives of any kind for regular usage. The SATA vs USB conundrum? I vote for SATA any day.
I am slowly moving away from hoarding movie files. Just dont have the time after using Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hotstar and others. I have a small set of my favourite movies to be re-watched on my HT system. Am also slowly moving to keeping 2K and 4K version of these favourite movies. These do take up a huge space. So another 8-10TB for movies. Sigh!!
Regular HDDs are perfectly safe. As long as you don't physically abuse them, they can last a life time.
SSDs will replace HDDs in time. But for that, they have to be manufactured in larger numbers till the pricing reaches the same level per byte of storage. Today SSDs are 20 cents per GB, while HDDs are 2 cents per GB. Here is an interesting article on SSDs vs HDDs. Unless your requirements are critical and require high performance, SSDs are still not cost-effective.
Again, unlike HDDs where the technology is common amongst multiple manufacturers and the form factor are just two, SDDs are still evolving and are subject to demands of computer and smartphone manufacturers in terms of size and form factor.
Cheers
The OP had also mentioned 4-5 years in one of the posts in this thread.
This data is incorrect. Today's HDD typically provide between 300,000 to 1.2M hours of MTBF. Even taking 24 hours a day of operation, this works out to between 34 to 136 years! Even if you cut off 50-60% in terms of production and batches, you minimum MTBF will be around 20 years.
Today, they are using a new term - Annualized Failure Rate, or, AFR. AFR is the probable percent of failures per year, based on the manufacturer's total number of installed units of similar type. AFR is an estimate of the percentage of products that will fail in the field due to a supplier cause in one year. Seagate offers 0.73% AFR while WD claims <0.5% AFR.
Cheers
Basically, those no are good for Enterprise Garde drives like WD Gold, I have seen WD Black drives going strong even after 10 years of datacentre service. As far as consumer drives are concerned like WD Green, the MTBF is around 4/5 years.
I would not read too much into MTBF figures. Those are averages across thousands of drives.
It does not mean that a particular drive cannot fail in 6 months.
I have had multiple HDD failures over the years.
Hence I always backup - to a NAS drive with RAID.
Any solid state device (SSD or thumb drive) will always have lower chances of failure, than a electro-mechanical device with moving parts, like a HDD.
For storing video and movies, HDD is still the economical choice (multiple gigabytes of storage needed).
But for music, where storage space needs are much lower, I would always reccomend solid state storage.
Still , always, keep a back up.
It does not mean that a particular drive cannot fail in 6 months.
I have had multiple HDD failures over the years.
Hence I always backup - to a NAS drive with RAID.
Any solid state device (SSD or thumb drive) will always have lower chances of failure, than a electro-mechanical device with moving parts, like a HDD.
For storing video and movies, HDD is still the economical choice (multiple gigabytes of storage needed).
But for music, where storage space needs are much lower, I would always reccomend solid state storage.
Still , always, keep a back up.
keith_correa
Well-Known Member
Absolutely right! I too have NEVER had a failure of a magnetic drive. But just because I got lucky and it has not happened to me doesn't mean that the same applies to others. Murphy's law applies! I have seen grown men cry on failure of their HDD's and when they realize that their data is hone forever. Not a pretty sight!
THISSSSSSSS!
Please provide us a link to one or more reliable sights where this claim of yours can be substantiated.
The figures I have provided can be seen in the specs of any drive from Seagate or WD. For example, if you look at the spec sheet of Seagate Barracuda, that is the least expensive of their drives, you will find a MTBF of 1.75M hours. You can see the information on page 21 of this document.
Today all manufacturers provide free software that watches your drive and warns you of potential failures. That is how I realized my 1TB internal drive is going to fail, recovered my data, and replaced the drive.
Though I do agree that there is no guarantee that all drives will always work all the time, there is also no reason to be pessimistic about things. The whole world runs on data that is stored on HDDs. As a consumer or user, if you take simple precautions, there is every possibility you will never lose your data. My Lenovo laptop, for instance, shuts down automatically when the ambient temperature around the electronics crosses it's defined threshold. This saves not only the laptop, but also the internal HDD. I have had many GPU failures and not even a single HDD failure.
Touchwood.
What do the NAS use? HDDs, right?
It is different matter that backups are crucial for all of us. On an average, your operational data (bank transactions, emails, etc) will be around 1TB.
NAS do provide easy access to your files from across the house, and in some cases, from across the world. But since they use HDDs, they should also have the same threats you see in your operational drives. NAS are on most of the time, and that would effectively increase their failure rate. I back up critical data on an external drive that is used for an a hour or so a week. I maintain two versions of backup. Current and previous. Worst case, I would lose one week's data. That is agreeable to me. As I said previously I have not lost one byte of critical data. Touchwood.
Cheers
Hi Venkat.
Not sure what is the point you are making.
What I am saying is as follows :
1. In general, SSDs are sturdier and more reliable than HDDs. SSDs are of course much faster, smaller, lighter.
2. Unfortunately, SSDs are still expensive (per GB of storage), hence HDDs need to be used where very large storage pools are required. Once SSDs achive price parity with HDDs, HDDs will probably disappear.
3. No matter what type of storage you use, always keep a regular backup.
Hope this helps.
Yes, my NAS uses HDDs, but in a RAID 1 array - ie every disk is duplicated / mirrored. Hence even if I lose a disk, I dont lose any data.
I just replace the disk, and the RAID array rebuilds itself.
The chances of simultaneously losing 2 disks in a RAID 1 array is extremely low.
Get the Award Winning Diamond 12.3 Floorstanding Speakers on Special Offer
