Mi2016 saidHi @adminpaul
Is it planned for Octave to support MQA via it’s I2S output, going direct into the Directstream DAC?
Or is that still in discussions with the MQA folk?
Cheers!
nmacjr saidIt can be done. In the Kaleidescape ecosystem the CD goes in, gets identified, gets copied to the server, and its done in 2 or 3 minutes. In the GUI the album cover art is correctly associated, song titles are listed, and it grabs collections of photos of the artist to populate your display during playback. Multi-CD albums appear under a single coverart in the GUI. I don't know what discography provider they use, but it recognises almost everything, even classical. I've only had to tweak the metadata of some obscure titles from my whole collection. So, as I say, it can be done.If you guys can solve the classical tagging problem (with which I have struggled from Foobar to JRiver to Roon, with many hours of metadata tweaking), I will be a customer for yet another one of your products!
jeffstarr saidWith Tidal, or any streaming service can the sound quality change based on the number of users? I would think that their servers would be more stressed or using a higher percentage of their operating system at times of peak use. Is that a correct assumption, and do you think it can have an effect on the SQ of the signal[?] or stream we are receiving?
I find Tidal to sound much better late at night, like now, it is 2:15am locally, so on the East coast 3:15am, and just after midnight on the West coast. With my JRiver files, I can turn off the Wi-Fi if I want, and as it all on my PC the SQ is not time dependent. I guess it could also be more activity over my Spectrum cable service provider.
Some of my guests can hear the difference when I turn my laptop’s WiFi off, but that’s harder to get away from these days.
Number of users on their servers? I doubt that that makes nearly as much of a difference as local issues. As long as there aren’t any gaps in he audio that is 
Elk saidThanks, Ted! I believe you got me past my mental roadblock.
I was stuck, thinking the issue was what should Octave do when importing user data and it comes across the data string “soul & funk.” It seemed obvious to me that Octave should simply leave the string alone and accept the string as entered by the user, no matter how misguided.
But, instead, the actual issue Richard was raising is how should Octave search the genre field after the field is populated with the user’s data.
To this point, I like the ability to use any string (including recognition of a universal character such as !), with connectors such as And, Or, But Not (%).
This may be because my experience is computers do merely what you tell them to, not necessarily what you want. I thus prefer making explicit decisions rather than making assumptions as to what the software may do.
My guess is the average user who tags something “soul & funk,” or “soul/funk” would like the piece to show up when searching on “soul,” “funk,” or using both terms. If he wants the most narrow result, he searches on both.
Octave has to make a serious effort to understand what it is that your tags actually mean. One approach may be to recognize “Soul/Funk” as conveying both [Soul] and [Funk] independently, but to also recognize the possibility that [Soul/Funk] itself is a third valid genre attribute for that track. However, to do so would mean recognizing something like [Classical/Concerto/Cello/Piano/Violin] as a valid genre attribute, and that looks like a bit of a rabbit hole. Likewise, recognizing [Soul & Funk] as a valid genre would logically imply recognizing [Classical & Concerto & Cello & Piano & Violin] as an equally valid genre. But is that as much of a rabbit hole? Those are the sorts of issues we are trying to deal with. Not only are we asking ourselves if we’re getting it right, we are also asking ourselves whether, if we get it wrong, our error is still going to be close enough to the user’s original intent. These are a hundred decisions similar to this that need to be made, and each one needs to be shaken down in the same way that our Soul-Funk discussion has been shaken down here, if not always so publicly
I should be clear that none of these decisions are yet cast in stone, and that at all times part of the decision-making process will involve deciding whether the benefit of supporting a certain feature, capability, or behavior, is outweighed by additional complexity (and resultant confusion) in the User Interface.
Richard Murison said Actually, no! I was talking about importing the user data.Whew! I feel better. I thought I was tracking, but was not understanding the specifics of the problem. I believe I have an appreciation of the issue now.
Thanks again for working through this.
If the problem is trying to adapt the user’s tagging/database to Octave’s tagging system, then would a possible solution be to keep the user’s database intact and make a link to the equivalent in Octave in a way that the Octave can search the interwebs, find the album with all the particulars, and then repopulate the Octave tagging database for its ‘proper’ format. Then the User can use their interface device to either scroll through the Octave database or their original (as the two entries are linked). Wouldn’t that eliminate the need for a custom database format for each user?
–SSW
I assume Octave will identify the music independently of what the user may have called it. Octave cannot rely on a user’s genre tags, album tags, or anything else to identify music or it will be continually misidentifying albums when the tagging does not match reality/what others have tagged the album.
I expect Octave to identify the album by its signature, and then have the user’s tags (and auto-loaded tags) point to the album. In this way, the user can be as idiosyncratic as he would like in his tagging.
Streets Still Works saidIf the problem is trying to adapt the user’s tagging/database to Octave’s tagging system, then would a possible solution be to keep the user’s database intact and make a link to the equivalent in Octave in a way that the Octave can search the interwebs, find the album with all the particulars, and then repopulate the Octave tagging database for its ‘proper’ format. Then the User can use their interface device to either scroll through the Octave database or their original (as the two entries are linked)…
Other than that (and assuming I understand you correctly), then yes, what you are suggesting is exactly what Octave will do.
... Wouldn't that eliminate the need for a custom database format for each user?Octave will always have its own local database, but at no point would it require the format of that local database to be customized.
Elk saidI assume Octave will identify the music independently of what the user may have called it. Octave cannot rely on a user’s genre tags, album tags, or anything else to identify music or it will be continually misidentifying albums when the tagging does not match reality/what others have tagged the album.
I expect Octave to identify the album by its signature, and then have the user’s tags (and auto-loaded tags) point to the album. In this way, the user can be as idiosyncratic as he would like in his tagging.
Exactly, Elk. You got it.
Richard Murison saidVery close to what I meant, just done by a different method than I'd thought.At the risk of re-covering a well-trodden path, no, Octave is not adapting the user’s database, it is merely trying to interpret it. And it will never change or modify the user’s own metadata, or if it does it will only ever do so under user control.
Other than that (and assuming I understand you correctly), then yes, what you are suggesting is exactly what Octave will do.
... Wouldn't that eliminate the need for a custom database format for each user?Octave will always have its own local database, but at no point would it require the format of that local database to be customized.
Notice that all of the discussion above has to do with the subject of Taxonomy or the science of classifying things. This is a field in its own right but IMHO has nothing to do with PSA’s core skill as a company which is why I questioned their entry into this space in the first place. Not trying to be negative or controversial, just pointing this out …
A number have made similar comments, from the time the server project was first announced, including declarations PS Audio is a hardware company, not software.
For one of Paul’s responses, click here.
Any update on the music server project? My rusty trusty Qsonix server died over the weekend.
The software UI (Octave) is about to go pre-Beta (a/k/a Alpha) with a group of users next week.
Thanks Elk. Yup, we’re getting ready to start testing. But. That doesn’t mean we’re close to finished. We have yet to integrate Tidal or Spotify. We haven’t added links for artists within their bios.There are a number of loose ends that need tieing up.
That said, what we’re attempting to do with this early eval is to get a few user’s first reactions to the UI/UE from several standpoints: is it intuitive to use? Does it quickly and seamlessly get you where you want to go? Fun to use? Does it get you invested into the music?
Most programs, like iTunes, don’t make me feel invested in the music or the artists. That’s one of the key goals of Octave is to help the user feel invested/connected with the artists and their works.
Don’t forget about my offer to alpha/beta test, Paul! I’d be very interested in helping out. 
Does the server have a name yet and price ?
rogerdn saidDoes the server have a name yet and price ?
They have a price point in mind, but no price announced yet. I wouldn’t expect to see a price announcement until it’s ready for beta (beta testers get the opportunity to buy the product before it’s ready to ship to retail customers).
So it’s the same as the sw UI ?