No, because I am still waiting. Only sounds good on paper so far.
I am not sure what a Brownfield approach is to be honest. Octave uses a series of API calls much the same way that JRiver does (and Roon). A simple JSON (XML) command line will trigger whatever event is needed, like Play, Pause, Get Library, Search for whatever. In this way the user interface apps can be fast and simple while the server’s doing all the work in the background.
Thanks for the explanation and sorry for the jargon. A greenfield software project is writing everything from scratch with no constraints from prior work, industry specifications, etc. A brownfield project is taking existing work and modifying/adapting to your requirements.
What I’m getting from your explanation is that Octave will contain a small web service which receives JSON commands and thus controls the server. Seems like a sound approach. I think though that I would shudder if I ever saw your software development budget…
Yes, I shudder looking at it as well.
So, a DS Sr will be able to have Octave inside it via Bridge III. Or maybe for higher throughput and/or other reasons I’m not aware of, a DS Sr owner might opt for the external Octave connected via I2S.
What about the TSS: will internal Octave be an option there? Any limitations on that as compared to an external Octave streamer connected to TSS?
I’m just trying to get my head around the product strategy. Maybe the focus is on selling a streaming box with a new experience to the entire market of generic DAC users, and more integrated support for PS Audio DACs just comes along for the ride.
I am hoping that it allows external USB HD (NTFS formatted) to be used also and that the unit can provide the power (I hate wall warts on the HD).
Looking at the prototype I can’t find a browse feature that allows accessing the music files from a dir structure, that is something I need/want. I need to know which dir the files are located in.
Personally I’d love to have a music server / disk spinner combo, that would rip and play CD’S.
I know there are a few companies out there offering such a unit, like Naim.
Edit: Paul just cleared this up for me in another post, I think.
“Octave, just to be clear, is the name of the music management software that will control a number of future PS devices and people’s music libraries. The first server to incorporate Octave will be our top of the line and yes, it will include a ripping engine. It’ll be completely automatic. One can sit and stuff discs in while watching TV and drinking beer and Octave does the rest for you.”
What I’m still not clear about is, will the new server also have a transport that will play CD’s?
Or will it just have a ripping engine, and require ones own CD ROM or transport?
Why? Why do you need to do this? We are muling this over and don’t feel great about it because it takes away from the simplicity of the design and lends itself more towards a computer based program.
I would like access to my music storage directory as I can find anything I want to listen to in a couple of clicks without need to search.
Additionally, my directory structure tells me things about the music a server will not. For example, I have 30 recordings of Mozart’s Requiem. Under the Mozart Requiem folder I have six subfolders, one for each edition of the work. Under these, I have folders labeled by conductor and performing orchestra. It is trivial to compare editions, performances, etc. with this setup. I have yet to see a server/playback easily display all of this information.
It is one of the many examples as to why classical music listeners are often unimpressed with server/playback software. It does not capture and display all of the information we want/need - composer, piece, conductor, orchestra, soloists, edition, year recorded, etc.
Kaleidescape does it, and very elegantly.
I have been waiting on you to reply with that very answer/suggestion after I read Elk’s post… You never disappoint…
He must have been expecting it…
Yes. Kaleidescape is, of course, perfect.
But Kaleidescape cannot do it for less than $100.
Which is why it was a difficult decision to buy another disc spinner. Al-be-it a reasonably good one.
Don’t want to make this a long email but I used to use a product
called Media Monkey don’t know if you are familiar with it but it
kept all audio files in one dir and used an MSACCESS db to catalog
the artist, album etc. After using it far a long time I started
noticing music files missing and I would have to look up what was
on that album to see which songs were missing (usually it was
because it was a song I wanted to hear). Anyways that got me to
rethink how I structured music on HD once I got a streamer (or
bridge). I store music like this (sample) CD
HiREZ->Artist->Album->Songs/music, you get the picture. I
do have some duplicate albums maybe one on cd and the same as a
hiRez hense needing to know what dir the file comes from (using my
method), I also store CD and HiRez setup audio files in the same
manner (in seperate dirs from music). I also maintain 2 other
directories of CD WAV files from CD’s that contain music I like
but sound bad and I need to replace with a different version (i.e.
something from the 80’s loudness wars realm) I keep a list of the
cd tag number on my iPhone and review it when at Waterloo Records
a great place to buy used and new CD’s and replace when I find a
different remastered version or cd tag numbered version. I keep 3
copies of my music backed up… not gonna loose it or have to
re-rip it again, if I can help it.
I find my method an easy way to know exactly what I have as it is
inventoried and easily validated using the computer. I will never
go back to all files in one directory method, got to much invested
in the music now.
In addition to his reply, I’ll as my view on this. Some meticulously, manually arrange their music library using their own directory structure and naming system. Even for those who don’t, sometimes being able to point to the exact place where you know the file is, is very convenient.
Also, it would literally require ONE button labeled “browse”. There is zero harm in including this one button, and you only risk alienating those who require it.
Although this one is no demand of myself I can say there are a lot of administrative demands to a library SW for certain tasks (as I described one in my question further above) which are not relevant in terms of the convenience orientated concepts but the tasks aside.
There are quite a few situations aside of the usual perfect plug&play scenarios which are important to cover, too.
My teasing aside, it will display composer, piece, conductor, orchestra, soloists, edition, year recorded, etc.?
This would indeed be wonderful. How much of the data does it fill in on its own and how much do you need to add?
Can you post a screen capture of what it displays?
Sure…the whole process is completely automated. All you need to do is put the CD in the magic box (up to 320 of them at a time). From that point you can over-ride anything with your own meta-data (via web browser on computer), and you can re-jig the way things appear in lists to whatever way you choose.
However, step 1 is usually all I need to do, unless it’s a bizarre title of foreign origin which is not recognized by the music db, in which case I need to fill in all the information myself (this doesn’t happen very often).
I need to work out how to capture screenshots from iPad to post pics here.