Can the hard drive on which you store files affect your sound?
Sorry to disagree, but no, it can't.
The role of a NAS is to produce a string of ones and zeros, the only variable is the speed at which it does it. If it's suitably specified and is capable of keeping the buffer on the streamer filled, then there is no possible way it can influence the resulting sound.
You might as well ask if your choice of hard drive would affect the numbers in your spreadsheet, or the colours in your holiday photos.
Bang on Mr Articulated Lorry, don't often disagree with WHF but that piece was straining credulity.
I have to say, I totally agree.
However, I'm not in the camp that swears a £5 HDMI cable is the same as a £200 one as they're both 'digiital', yet that debate rages.
There are also people adamant that mains supply makes no difference to sound quality as it's just 'power'. But having had my dedicated spur for hi fi put on its own consumer unit and dedicated earth, I can tell you it makes an amazing difference.
You appear to have asked a question and then immediately disagreed with it. Odd... 
You appear to have asked a question and then immediately disagreed with it. Odd...
Or setting out an argument then stating his opinion?
Andrew - no offence mate but I prefer your old photo!! 
While cables may or may not have subtle effects upon sound quality and are worthy of debate, NAS drives are not.
As long as the NAS drive is working correctly then it will have absolutely no effect upon sound quality. It is not often that I feel strongly enough to invoke absolutes about HiFi but this is one question which demands a resounding answer of NO. I thought the conclusions in the magazine article were weak.
Yes ... if it makes a whirring clunking sound and has a fan that sounds like Concorde at take-off.
As long as the NAS drive is working correctly then it will have absolutely no effect upon sound quality. It is not often that I feel strongly enough to invoke absolutes about HiFi but this is one question which demands a resounding answer of NO. I thought the conclusions in the magazine article were weak.
Weak? They were non-existent, the differences the participants were describing were so slight (they said so themselves) they were almost certainly imagined. The trouble with the way this works is that, unconsciously at least, people will be thinking "I'm going to look an idiot if I say I can't here any difference" so they find a difference, just so they have something to say.
I had a situaion where the sound wasn't 'right', then it was pointed out I had a RAID1 setup! Obviously some data was being read from the 'audiophile' disk and some from the 'lesser' disk. Once that was sorted, even the wife asked what had happened to the hi-fi! 
Utter rubbish. Sorry, but it is. What was it that you "sorted"? Change one of the disks? How did you know which was the "audiophile" disk? Never heard such rot in my life.
There really is no difference between these tests and Nessie sightings...
>How did you know which was the "audiophile" disk?<
Via a technique based on Bentham's hedonic calculus I'll be making available as an iOS app before Easter.
>How did you know which was the "audiophile" disk?<
Via a technique based on Bentham's hedonic calculus I'll be making available as an iOS app before Easter.
Now that's what I call an answer!
I think that's very unfair on, and insulting to, those readers who give up their time to participate in The Big Question
I'm not going to contest the results of this test either way, and this post isnt really a reply to the topic as such, but I've been giving a lot of thought recently to what is and isn't possible.
Going by one of man's most famous faux pars, we once thought the world was flat. Fair enough, proof was supplied to the contrary, and now the truth is common knowledge. It was also thought that the atom was the smallest possible thing in the universe, until man split it. There's now questions being raised about Einstein's theory of relativity. And so on.
My point is that, we all know what we think we know, but there's still a lot out there that is still unknown to us, whether this is just because it's undiscovered, or because we don't have the right tools or methods to discover or analyse. We take for granted that 0's and 1's are 0's and 1's, and because they're digital they're untouchable, but how do we know that we know everything about 0's and 1's? There could be something undiscovered about them that might one day completely change what we think we know.
All I'm saying is that an open mind is needed. True, an open mind may be more open to being influenced, but it will also be more open to finding out something new. If everyone just stuck to what was known, nothing new would be discovered - it's those open to impossibilities that discover.
- Login to post comments
You might as well ask if your choice of hard drive would affect the numbers in your spreadsheet, or the colours in your holiday photos.
Point taken, but I don't tend to stream spreadsheets or photographs!