ARCHIVED FORUM -- March 2012 to February 2022READ ONLY FORUM
This is the second Archived Forum which was active between 1st March 2012 and 23rd February 2022
Just seen this review of a new company HifiRose that has brought out a music streamer with a fantastic front display, capable of Roon Ready, MQA, native DSD compatible, internet radio, internal drive and ripping, but more importantly so beautiful, elegant and simple to use. I can’t but help think that this is what the Moment should have been or where the next era of streaming should go to.
https://youtu.be/Yxzhr-GTgbw
.
Present: BL90, Core, BL6000, CD7000, Beogram 7000, Essence Remote.
Past: BL1, BL2, BL8000, BS9000, BL5, BC2, BS5, BV5, BV4-50, Beosystem 3, BL3, DVD1, Beoremote 4, Moment.
Ok, a big black box with a screen and an ugly interface. Don’t see any inspiration to get from that.
diisign.com
mbee:Ok, a big black box with a screen and an ugly interface. Don’t see any inspiration to get from that. diisign.com
Oh God, no!
The usability on this thing is terrible - they just threw in every technology they could find instead of thinking about how people should use it.
The reviewer himself says he primarily runs from Airplay (7:25). So if you're doing Airplay, why have a display at all? Airplay is controlled by an apple device, not the streamer.
It can act as a Roon endpoint, but if you're using it as an endpoint for Roon you don't need to be able to rip CDs to an internal drive (since your music would be coming from Roon) and you still don' need a display since Roon would be controlled by an iPad or similar.
And that interface with a long row of "app" icons? I don't want apps on my music player, I want an integrated experience. (If I want apps, I'll use my phone or iPad.) The Moment's interface was much better thought-out. There is a single interface that allows you to play from Deezer, DLNA, or internet radio - no need to switch apps depending on what you want to listen to.
I'm glad to see dedicated volume buttons - that's a must on any audio output device, as that is the most accessed feature. But whoever designed it wasn't thinking about interaction: the power off button is right next to the volume-up button, so you can accidentally turn the device off when you're trying to make you music louder. Oops!
He also said it gets lots of updates - roughly weekly. No thanks, please make your product work before your release it. Updates should only be for security or to fix something that a streaming service has broken. (To be fair, B&O also screwed this up on the Beosound Moment- they released the device long before the software was working. Shame on them!)
Finally, the Moment's tilted display is much more user friendly than the vertical display on this device. With the display vertical you either need to square to control it when you walk over to the table/stand it is sitting on, or you need to mount it at eye level and then lift your arm all the way up to shoulder level to press buttons. It's just not a user-friendly design.
For "looks flashy" this streamer gets 10/10. But for actually using it on a daily basis, I'd take my 6 year old Moment any day of the week.
Sources: 2x Beosound Moment • 4x Beosound Essence Mk II Speakers: 3x Beolab 8000 • 2x Beolab 6000 • 2x Beolab 3 • 3x Beolab 2 Integrated: 1x Beosound 2 • 1x Beosound Level • 4x BeoPlay M5 • 1x BeoPlay A6 Control: 16x* Essence Remote • 1x Beoremote Halo
* Yes, really! 🤦♂️
seethroughyou:A highly legible 4K display unlike the Moment which used a cheap as chips display. ... Has software and service refinements every 2 weeks unlike B&O.
...
Has software and service refinements every 2 weeks unlike B&O.
I don't like to get in interweb tit-for-tat arguments, but this post is so ridiculous that I feel compelled to respond to every single point.
> A highly legible 4K display unlike the Moment which used a cheap as chips display.
This is false. Although the RS-150 is capable of putting out 4k video from its HDMI output, the display on the front is a 14.9 inch HD display at 1280x390 resolution, not a 4k display. The Moment's screen resolution is 1280x800, so more than twice as many pixels as the RS-150. Also, the Moment's screen is has much higher pixel density because it is smaller.
And you think the Moment's display was cheap? Well it uses the same IPS technology as the HiFi Rose's display, which is about as good as you can get in an LCD display. And the Moment was released 6 years before the RS-150, so including that high-quality display was more of a stretch back then.
Again, the Rose RS-150 has a lower resolution display than the Moment, it's not 4k. And the Moment's scrolling is perfectly smooth, so this is just you inventing ***.
The Moment's display is also removable in tablet form so control is possible from all over the room, not in a single location like the Rose, so I think the Moment wins easily.
> Multiple streaming services unlike Moment and Core.
Who cares? I don't, because I can get all the music I want from Deezer and net radio.
However, if you really do want lots of audio streaming service options, the RS-150 would be a bad choice because for audio streaming it only supports Tidal at the moment. They do claim "Future updates will provide additional Hi-Fi streaming services, such as Spotify, Qobuz, and Deezer" but as of right now the RS-150 is no better than Moment, and has fewer options than Core.
> Intelligent playlist and genres unlike the Moment’s broken Moodwheel.
I agree that it's terrible that the inner ring of the Moodwheel no longer works. The middle and outer rings still work fine with with Deezer, so it's still possible to get curated music streams. And of course Deezer playlists remain available. So I can still get playlists and music by genre or mood.
On the other hand, I don't see any intelligent playlists or Genres support in the RS-150. Can you link to where this is claimed?
> Software that’s glitch free - very much unlike the Moment’s abysmal history.
Although we know the Moment's sad software history, I don't how you can claim that Rose devices to be glitch-free. Have you used one? The fact that they are updating software weekly makes me think there must be more than a few glitches.
> An app that ranks as one of the best unlike the BeoApp and integrates your DLNA and streamed content seemlessly like Roon.
That's odd. When I look up "RoseConnect" in Apple's app store there is a base RoseConnect version that gets 1 star out of 5 possible, and RoseConnect Premium with no reviews at all. I'm not sure how you can claim this is better than the Bang & Olufsen app which is currently rated 4.3 out of 5 with 9.2k ratings.
> Is Roon Ready like many manufacturers unlike B&O.
If I was using Roon I wouldn't need a $4,000 streaming box, would I? I'd fill my house with Roon endpoints and a single Roon server. I can't imagine why anyone would want a $4,000 box for a Roon endpoint.
> Many different inputs and outputs unlike the meagre connections from B&O devices.
And yet I've never found my B&O equipment to be lacking inputs or outputs. What more should they offer? They attach to speakers for output, and offer line or digital inputs if you want to use an external source. Nothing more is needed!
> High quality components and toroidal power supply unlike B&O.
The components I've found in the B&O gear I've taken apart are all high quality. I have been designing electronics - including life-saving medical equipment - for a living for almost 25 years, so I am pretty well qualified to make that assessment. Now you're just bashing B&O without having a clue what you're talking about. Did HiFi Rose pay you to do this?
Also, toroidal transformers for audio power supplies are useless crap promoted by the same "Audiophiles" who prefer gold-plated optical cables or oxygen-free copper cables on the AC inlet. (Hint: those are also completely useless.) Contemporary amplifiers use switch-mode power supplies (probably with a PFC front-end) to generate the DC rails that power the electronics and amplifier stages.
> DSD, MQA, all formats and free YouTube music embedded unlike B&O.
Yup, still don't care. Deezer HiFi sounds the same as regular Deezer to my ears; I don't care about a Tidal-specific format.
> An internet radio service that works unlike B&O’s which broke when Tunein pulled plug on non-national radio stations.
TuneIn didn't pull the plug, those radio stations did that. And they broke more than just B&O equipment. This is a failure of the radio station, not B&O or TuneIn. Direct your angst appropriately
> Has software and service refinements every 2 weeks unlike B&O.
This is the biggest red flag for me. Releasing software every 2 weeks means they're not doing proper testing. Even a massive company the size of Microsoft or Apple can't release high-quality software at that pace.
Also, software updates every 2 weeks means they released the device before they finished it, and are playing catch-up.
There is not much to discuss there.
If you like the device, go for it.
I certainly can’t see that as a source for inspiration for B&O.
B&O is heading in a different direction, because they have a ‘somewhat different’ target costumer........not many device-obsessed audiophiles amongst the buyers of the stuff that B&O makes. Those, who are, most likely would not be satisfied with whatever B&O would make anyway. And honestly, they have plenty of more or less obscure devices to play with - they don’t need B&O.
I can’t see myself benefit in any way from such a device - if you can, be happy with it.
MM
There is a tv - and there is a BV
^^ There's a really useful 'quote' or 'partial quote' feature when responding to posts on Beoworld - this makes it easy to see who is saying what. In the two longer posts above MM's latest, it is very difficult to follow the argument, if there is one
I’ve gone full-stupid on my gear to compliment the BL90s. Somewhere between an Audiophool and a typical B&O punter:-
• A full Auralic G2/G2.1 Stack (x4)
• Melco NH1 Media Server
• Melco Switches and CD Ripper
• PS Audio Stellar Regen to clean the digital equipment power supply
• Some half-decent cables (but not silly cables)
Im happy with what I have. Can I discern every component? Simply put No.
Can I discern every CD/Ripped CD/Streamed CD? Simply put Yes.
a) At best, 90-95% of all Streamer content is CD Redbook.
b) Very little is available as Hi-Res (relatively speaking)
c) Big debate on Auralic over MDA (which Auralic and Linn will not/never support)
d) They argue MQA is another iTunes conn for control and proprietary control
e) MQD is not lossless and adds noise to the signal (I can cite elsewhere)
f) BUT OVERALL, THE MASTERING OF THE RECORDING plays the biggest part of the playback experience if done well AT ANY RESOLUTION. Too much hi-Res music is still recorded in a Cr@p and well un-dynamic way in my opinion.
My overall view as a happy consumer is:-
1. Buy what you want and can afford.
2. A good question to ask yourself is “can I afford to buy 2 of these”?
3. I look for clean power supply on my digital equipment. Make it as good as you can afford. Your PC (or any PC-based digital source) is the major generator of digital noise which is constantly being added to the signal.
4. I look for high sample rates – not for the music files….but to push the digital filters as high as possible out of the audible sound range.
5. Listen to the music and not the equipment. (An Audiophile is a person who uses music to listen to his/her equipment).
6. If your ripping CDS, I do not believe it is just about bit-perfect. A good quality ripper does in my opinion work better than the $5 unit in your PC. This finally leads.
7. If buying music in any format or resolution, buy the best recording (if such thing exists)
The hardware and software market is full of over-complication and one can go either/or/and. In the long run....it does not make a lot of difference I believe. The pursuit of happiness.
Mr 10Percent:I’ve gone full-stupid on my gear to compliment the BL90s. Somewhere between an Audiophool and a typical B&O punter:-• A full Auralic G2/G2.1 Stack (x4)• Melco NH1 Media Server• Melco Switches and CD Ripper• PS Audio Stellar Regen to clean the digital equipment power supply• Some half-decent cables (but not silly cables) Im happy with what I have. Can I discern every component? Simply put No.Can I discern every CD/Ripped CD/Streamed CD? Simply put Yes.a) At best, 90-95% of all Streamer content is CD Redbook.b) Very little is available as Hi-Res (relatively speaking)c) Big debate on Auralic over MDA (which Auralic and Linn will not/never support)d) They argue MQA is another iTunes conn for control and proprietary controle) MQD is not lossless and adds noise to the signal (I can cite elsewhere)f) BUT OVERALL, THE MASTERING OF THE RECORDING plays the biggest part of the playback experience if done well AT ANY RESOLUTION. Too much hi-Res music is still recorded in a Cr@p and well un-dynamic way in my opinion.My overall view as a happy consumer is:-1. Buy what you want and can afford. 2. A good question to ask yourself is “can I afford to buy 2 of these”? 3. I look for clean power supply on my digital equipment. Make it as good as you can afford. Your PC (or any PC-based digital source) is the major generator of digital noise which is constantly being added to the signal.4. I look for high sample rates – not for the music files….but to push the digital filters as high as possible out of the audible sound range.5. Listen to the music and not the equipment. (An Audiophile is a person who uses music to listen to his/her equipment).6. If your ripping CDS, I do not believe it is just about bit-perfect. A good quality ripper does in my opinion work better than the $5 unit in your PC. This finally leads.7. If buying music in any format or resolution, buy the best recording (if such thing exists)The hardware and software market is full of over-complication and one can go either/or/and. In the long run....it does not make a lot of difference I believe. The pursuit of happiness.
Very interesting, @Mr 10Percent.
I have the BeoLab 90s and am heading down the same route. I have a couple of questions for you.
You said you have the full Auralic stack, presumably including the DAC. Do you find this gives you better sound when connected to the BL90s' analogue input compared to a direct digital connection from the streaming transport?
Do you find the music server gives better results than a generic NAS?
Do you find the Melco CD ripper (which I'm presuming is a D100) gives better-sounding files than ripping using a computer and a quality program with AccurateRip?
Not exactly the same setup by any means, but I bought a Linn streamer / DAC for my 50s.
Partly to give the 50s a Roon source - as the Linn is seen by my Roon Nucleus as an endpoint.
But partly, and just as importantly, the DAC in the Linn streamer sounds a good deal more pleasing (better to me) when I take its DAC output into the analogue 50s inputs.
If I bypass the Linn DAC, and just take its streamers' digital output into my 50s, its perfectly fine, but not that close to the relaxed warmth I get from the Linn's analogue (i.e. DAC) output. For the record, my Linn streamer has the upgraded Katalyst DAC.
I won't go farther in adding bits to the chain - but from my experience, a strong DAC has got me to a very happy place.
politician: Very interesting, @Mr 10Percent. I have the BeoLab 90s and am heading down the same route. I have a couple of questions for you. You said you have the full Auralic stack, presumably including the DAC. Do you find this gives you better sound when connected to the BL90s' analogue input compared to a direct digital connection from the streaming transport? Do you find the music server gives better results than a generic NAS? Do you find the Melco CD ripper (which I'm presuming is a D100) gives better-sounding files than ripping using a computer and a quality program with AccurateRip?
Also very interesting, @Sandy B. I've always been cautious about introducing extra steps into the chain (i.e. two DACs) and wonder whether there is any point in clocking an Auralic or dCS stack as the Lab 90s/50s reclock when converting to digital and back again, but maybe this is something I should investigate.
Politician.
To address you points as best I can:
1. I went for the Melco N1Z H60 first. I was fed-up of my WD NAS and the way it performed (slow, difficult access and yes....noisy)
2. The Melco is a dog to control on its own but it does do DNLA - so all my older Beo-Systems (TV, Essence) could pull the files effortlessly.
3. I purchased the Vega G2 DAC - mainly because I was not overly happy with the Melco to BL90 over USB or SPDif. I was also worried that Auralic have had issues changing their coding and the BL90 not being receptive. This is common with a lot of Streamers/DAC combos that cant talk to one another. By purchasing a Vega G2 DAC, I could stream analogue (which is what all digital music is anyway) via XLR and get good results. I used a reasonable priced cable here (AQ Water 2) to move the signal 6m. BL90 has a USB limit of 4.8m so no good for me hiding black boxes away.
4. Later, I added the Leo Clock, the Aries G2 Streamer and finally, the Sirius G2.1. I would say you could quite easily stop at the either one box solution of the less capable streamer (VEGA DAC) or connect fully digitally with the Aries). Adding the Clock made a very small difference. The Sirius however (the VEGA-LEO are combos as is the ARIES-SIRIUS) made what I think is a very noticeable addition to the sound by up-sampling almost everything from Redbook to DSD512. This (and the Aries too) helps the DAC compute much better and filter off the noise.
5. The analogue waveform then goes to the BL90 as 192kbps where it is re-digitised, DSP-d and re-analogue. One can say too many processes? However, it does sound very good and somewhat future-proofs my system. (replace BL90s with something else, use Auralics somewhere else?)
6. I have ripped my entire CD collection twice. Once with my PC and dbpowerAmp/Accurip etc..) and once again with the Melco. In retrospect, the Melco gives very good results and is effortless apart from pushing a eject button and twice on the Melco N1Z to record. I do not use the Melco D100 with my PC. I do use Jaikoz to re-tabulate my music file metadata.
7. one more unforeseen issue was with the BL90s generating a very distinct humm at 0 sound volume. This was attributed the Auralics running on the same power circuit as the Labs. The PS Audio Stellar P3 was then purchased to power all the digital sources (with a Audio Macro 6-way power distributor) on the high performance Regen line. The other equipment runs on the standard regen line.
In terms of it all holistically.
1. The BL90 adds the biggest bang for buck by far.
2. There is definitely more money involved here than sense. It sort of addictive in a way. Beware.
3. Music quality (mastering) as you know with the BL90 is THE major problem.
4. Adding more black boxes improves the quality of the sound. The Law of diminishing returns. The argument is...can you really tell and can you measure it?
5. Is my solution better than a BS Core. Yes. Absolutely. Testing a Core and the PLink from a Beovision. No difference/improvement between those two in my opinion. However, there is $$$$ attached to the big difference between the Auralics and a BSCore.
6. What I think erks me the most is pairing the BL90 with something decent, but not stupidly expensive decent. There is nothing in the middle and those loudspeakers deserve something good and they deserve well-recorded material to play.
Thanks for a very enlightening answer. I'm currently using an Auralic Aries Femto directly into the BL90, but will probably upgrade when they launch the G3. (I tested a G2.1 and it was a significant improvement, but as it was a mid-life upgrade I decided to wait.) I also a tested a dCS Network Bridge, which I found very unimpressive, but might have more luck with their Vivaldi range if ever I get my hands on a piece to test.
politician: Also very interesting, @Sandy B. I've always been cautious about introducing extra steps into the chain (i.e. two DACs) and wonder whether there is any point in clocking an Auralic or dCS stack as the Lab 90s/50s reclock when converting to digital and back again, but maybe this is something I should investigate.
Just to add on my last point for everyone else as well.
Clocking reduces jitter. Im sure Technical people can give better explanations than myself - a music lover-techno-novice.
The Upsampling stage is interesting. Contrary to the "bits is bits", and that you cant get any more information out of a 44.1kbps CD, the upsampling as I understand it converts the signal into higher bitrate and then the x2 Nyquist formula comes into play where it can place a very accurate filter on high-frequency "undesirable noise".
At lower bitrates, this cuts off part of the audible spectrum as filters capable of doing this are very complicated/expensive. I look as an upsampler as add-on filter.
As an added bonus, you also get to chose the native/optimal sample feedrate of a DAC and thus reduce computational load. This is equipment matching at its finest?
Sandyb: Not exactly the same setup by any means, but I bought a Linn streamer / DAC for my 50s. Partly to give the 50s a Roon source - as the Linn is seen by my Roon Nucleus as an endpoint. But partly, and just as importantly, the DAC in the Linn streamer sounds a good deal more pleasing (better to me) when I take its DAC output into the analogue 50s inputs. If I bypass the Linn DAC, and just take its streamers' digital output into my 50s, its perfectly fine, but not that close to the relaxed warmth I get from the Linn's analogue (i.e. DAC) output. For the record, my Linn streamer has the upgraded Katalyst DAC.
I think what we are hearing here is the limitation in either USB transmission or the SPDif. I don't think this is a B&O thing as I've hear plenty of people take about DAC compatibility issues and the thin-ness of USB sound when there is no compatibility issue.
Another issue is that a good deal of Streamers (particularly lower-end) stream via USB with the 5V service voltage inherent in most of their USB connections. Galvanically isolated is better?. This 5V re-introduces noise into the system which the Amp/Loudspeaker combo can pick up on.
Although the USB connections are fine, I have been considering connecting my Lumin UI Mini streamer via XLR to my 90s.
Does anyone have any experience or advice with this kind of hook up?
Mr 10Percent:I’ve gone full-stupid on my gear to compliment the BL90s.
New: Beovision Harmony, Beolab 50's, Beolab 28's, Beolab 18's, Beolab 17's, Beosound Stage & LG, Beosound 2, Beoplay M3, Beoplay A1, Beoplay Portal, Beoplay H4 gen 2, Beoplay E8 3.0
Mikipedia on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/Mikipedia
Mikipedi4 on Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/mikipedi4
Mikipedia on Intagram: https://www.instagram.com/mikipedi4/
Old: Beosound 9000 mk3, Beolab 3's, Beovision Eclipse, Beolab 1's, Beolab 2, Beovision 10-46, Overture 2300, beolab 8000's, Beolab 4000's, Beovision avant 32" etc. etc.
@seethroughyou I'm not going to reply to each point in your post. I do agree with you that B&O's handling of the software on Moment was absolutely dismal from beginning to end. I think it's pathetic and almost unconscionable that they are no longer supporting the product that was their flagship device until just a couple of years ago.
I do want to address this:
seethroughyou:You must need your eyes checking if you think the display has the granularity and clarity of the Moment's.
The display on the HiFi Rose RS-150 is 1280x390 - I confirmed this with the manufacturer over email. On a 14.9 inch display this works out to a pitch of 90 pixels per inch. The Moment's display is 1280x800, and 7 inches diagonal. That works out to a pitch of 216 pixels per inch. If you think a 90 ppi display will look better than a 216ppi display I think you may also need to have your eyes checked. Or more accurately, I think you should look at videos of the RS-150 using a large 4k display, so you can see yourself that the RS-150's display is actually lower pitch/resolution than the Moment's. This 4k video shows a close-up of the Rose's display at 1:29: https://youtu.be/6vLF-7BIc7Y?t=129
I don't think you have ever owned a Moment, or you would understand that its display is just fine: it looks good and the touchscreen and scrolling are very responsive. And I don't think you have used the RS-150 yourself, or you would know that the display is only half an HD display (meaning HD pixel width, half as tall) and lower pixel pitch than the display on the Moment.
I think ultimately it comes to preferences. I like iPhones because the interface is fairly basic and consistent, and I find it does what I need in a simple way; I have friends who prefer Android phones because they can be customized and adjusted in an almost infinite manner. The thing that they love about Android is what I dislike about it; the thing that I love about iOS is what they dislike about it. Similarly, I want a simple interface that lets me pick some music and not think any more about it. You don't like that because you want lots of apps and upgradability and configurability. So the simple Moment is a good choice for me, and the app-centric RS-150 is a good choice for you.
As far as which is better for B&O . . . well I think they lean toward simple and elegant rather than flashy, so I feel that the RS-150 design isn't appropriate for the brand.
I quite like the design and usability of the rose audio streamer although I think that the Sony HAP-Z1es still has the fastest non touchscreen interface with its jogdial. No need to fight or argue whether or not the rose audio streamer is better or worse than B&Os solution(s). It's a matter of taste and as many members here on Beoworld had demonstrated since all the years of B&O love, you can mix it well with B&O and can be happy. But personally I would be happy if B&O makes a Beosound with a screen and physical controls again... I hate when I have to use a phone or tablet for controlling anything. I really like and support Mrc. 10 percents approach to music listenting at home! It has that relieving "Ah, I'm not alone with this" effect. ;-)
TWG:But personally I would be happy if B&O makes a Beosound with a screen and physical controls again... I hate when I have to use a phone or tablet for controlling anything.
CB: Isn’t it what is called Halo+Core?
Isn’t it what is called Halo+Core?
Sold my Moment last week to purchase this combo. The feature I will miss will be the search function through my music collection on my NAS.
I've read interesting setups in this thread, but I'm still wondering and curious at what level the psychological factor (I've spend more money and therefore it should sound better) kicks in.
Beobuddy:Sold my Moment last week to purchase this combo. The feature I will miss will be the search function through my music collection on my NAS. I've read interesting setups in this thread, but I'm still wondering and curious at what level the psychological factor (I've spend more money and therefore it should sound better) kicks in.
CB: TWG: But personally I would be happy if B&O makes a Beosound with a screen and physical controls again... I hate when I have to use a phone or tablet for controlling anything. Isn’t it what is called Halo+Core?
TWG: But personally I would be happy if B&O makes a Beosound with a screen and physical controls again... I hate when I have to use a phone or tablet for controlling anything.
But personally I would be happy if B&O makes a Beosound with a screen and physical controls again... I hate when I have to use a phone or tablet for controlling anything.
You're right... mostly. ;-) It could when the Halo will be updated to have its full potential