twinkletoes
Well-known member
I don't understand your comment other than fact your repeating my point in a round about sort of way.
and I fail to see the bias.
and I fail to see the bias.
Oxfordian
Well-known member
Linn has an all in one streamer/dac/amp/av box that can had for less than the cost of a RA520, so does that make the Rose the more upmarket product only for the well off?
manicm
Well-known member
Ah the Linn Majik DSM. But I'll turn that around and ask you does the price make the HiFi Rose overpriced?
In a previous post I pasted a link to HiFi News review. That's a British rag, I'll remind you.
Last edited:
manicm
Well-known member
You're pointing out 'obsolecense' in the Hi-fi Rose? When that's true of any streaming component.
You also mention colour screens, well Cambridge Audio have that on the Evo range too.
Last edited:
jjbomber
Well-known member
Films can easily take up 4TB and you'll be having a short life if you don't have enough time for them!
Revolutions
Well-known member
If I’m following this correctly, the Hifi Rose RS520 is good, terrible, great value, overpriced, innovative and anti-ethical all at the same time.
Oxfordian
Well-known member
Apologies I thought we talking music not film, in those circumstances the larger the drive the better. I don't watch too much AV (TV or Film) so don't store any films at all.
manicm
Well-known member
Having said that Oxfordian pointed out the Linn Majik DSM is around the same price, a bit cheaper actually. So not to be overlooked either.
My main gripe with Linn and some others is the lack of USB drive playback. Cambridge Audio offer it but without gapless playback.
Naim do offer it with gapless playback, and any Denon/Marantz with HEOS.
I'm in a niche, but it's important for me, as I sometimes want a halfway point between CD playback and streaming. I've decided installing a NAS is too much of a faff. And doesn't it use wifi bandwidth even when idle/not streaming? Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here.
manicm
Well-known member
Oxfordian
Well-known member
In your rationale yes it does make the Rose overpriced as you stated that Linn was overpriced, if one is then the other must be as well. Your comment not mine.
You missed - not patriotic
Last edited:
manicm
Well-known member
In your rationale yes it does make the Rose overpriced as you stated that Linn was overpriced, if one is then the other must be as well. Your comment not mine.
You missed - not patriotic
I NEVER said Linn was overpriced, please quote me, or stop putting falsehoods in my mouth.
manicm
Well-known member
In your rationale yes it does make the Rose overpriced as you stated that Linn was overpriced, if one is then the other must be as well. Your comment not mine.
You missed - not patriotic
What exactly is not patriotic about buying a Hifi Rose instead of Naim for example? In either case 4k is a lot of money.
There is space for both in my view.
Just the last word on the Exposure. The quality of the drawer mechanism is as solid as a spinner 3 x the cost of the £599 Exposure. It doesn't sound plasticy at all, when open & close it it has a little hum and closes with reassuring clonk. It also doesn't misread a disc - it's immediate. This is from a player first released in 2004.
When the time comes to replace the Leema (eventually I'll have to) the Exposure 3510 amp will be high on the audition list.
When the time comes to replace the Leema (eventually I'll have to) the Exposure 3510 amp will be high on the audition list.
Oxfordian
Well-known member
‘If you want upgradability then buy a Linn, but don't complain about the price.’
Your comment not mine, and I interpret this to mean that the Linn is overpriced, if this isn’t what you mean then why mention price?
manicm
Well-known member
What I said is it's expensive, being overpriced is an entirely different matter.
Read properly or don't put words in my mouth.
Oxfordian
Well-known member
I haven't put words anywhere, if you wanted to say expensive then say expensive, if you leave comments open to interpretation then they will get interpreted but necessarily in the way that you meant.
My apologies for misinterpretation of your comment.
manicm
Well-known member
manicm
Well-known member
Gray
Well-known member
Yes and not 2x £1500.....if you buy the pair, it's £2,800.
Mustn't be greedy and I never take discounts for granted - but a couple of dealers have given me 10% discounts without batting an eyelid.
A potential £2,520 price for the pair is starting to look like a bargain - especially if you consider how much other UK manufacturers equivalents might cost (no Naims mentioned).
Last edited:
davidf
Well-known member
Any software based product has the potential of reaching the end of its useable life prematurely. This will depend on its available memory and processor to run future updates, and sometimes to move forward, a manufacturer has to start afresh with new software.
As to the cost and reliability, I guess it partly depends if any given company has its own software engineers on site (and good ones too), or whether the software is farmed out to a third party - the latter is relying on that company to keep your product going. In-house engineers can deal more quickly with issues caused by updates from outside companies (Apple/Microsoft/Google etc).
Screens have been an issue for some manufacturers (Naim in particular), this will come down to how lenient the manufacturer is going to be if screens start failing, whether they stick to existing warranty lengths or will cover them outside of warranty out of good will. Personally, I would usually recommend turning streamer screens off during use in order to help them last longer. Or better still, buy one without a screen, unless it's a necessity for you.
As to the cost and reliability, I guess it partly depends if any given company has its own software engineers on site (and good ones too), or whether the software is farmed out to a third party - the latter is relying on that company to keep your product going. In-house engineers can deal more quickly with issues caused by updates from outside companies (Apple/Microsoft/Google etc).
Screens have been an issue for some manufacturers (Naim in particular), this will come down to how lenient the manufacturer is going to be if screens start failing, whether they stick to existing warranty lengths or will cover them outside of warranty out of good will. Personally, I would usually recommend turning streamer screens off during use in order to help them last longer. Or better still, buy one without a screen, unless it's a necessity for you.
Revolutions
Well-known member
Definitely a great price. I’d be interested to hear it alongside my Elicit Mk5. Similar spec, similar price.
podknocker
Well-known member
I never said it was a perfect component, or sounded perfect, because that's impossible. I said it was nearly perfect and I wasn't suggesting its sound quality would be streets ahead of the competition. When I said nearly perfect, I was suggesting it does what it says on the tin better than any other device out there. The huge and clear touch screen, the aesthetics and ergonomics, the range of very useful features, it's expansion potential and many do say it sounds incredible. There isn't another product out there offering all this functionality and ease of use as the RS520 from HIFI Rose. With Naim entering the Class D sector, it does show where the market is going. Class D streamers and fantastic connectivity are going to appeal to many more people from now on. I know there are many here still hanging onto valves and vinyl, but as I've mentioned before, the world and technology changes and offers new ideas and I've embraced new concepts for decades, working in the IT sector. I still feel people are scared of change and will fight it forever. History has shown us that it's adapt or disappear.
Last edited:
Stuart83
Well-known member
I'm going to risk going nearly off topic in response in regard to the quality aspect of things.
Recently I've been as you know demoing all sorts of cd players and transports even an advance Paris A10 to find the usual suspects are better IMO as I always have our of a vast bunch of newbies but that's not my quarm.
My smart TV broke again and I've had 4 now to replace it ALL with atleast one dead pixel.
All were cheaper models from sharp, Samsung, lg and Panasonic.
So after sending the lot back infuriated and feeling feverish with worry as my diagnosed OCD means I can't put up with a tiny black mark even at the far edge if the screen I started to think maybe it's time to get something more upstream as I do with hifi despite TV not being my main concern.
Out came a sony bravia at a rediculas price which I got home and put on thinking similar to hifi from the known and well established brands it would be perfect and I thought it was until 😲😲😲😲😲.
Another dead pixel, only one this time but it's still there on a supposedly high end set.
I'm posting here and not in the TV section which might get me in moderator trouble because the names I've come to know frequent the same threads I do.
My question is despite reading conflicting information online about one dead pixel being actually more than acceptable and most people have them which they've never noticed.
Is this normal ?
I mean one wouldn't but a jigsaw puzzle with one piece missing would they?
After seeing that I thought I'd check my Samsung in the bedroom and true to form it has four pixels out at only 3 months old.
Lightening can't strike 5 times surly.
Has anyone here found that it's inevitable to have atleast one dead pixel on a new TV?
I mean that of course after they've looked as most don't realise apparently unless it's a few together.
I rang Panasonic with their set and they said they wouldn't cover a dead pixel as it's normal and to them acceptable.
Infuriated and knowing that I treated them with the same care they did me and just took it back to the dealer stating it was faulty.
Things seem to be getting worse.
I'm they guy who sends back a mid range amp if the side has a scratch despite not seeing it once set up I know it's there.
More on topic I always stay with more established brands because of lack of support if problems arise.
Made in china still gives me worry even now.
I've had too many throw away products from there.
Sony bravia produce there aswell as other countries and I just know which country will churn out the worst made.
If I'm paying over the average for something I want to have it serviceable.
I don't want to have to find when the warranty is up that's the end of any scope of repair as nobody will touch it.
Recently I've been as you know demoing all sorts of cd players and transports even an advance Paris A10 to find the usual suspects are better IMO as I always have our of a vast bunch of newbies but that's not my quarm.
My smart TV broke again and I've had 4 now to replace it ALL with atleast one dead pixel.
All were cheaper models from sharp, Samsung, lg and Panasonic.
So after sending the lot back infuriated and feeling feverish with worry as my diagnosed OCD means I can't put up with a tiny black mark even at the far edge if the screen I started to think maybe it's time to get something more upstream as I do with hifi despite TV not being my main concern.
Out came a sony bravia at a rediculas price which I got home and put on thinking similar to hifi from the known and well established brands it would be perfect and I thought it was until 😲😲😲😲😲.
Another dead pixel, only one this time but it's still there on a supposedly high end set.
I'm posting here and not in the TV section which might get me in moderator trouble because the names I've come to know frequent the same threads I do.
My question is despite reading conflicting information online about one dead pixel being actually more than acceptable and most people have them which they've never noticed.
Is this normal ?
I mean one wouldn't but a jigsaw puzzle with one piece missing would they?
After seeing that I thought I'd check my Samsung in the bedroom and true to form it has four pixels out at only 3 months old.
Lightening can't strike 5 times surly.
Has anyone here found that it's inevitable to have atleast one dead pixel on a new TV?
I mean that of course after they've looked as most don't realise apparently unless it's a few together.
I rang Panasonic with their set and they said they wouldn't cover a dead pixel as it's normal and to them acceptable.
Infuriated and knowing that I treated them with the same care they did me and just took it back to the dealer stating it was faulty.
Things seem to be getting worse.
I'm they guy who sends back a mid range amp if the side has a scratch despite not seeing it once set up I know it's there.
More on topic I always stay with more established brands because of lack of support if problems arise.
Made in china still gives me worry even now.
I've had too many throw away products from there.
Sony bravia produce there aswell as other countries and I just know which country will churn out the worst made.
If I'm paying over the average for something I want to have it serviceable.
I don't want to have to find when the warranty is up that's the end of any scope of repair as nobody will touch it.
Last edited:
Revolutions
Well-known member
There's some interesting thoughts here. (edit: this turned into a sprawling scatter gun response, a lot of which isn't even related to your post
)I'm impressed with the touch screen operating system. Ever since Tesla, there has been no excuse for any company to ever offer a mid/high range product with a touchscreen that doesn't offer the same experience we feel on our phones/tablets. It pains me that so many new cars & other electronics still have ancient tech that is an absolute pain in the arse to work. Yes, it's either difficult or expensive. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I'd rather they spent cash on an 'OK' app for control over painful touchscreen with terrible software.
On technology & change: what is actually new on the AS520? As far as I understand, it's not adding anything that hasn't been bundled on a streamer before. So they might be packing in more features, and doing it well. But's not new. Mainstream streaming is coming up to 20 years old. Network music playing must have been happening ever since I can remember. Class D is what, 50 years old? And it's always been possible for it to sound just as good as A or B. Reliability has probably been the biggest improvement since MOSFET bought the cost down in the 80s.
That's not meant to be negative. Nothing wrong with adapting & improving. That's how most products make it in the world. Every brand is doing the same.
The psychology is of course bang on. We are adapted as a species to dislike change. Especially when things like class D still have a hangover from the 'budget hifi' label. But what do you think people are scared of? Adapt or die seems v extreme in this situation.
Preferences are completely subjective, and rarely rational. There is a convenience with digital. Speaking for myself, I don't particularly enjoy it. Searching for music on lists reduces my joy of listening to music. I'm 41, had early mp3 players & an ipod. I ripped 600 cds to a hardd drive in 2001. That got corrupted at some years later. I still gravitate to physical music, and I currently see no need for a music server whilst I can stream pretty much what I need from Spotify et al.
One interesting benefit of a 10,000,000,000,000 TB home server is reducing the environmental impact of streaming. Running servers all over the world to allow for our bandwidth addiction is a pretty crazy thing to dive into.
And on software - I tend to find all electronics can be sold/donated for parts once obsolete or broken. Maybe that will reduce the overall longevity of hifi products over time. But I've yet to keep hold of an analogue unit for more than 10 years due to my habit of changing things up regularly.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram