Problem Solved But....
Answered
I'm sorry for starting another topic about indexing, but as I wrote in my other topic I was recomended to connect my HDD direct to my Node's usb port. After a lot of trials there was still errors in the tracklisting. A album could start with track 11 instead of track 1 for example. After several try out with factory reset, reindexing, during several days I went back to stream from my router. My HDD is now connected to my router and now it works and every album is in correct order. So here is my question: Why does it work via WiFi and not direct connected to the USB port? Is there two different system for indexing? I was told thar BluNode could easily index 200 000 tracks and I'm just at 76 000. I do use Audacy for ripping and tagging. Also I'm not a newbie as I have used BlueNode for several years. Still Iwould get rid of the router system and have it work properly via USB. So I reach out to those who write the software.
Kindly Conny T
-
Official comment
HI Conny
There is no difference between the two. I saw your other thread, too...
Likely moving the drive from a USB to a functioning NAS destroyed the original Index and the new Index created in the new location resolved the issue. Glad this is fixed now. Other way to have resolve it in the old location would have been rather than re-index any changes, under Settings, Diagnostics, Rebuild Index which would have purged and recreated a new copy of the index.
As suggested - if issues still arise, send our Support Crew a log file by selecting, Settings, Send Support Request from the Home page of the App. -
Hi Tony
Thank you for you answer. Just to let you know that the action I was taken was indexing, reindexing, resetting to factory reset, formating the HDD and made a new copy of my collection, and nothing worked when using the usb version. I then went back to using my router and connected my HDD with the same the same unaltered HDD and it was perfect. I did a research on older topics saying that the USB port was for just a quick way to get acces to music via a USB stick. Thats why I wonder if there was two versions on how the indexing worked. I would like to have the HDD connected to the node, but it never worked for me. Maybe some other users have something to say about this matter and if it worked for them wit a larger collection.
0 -
The indexing is the same if the tracks are on a NAS, computer share or attached direct via USB. There is absolutely no audible difference on where the tracks reside.
There are differences in how local music is handled, search for this as I can’t post links
HOW USB STORAGE DIFFERS FROM A LOCAL LIBRARY WHEN SERVER MODE IS DISABLED?
The only thing that springs to mind is the amount of power your HDD uses, if it’s close to the limit of what the NODE supplies then you will run into issues.
Best practice for local music is to use a NAS, low power and always available
0 -
Hi Conny,
Just like you, I have my collection on a HDD that is connected to my router. Besides several bugs in BluOS and/or its accompanying apps, which affect how albums are (incorrectly) displayed, this setup works fine.
The same HDD connected to the Node USB, after completion of indexing:
1. server mode disabled
the collection shows under the music sources as USB, without any visible differences compared to the collection shown under Library; Library still exists and can be browsed, as this is a persistent index, but trying to play a track results in an error, as expected
2. server mode enabled
the collection shows under the music sources as Library, without any visible differences compared to the original (network share) collection shown under Library; the indexing has replaced the original library with the new (USB) library
Any bugs I found using a network share, were fully reproducible using USB, further confirming there do not seem to be any differences between network share or USB indexing.
As understood from your posts, you and your dealer believe that music played from USB would result in better sound quality than when played from network share. Can you elaborate on the factors that would contribute to a better sound quality?
0 -
Hi everybody and thank you all for your inputs and advice. To answer Seppi first, my HDD is a 4 TB and powered. Right now there is about 76 000 tracks and the storing usage is 2,63 TB. If true that BlueNode can hold and indexing 200 000 tracks, then my collection is far from that numbers. The reason to connect the HDD direct to the Node was that I have to use two different networks one for internet and one for my Node that has no acces to internet. This is because my internet providers router don't have an USB port to connect the HDD.
So when using the Nodes USB port I could use my "Internet" Wifi and get rid of my "Hifi" router. I can't say that the sound is different but the handling for example tracklist was much better, It took forever when using WiFi. So this was not so much of a "better" sound issue even if there was a discussion on what is sounding better or best, but for me I can't tell any difference, but the more things you have to use the more possability to corrupt the sound, that is the common idea in the HiFi world. I do belive in some arguments and some I don't belive.
But I have now changed back to my original setup and using my dedicated router the indexing is perfect and track orders are now similar to the original album, that it never was when connected to the USB port, instead there was in some cased three "gost" version of the same album and a dissrupted track order. To use either USB or library made no different, this is a indexing issue and a pity for us who wants to use the USB port.
To make it even more clear I have used EAC for my earliest rippings and Audacity for the last three years and before adding albums I check for different problems and correct them.
0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
5 comments