BowsAndArrows
Senior Member
agreed. this is the only way you can guard against failures. proper backup plan with multiple layers of redundancyI really question whether latency can be a problem reading audio files. That’s what buffering is for. I’ve never seen a problem with video, and the data rate is much higher.
Second, you can eliminate the randomness by copying to a new or formatted drive, eliminating fragmentation.
But, for a few dollars more, SSDs. No argument, except money. Does not eliminate the need for backups.
High quality drives fail. Google has tested everything, and there are no good predictors of longevity.
Backups.
Backblaze publishes a failure rate on their blog every year - been following it for ages! https://www.backblaze.com/blog/backblaze-drive-stats-for-2023/ and it basically states that unless you're going for the bleeding edge drives with funky tech in them (like the very high capacity seagates last year) then you're basically good. mind you they are using them in really stressful server environments as well so doesn't necessarily translate to consumer drives in home settings. but still
it's not really about the audio files themselves. but about the IOPS required to perform library functions (in which case fragmentation has little effect) - like R/W metadata and stuff. it's why roon specifically recommends against it. and i believe LMS also discourage users from installing on HDD NAS for the same reasons - unless you are mainly a "web streaming" user with a small or non-existent local library of music. the library itself can be on HDD NAS in both cases. it's just that for the roon server specifically - since they build your data locally - they strongly recommend against it.
i've tested this in my own setup over the years - roon is very unresponsive when run on HDD. and i still do run LMS on my HDD nas - but i only use it for radio and streaming.