Article: SOtM sMS-100 Mini Server Review

[The Computer Audiophile]

You can view the page at http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content.php?r=585-SOtM-sMS-100-Mini-Server-Review

[firedog]

Chris-

 

Realy intriguing review.

 

I especially liked the little experiment you did with the SOtM battery supply and using the Berkeley converter as an isolator to compare.

 

I wonder if there is any other device on the market that could do what the Berkeley did for less.

 

I'd suggest that when you review the Aries you do the same kind of experiment, and the results may help us learn if the Aries is worth twice the price (or more) of the SOtM unit.

[tranz]

Thanks for the review. I would love to see the technical details follow up.

 

I.e. no graphics chip, limited hardware mobo, SoTM usb card, small power fluctuations, minimal background processes, option for external LPSU, etc.?

 

Could this be the audio server answer in a 2 server (control and audio output) setup? Can the control server be either Mac or Win based?

 

Cheers

[MarkS]

Great review of an intriguing product. Can't wait for the Aeries review.

 

I'm nervous about the quality of the Aries' PSU. And I don't mean that as a slight against the Company, especially since the product isn't even out yet. I only mention it because PSU's are so critically important to the ultimate sound. I hope the PSU is of a super high quality.

[labjr]

Is it better than using a notebook computer?

[tranz]

Hi Chris,

 

With the Alpha converter and/or battery does the sound with the SMS100 beat or match the Aurender W20, ignoring all the extra features of the W20 for a moment?

 

Is your control computer optimized for low electrical noise? Was there an ethernet filter in place?

 

Cheers

[The Computer Audiophile]

Is it better than using a notebook computer?

Only you can answer that question.

[labjr]

I'm beginning to wonder if replacing one computer with another one makes any difference?

[The Computer Audiophile]

I'm beginning to wonder if replacing one computer with another one makes any difference?

Only you can answer that one as well :~)

[realmassy]

Thanks for the nice review, Chris. I've been using the mini server for a few weeks and I'm loving it. In my system, to my ears etc etc sounds better than my previous PC + JPlay, and I use the Ayre QB-9, which as you mentioned in the review is completely isolated. Actually I've built a USB cable whithout the power line at all (so not just a dual head USB) and it works perfectly with the mini server. I was waiting for the Aries but I was concerned about the integration with JRiver/JRemote.

[wappinghigh]

What a superb review Chris. The time taken and detail show you really "get this" streaming stuff!!!

 

And so does Sonore. Clearly. Because they have had this, and the Rendu out there for months...if not years..

 

Chris I have a couple of Q's..

 

1/ You said you couldn't stop this product from working (power disconnects etc) Can you see say 4 of these all networked and joined together fully functional in a multiroom setup (like say Sonos)

 

2/ Do you think the Mini Server will work with *every* USB connection/DAC come what may (or does it have driver compatibility issues rumoured to be in the Aires)

 

3/ Why do you think Sonore doesn't release a version with SPDIF out to compete with the Aires? Or could this be coming as well?

 

Cheers

 

Wap

[juno]

Hi,

 

You wrote : " In addition to receiving the sMS-100 I received the SOtM mBPS-d2s battery supply... The sound quality was quite a bit better...This was a very positive improvement. But, sound quality wasn't as good as it would get with the sMS-100."

 

Sorry but I don't get it well, last sentence especially, could you please clarify if SQ was better with or without the battery power supply ?

 

Thanks,

 

j

[CKKeung]

 

I especially liked the little experiment you did with the SOtM battery supply and using the Berkeley converter as an isolator to compare.

I wonder if there is any other device on the market that could do what the Berkeley did for less.

 

 

Schiit Audio will launch the Wyrd which clean up noise and stablize the DC of USB soon. Price low and worth considering.

Five new pieces of Schiit drop at T.H.E. Newport Beach 2014 | Digital Audio Review by John Darko

[kumakuma]

Schiit Audio will launch the Wyrd which clean up noise and stablize the DC of USB soon. Price low and worth considering.

Five new pieces of Schiit drop at T.H.E. Newport Beach 2014 | Digital Audio Review by John Darko

 

Gotta love the title of this article...

[Sam Lord]

Nice work, thank you Chris.

 

I have the unit and the BPS, but because of equipment location and the excessive USB cable length required, I won't be able to test the sonic insertion loss. Did you, or would you, test the unit in the circuit compared to outside the circuit, i.e. using the same USB cable? Of course it's not quite the same because another ethernet connection is added in the computer-to-SMS100 leg, but the comparison is important, IMO.

 

Also, critically, the unit has a selectable option for use as an HQPlayer NAA (server) capable of DSD256 output. But AFAIK there is no DAC that now operates *with* HQPlayer at that speed. I believe Exasound is working to provide that ability. Can you shed any light on the situation? BTW my system is almost rebuilt but like you I'll begin by using JRiver's DLNA setup.

[4est]

Out of curiousity Chris, did you try the sMS 100 with two USB DACs attached? If so, can you pick one, or does it automatically switch or something?

 

Does anyone know if you can hack(DIY) i2s out of this? I'd buy one in a heartbeat if so... Are there any photos of the interior?

[One and a half]

I'm beginning to wonder if replacing one computer with another one makes any difference?

 

That's a good point, this focuses on the level of computing/processing that needs to get the job done. Is a small renderer better than a full computer, not necessarily. Let's put aside more processing = more noise for now.

 

The sMS-100's sound quality is as good as the power supply that feeds it, so there is a limitation that requires work and thought. The battery supply is one solution, independent PSU could/would make a lot of difference as well. As to how much, it's subjective, but if you do have a good PSU (JS-2, Pardo, Hynes), then its use would be mandatory with the sMS-100 or similar.

 

Inside the sMS-100 is a computer, obviously scaled down from your regular Mac Mini/CAPS designs, but the computer as a music server is, still, inherent in its design, uses less connections and more importantly less reliance on external power supplies to get to the DAC where quality is critical, that is out of the USB port. In a typical scenario using an Ethernet Renderer:

 

NAS + PSU (Maybe int or ext) -> Switch/Router -> Ethernet -> Renderer + Ext. PSU -> USB A to USB B Cable -> DAC (Add a computer to manage the files anyway)

 

Compared with

 

DAS + Ext. PSU -> USB/FW/TB cable -> Computer -> USB A to USB B Cable -> DAC or

NAS + PSU (Maybe int or ext) -> Switch/Router -> Ethernet -> Computer -> USB A to USB B Cable -> DAC

 

The big IF is that the DAC you use couldn't care less about noise from the source, since it takes corrective action internally, then the choice of using a renderer is dependent on the install (long cabling). If the DAC doesn't, in fact uses the 5V from the computer, then it would be wise to use the least amount of devices in front of the DAC as possible.

 

All these PSUs in the chain, complicate AC ground loops and stray noise conductive paths, less of them and the wall warts, the better.

 

I must be in the camp where I can't see the use of a renderer, where a 'classic' Computer/USB/DAC works consistently and with repeatable SQ expectations.

[wappinghigh]

^ it's all about ease of use...

 

Chris made that point in his plug/unplug/pull the power comments..

[The Computer Audiophile]

I'm beginning to wonder if replacing one computer with another one makes any difference?

Fortunately these renderers running Linux work like an appliance. They do one thing and have nothing a user can screw up or maintain.

[Sam Lord]

I wish I could have done the following tests on my SMS100, but they would have been extremely difficult to set up and would have been incomplete:

 

1) Does it improve or degrade sound quality? Obviously this depends on the system.

 

2) Is there any way to use the HQPlayer option and hear DSD256?

 

EDIT: Ahh, there is a DIY DAC By Miska:

 

Signalyst DSC1

 

Hopefully new DACs that do this will come along.

 

Hacking i2s seems like an amazingly silly project to attempt, but maybe I'm wrong.

[Superdad]

Yes, and low activity on the processor module and lack of storage interface interference are in the plus column for a small "renderer."

Such a device is also an opportunity to develop a high-quality, isolated USB output to feed the DAC with. Though I have no knowledge of the extent to which SOtM focused on that, given their popular PCIe USB card I doubt they overlooked it.

 

I'm not a big fan of DLNA, LMS, etc. (though I respect those who are). But I would be very interested in trying the sMS-100 as an NAA for Miska's (Signalyst) HQPlayer.

[Sam Lord]

Hi Alex,

 

I still haven't hooked mine up but intend to get it going ASAP. I need the organization of JRiver and its DLNA functions to get my feet wet (was using iTunes/Audirvana+), but then I'll see how HQPlayer works.

 

Now hold on, Signalyst (= Miska = HQPlayer) says it has a Mac OS version!!! What the? If it is functional then my Mac Mini can keep running MacOS and I can run DSD128 straight away using HQPlayer's PCM to DSD conversion, while the MM finally gets its own monitor and keyboard in my office! Yes, of course I can get DSD128 conversion with JRMC, but now I can compare the two software conversions *without* having to ever run Windows.

 

Note, I just got an Oppo 105D for *several* reasons, but a big one was to play DSD128 from my server. This could get fun sooner than I expected. BTW, the SMS100 and battery supply are *tiny,* just 4' wide = 1/4 rack width each.

 

Finally I should add that Jesus has already helped me with battery supply questions by email: he is customer satisfaction personified!

[Superdad]

Now hold on, Signalyst (= Miska = HQPlayer) says it has a Mac OS version!!! What the? If it is functional then my Mac Mini can keep running MacOS and I can run DSD128 straight away using HQPlayer's PCM to DSD conversion, while the MM finally gets its own monitor and keyboard in my office! Yes, of course I can get DSD128 conversion with JRMC, but now I can compare the two software conversions *without* having to ever run Windows.

 

Sam:

I think I get what you are going to do, but are you clear that the Mac OS version requires the use of an NAA? Jussi (=Miska) did not want to get mired in Core Audio stuff, so an NAA is a requirement for use with the OS X version of HQPlayer. He tired to help me for a while with a Debian build for the Intel mini (the one in my music rack) to make it an NAA, but we had to give up after a bunch of tries. I hope that devices like the SOtM sMS-100 (and another I know of in development), along with DACs that can take DSD256 or 512, will broaden the base for HQPlayer/NAA set ups. His algorithms are special, and the split architecture with an NAA has numerous advantages.

 

Let us know what works out with your experiments.

[Sam Lord]

Sam:

I think I get what you are going to do, but are you clear that the Mac OS version requires the use of an NAA? Jussi (=Miska) did not want to get mired in Core Audio stuff, so an NAA is a requirement for use with the OS X version of HQPlayer. He tired to help me for a while with a Debian build for the Intel mini (the one in my music rack) to make it an NAA, but we had to give up after a bunch of tries. I hope that devices like the SOtM sMS-100 (and another I know of in development), along with DACs that can take DSD256 or 512, will broaden the base for HQPlayer/NAA set ups. His algorithms are special, and the split architecture with an NAA has numerous advantages.

 

Let us know what works out with your experiments.

 

I assume that the HQPlayer selection option on the SMS100 (which I'm installing now with the DLNA function before I move to HQPlayer) will make it an NAA, so I didn't think about it further. Is that correct? I emphatically share your wish that the SMS100 and cohorts will expand the adoption of DSDx2,4,8.

 

All this and an earlier thread

 

DSD Only DACs

 

made me think, WAIT, haven't CD players been doing this for years...conversion to sigma-delta for output?? Of course the quality of the numerical conversion, the extreme importance of minimizing jitter, and the understanding of the sensitivity of DAC modulator and clock circuits to noise have advanced a great deal. I dunno but expect that most good DACs are converting to the 5 or 6 levels of their modulators instead of a pure binary bitstream output. In other words they are reversing the process of most of the good, multilevel DS ADC converters in the market.

 

I think most DACs will accept ethernet inputs before long, though super-fancy rigs might use two boxes that effectively do what a pairing of SMS100/Auralic Aries/Signalyst NAA and DAC does today. And maybe we will listen without modulators at all, but rather the FPGA outputs that Chord is using or even static RAM...

 

Cheers

[wappinghigh]

^ Wow. You guys are onto something here.. Awesome... yes.. Delta sigma.. It's why I luv my ol Benchark DAC1 so much.. You guys are onto something big here.. please keep us posted..