Does the BADA USB converter overcome need for "super server?"

[jeffkad]

Although I am no stranger to costly audio purchases (Revel Salon 2, Mcintosh MC452, Krell S-1200, Esoteric K-03, etc), I have been wrestling with music server options for over a year, especially regarding the outrageous cost/markup for an one-box solution. There is also so much counter-opinion on switching vs linear psu's, operating systems, software, usb vs spdif, usb cards vs sound cards, storage in or outside server, etc, that my novice head is spinning. I cant seem to wrap my head around why it's worth spending 3k-4k for units like a Baetis, Music Vault, Antipodes, SOTM, etc, let alone the crazy money for a Lumin or, God forbid, an Aurender or Kryptos. Good Lord, it is just a server, right? Especially since no server has any real value in used market, so it's dead money (unlike top shelf speakers, amps, CD players, etc). Not to mention most of these manufacturers are mom and pop shops.

 

But in the end, it's all about noise and jitter, isn't it? If the server rips the music properly, and I assume using something like DB poweramp or whatever will get an accurate rip, then it's all about delivery of the signal, no? So my basic question here is, based on everything I've read about the BADA converter, it basically eliminates and removes the noise and jitter issues arising from delivering the signal from computer/server via USB. Is there really more to this? I know it can't be that easy, and I'm clearly a novice, so be easy on me, but a basic computer or inexpensive purpose built server, plus the BADA USB converter, should be the equivalent of the uber-servers, no? Has anyone done a comparison?

[Blake]

It does for me. I have no interest in a dedicated server for many of the reasons you mention. I just don't see the point.

 

I run Audirvana+ with all of the audio optimizations turned on to maximize sound quality through my Mac. I doubt a dedicated server could improve the sound over my current setup and I am happy interfacing with the computer.

[ringenesherre]

Theoretically you still have jitter and noise on the output of the alpha USB. Practically you should be fine with any computer as source that does not output huge amounts of noise through its power supply nor emits tons of RF noise.

 

That said, personally I would just get a well-engineered DAC (e.g. Benchmark DAC2).

[jeffkad]

Since I have absolutely no interest, time nor inclination for doing any DIY, nor enduring the potentially steep learning curve necessary in optimizing a PC/Mac (or learning more than basic function of ripping/playback software like the beloved JRiver), my original interest was in a pre-configured one-box solution that ripped, stored, and played back music as best as possible for SQ equal to a very good CDP. After as much analysis as I can do, there seems to be no clear answer. Every review of one of my prime one-box options (MV, Baetis, Musica Pristina, Antipodes, etc) says it's the best digital they have heard, but the only comparison is to a stock, or slightly modified (ie, psu upgrade) Mac. There has been no comparison that I have found between the various purpose built servers, so its hard to tell whether there is really a difference. The uber boxes, like Lumin, Aurender, etc, all need a separate NAS, ripper, etc, so they do not qualify for my one-box solution, in addition to the fact that I wonder if they are really worth it (again, no comparisons of note, either versus other servers or a lesser server with the BADA converter). The only reason I would get one of these servers is for the pre-configured and optimized OS, ripping and playback software, getting me closer to plug and play. However, I DO like the option to use JRiver for its flexibility, SQ, and potential (upgrades, EQ, Room Correction, etc), therefore, I am not interested in closed solutions like Olive or the Linux based W4S server.

 

The most compelling argument I've read is one posted by a gentleman named "Eberoth" on several forums, where he compared numerous top transports versus a computer using the BADA converter, and he was unequivocal in stating that the BADA handily beat them all. His extensive testing and reputation for very high end components got me started on thinking maybe dumbing down on the server itself (dead money as I said) and focusing on a cheaper ripping/storing/playback solution in conjunction with the BADA converter. In this way, even if the total cost was more than the 3k floor that seems to exist on the one-off servers, only around 1-1.5k of it is invested in a server vehicle, so the "lost money" aspect is lessened (makes me feel better, lol) and flexibility is increased by allowing me to completely replace the server with something new or better without losing as much money, and if it's a true pc/mac/laptop, it can still be fuctionally useful in another application. in addition, the BADA will probably have strong resale value for some time to come.

 

The bottom line is that I WOULD spend the money on a purpose built server if there was a significant improvement in SQ, but I see no convincing evidence on a comparative basis. I wish more people would make these comparisons and help out all us "on-the-fencers," LOL! Anybody else have experience they'd like to share?

[jeffkad]

BTW, I did try to ask the infamous Elberoth what type of computer he used as source, but he never answered, nor was I able to find out in reading through the hundreds of responses to his posts. I may have missed it, so if anyone else knows Elberoth or the posts I'm referring to, please chime in. Thanks much...

[ericuco]

It does for me. I have no interest in a dedicated server for many of the reasons you mention. I just don't see the point.

 

I run Audirvana+ with all of the audio optimizations turned on to maximize sound quality through my Mac. I doubt a dedicated server could improve the sound over my current setup and I am happy interfacing with the computer.

 

+1 - just don't see the improvement in SQ vs additional cost.

 

A few thoughts to consider:

 

Noise - there are cheaper means of reducing noise coming for the computer via USB. Devices like the Schiit Wyrd ($99) or ifi Micro-iUSBPower ($199) that basically cut the power lead from the USB cable and replace it with cleaner power. Or, simply cutting the power lead on the USB cable (either cut wire or place a piece of tape over the connector pin), assuming there are no handshake issues in having the computer recognize the DAC.

 

Some DAC's have galvanic isolation (e.g. EXA) on the USB input boards that also help disconnect the USB power from the computer from getting to the DAC.

 

Instead of going to high-end server, there a number of devices (small computers) like Beaglebone Black or Raspberry Pi along with a number of dedicated music players such a Volumino. For well less than $100, you can have a minimalist music server. These are a lot like using a Mac Mini in that you add a monitor, keyboard, mouse. There are other connection options available as well (tether to PC, remote control, etc.) Obviously, the OS is much more minimalist (good & bad) vs OSX or Windows.

[tboooe]

The bottom line is that I WOULD spend the money on a purpose built server if there was a significant improvement in SQ, but I see no convincing evidence on a comparative basis. I wish more people would make these comparisons and help out all us "on-the-fencers," LOL! Anybody else have experience they'd like to share?

I'm with you on this. I am currently running an old Atom 525 based off the shelf HTPC PC (Acer Aspire Revo R3700). Yes I believe I can get sonic improvement if I bought a purpose built one or went the DIY route with a CAPS but at least to my ears the sound I am getting is amazing as is. That being said, I did recently purchase a used CAPS Zuma because of 2 reasons:

1. I could not get Jplay to work well with my underpowered ATOM processor and I was curious try DSP in my room.

2. I just like to tweak and experiment so I will be trying out different USB cards, SATA cables, shielding etc.

[Hifidelit]

Elberoth's signature shows: CAPS v3 with Jcat USB card and dual Teddy Pardo LPSUs, running Win 2012 + AO. If this is the thread you are referring to http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/state-art-cd-transports-vs-universal-serial-bus-industry-standard-cables-connectors-and-communications-protocols-between-computers-and-electronic-devices-spdif-converter-shootout-15193/ he concludes the first post:

But for the rest of you, who DO mind spending $50k for the transport, clocks and cables, this is a great news. Nowaydays for ~$5000 (BADA Alpha USB + CAPS v3 Lagoon computer + NAS) you can have a State-of-the-Art digital transport, that will rival most super expensive CD spinners.

 

If it is this thread http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/state-art-cd-transports-vs-universal-serial-bus-industry-standard-cables-connectors-and-communications-protocols-between-computers-and-electronic-devices-spdif-converter-shootout-15193/ which references the above thread then he lists the kit as:

On the computer side, I was using my hi-man PC server (equipped with powerful i5 processor, fast RAM, SSD, Seasonic fanless PSU, various SOtM bits including PCI/USB SOtM card), running Win 7/64, JRMC 17 and JPlay v4.1

 

In my opinion the perceived big obstacle with the computer and good converter route is the motherboard, I believe a server board and Xeon processor is the way to go - amongst other things but the W20 etc. design their own.

[tranz]

The BADA USB has been able to best any direct USB DAC I have tried, even though theoretically a SPDIF path will be more prone to jitter. All in the implementation though and of course I have not tried them all.

 

However, I would still recommend sticking an IFI USB in between because the BADA uses the 5V USB path for its USB receiver. I have stuck a scope on the before and after IFI of that 5V coming from the computer, and it confirmed what I heard. USB is nasty and requires everything incl. the kitchen sink to be thrown at it to get a bearable sound. If I was not running a Mac I would have bought an SoTM card as well.

[ganogreted]

yep,just like to tweak and experiment so I will be trying out different USB cards, SATA cables, shielding etc.

[kartracer]

I am very interested in this topic as well. I'm starting from a (somewhat) clean slate with respect to serving my CD rips and HD Tracks to my PS Audio PWD MKII, as I've given up on their bridge. My primary question is also, will a BADA or some similar converter alleviate the need for a high quality server/streamer?

[Kelly]

I am very interested in this topic as well. I'm starting from a (somewhat) clean slate with respect to serving my CD rips and HD Tracks to my PS Audio PWD MKII, as I've given up on their bridge. My primary question is also, will a BADA or some similar converter alleviate the need for a high quality server/streamer?

 

My understanding was that the PS Audio USB input was pretty good. Is this not the case?

[kartracer]

I've never used the USB input, but I hope so from everything I've read. So I'm thinking of going the less expensive route for now - an SOtM Mini Server, and see how it sounds.

[tranz]

I am very interested in this topic as well. I'm starting from a (somewhat) clean slate with respect to serving my CD rips and HD Tracks to my PS Audio PWD MKII, as I've given up on their bridge. My primary question is also, will a BADA or some similar converter alleviate the need for a high quality server/streamer?

 

Quick answer is no. You want to keep electronic noise as low as possible at all stages.

 

However, if you are not looking for perfection, and/or do not hear a difference in your setup, then it will be a huge step in the right direction, and for many good enough.

 

Biggest bang for the money when using USB is the IFI USB. But this still allows noise on the D+/D- USB lines to travel from the computer downstream. For pc you have some good options with SoTM (fed by a linear psu of course) that helps reduce these signal lines noise as well. Not so much on the Mac, where it is much harder to clean up noise.

[Ben-M]

I've never used the USB input, but I hope so from everything I've read. So I'm thinking of going the less expensive route for now - an SOtM Mini Server, and see how it sounds.

 

Hopefully soon, ~February :-P, I'll be able to share my experience on this. I'm in the middle of the annoyingly long process of overhauling my system. I've mostly got the AMP and DAC parts together, but I'm building a pretty hardcore Dual-PC Jplay setup, and that will feed the USB on my PWD Mkii. I've got the ifi-iUSB and the iPurifier, and I've got the PPA Studio v2 USB card, and soon I'll have an LPSU for the card. Besides that I'll soon have a custom LPSU for the entire PC, so we'll see where that takes us too.

 

The PC parts are slow to roll in, though, as I'm having them delivered to wherever's cheapest and having friends drop them off as they come through my way. So, February it is.

 

Now besides that I'm also SUPER insterested in that little SOtM SMS-100 streamer, so I might have to bite the bullet for it and the intelligent battery supply. For about $800-900 all in, it could be the deal of the century.

[Blake]

Back to the OP's original question...

 

Robert Harley just compared an iMac + Berkeley Alpha USB to a state-of-the-art PC based server. The iMac + Berkeley easily emerged as the victor:

 

 

Berkeley Audio Design Alpha USB Interface | The Absolute Sound

[Ned Kelly]

Quick answer is no. You want to keep electronic noise as low as possible at all stages.

 

However, if you are not looking for perfection, and/or do not hear a difference in your setup, then it will be a huge step in the right direction, and for many good enough.

 

Biggest bang for the money when using USB is the IFI USB. But this still allows noise on the D+/D- USB lines to travel from the computer downstream. For pc you have some good options with SoTM (fed by a linear psu of course) that helps reduce these signal lines noise as well. Not so much on the Mac, where it is much harder to clean up noise.

 

I recently shelled out for an iFi 'stack' - iUSBPower/Gemini cable/iPurifier and iDSD Nano - and I'm using it on my Asus laptop and Mac Mini but I'm hesitant to make any claims re improved audio quality until I'm confident that what I'm hearing (or -not- hearing) isnt simply a heady mix of placebo and expectation bias. Ideally I'd like to give the Audiophileo2 a shot, but the BADA is a serious step up from that. Still, if it does solve many of the issues around the use of the computer as a source surely that's what we're all trying to achieve here.

 

To date, the best sound I've heard from a computer was an iMac running nothing more exotic than iTunes, but it was hooked up to the Weiss DAC202. I can only assume that Firewire presents its own set of challenges and the sticker price on the Weiss left me wishing I had a trust fund, but in terms of clarity and relaxed delivery it was clearly on another tier or three from my Hugo. Sadly, I didnt get to spend as much time with it as CC did before writing his review but it's obvious that he was also blown away by what it had to offer - his comparison to the Alpha is particularly interesting. In any case, I'd like to hear the Mytek Stereo192-DSD to see if its possible to get some of that firewire magic without the Weiss sticker.

 

Computer Audiophile - Weiss Engineering DAC202 Review

[Ned Kelly]

If I can take this opportunity to have a brief rant, one approach which has consistently baffled me is best exemplified by a company which sells several variants on a 'super audio server' which seem to be almost everything you would want in a high-end graphics workstation minus the video card - truly odd given the minimalistic approach Chris has taken with the majority of CAPS designs. I get the concept that the quicker you can move a bitstream from whatever physical media it resides on to your audio interface, the better, but surely we are talking minute fractions of a second anyway ? I'm sure these guys would love to have a metric to use in their marketing, but after reading the specs on some of their gear I'm left wondering if they should just go with the same tests used by hardcore gamers to establish the merits of a given system - till then, those of us who dont use DSP/room correction or other heavily CPU-intensive applications might be better served spending our money elsewhere. Granted, I havent heard the fruits of their labor but we are talking prices in the same ballpark as the Weiss DAC I mentioned above - I know which box I'd rather sign for down at the Post Office. As always, this is just my two cents worth and the owners of said servers may well smirk at my ignorance, but as of right now that ignorance is most assuredly bliss

[tranz]

If I can take this opportunity to have a brief rant, one approach which has consistently baffled me is best exemplified by a company which sells several variants on a 'super audio server' which seem to be almost everything you would want in a high-end graphics workstation minus the video card - truly odd given the minimalistic approach Chris has taken with the majority of CAPS designs. I get the concept that the quicker you can move a bitstream from whatever physical media it resides on to your audio interface, the better, but surely we are talking minute fractions of a second anyway ? I'm sure these guys would love to have a metric to use in their marketing, but after reading the specs on some of their gear I'm left wondering if they should just go with the same tests used by hardcore gamers to establish the merits of a given system - till then, those of us who dont use DSP/room correction or other heavily CPU-intensive applications might be better served spending our money elsewhere. Granted, I havent heard the fruits of their labor but we are talking prices in the same ballpark as the Weiss DAC I mentioned above - I know which box I'd rather sign for down at the Post Office. As always, this is just my two cents worth and the owners of said servers may well smirk at my ignorance, but as of right now that ignorance is most assuredly bliss

 

Perhaps many are still basing the setup on the DAW computer, where a monster box with low noise graphics card is required. For virtual instruments, multi-track recording, real time DSP, low latency/buffer for simultaneous recording and montoring it requires a big CPU power and lots of memory.

 

However, for pure audio playback it is a different requirement. You don't want electrical noise and ugly harmonics to get to your speakers via all the copper connections. You don't need extremely low buffers, as ideally the songs are loaded into memory/cache before playback anyway. This lowers electrical noise as disks are not spinning.

 

The low noise, simple streamers are exciting because you can circumvent the whole noisy USB connections all together. An ethernet connection breaks the ground and has inbuilt transformers to help with noise. This way you can save a lot of money and arguably lower noise floor. (It is all in the implementation of course)

[alfe]

The BADA USB has been able to best any direct USB DAC I have tried, even though theoretically a SPDIF path will be more prone to jitter.

 

Yes because you are using the clock of the bada and the DAC, more clock better result .

[Hifidelit]

Ned

The super server builders may feel that is the way to go for some set ups and applications - maybe they've listened to the alternatives and feel that is their preference. An example would be the cache level of the more powerful CPUs may be a benefit in some scenarios or like Pang feel an I7 is preferable to an I3 or an Atom. The low powered systems struggle with some configurations so there is a need for higher powered systems for some people and for people who don't "need" the high power they might prefer to underclock an I7 and feel they prefer it - some people would see this as a waste of money but I use a 1265l v2 Xeon this way and so do several others.

There are lots of variables involved (systems and software) so it's no surprise to me some people have different ways of doing things.

[christopher3393]

Back to the OP's original question...

 

Robert Harley just compared an iMac + Berkeley Alpha USB to a state-of-the-art PC based server. The iMac + Berkeley easily emerged as the victor:

 

 

Berkeley Audio Design Alpha USB Interface | The Absolute Sound

 

This seems right on point as a response to the OP's question. It would be interesting to read responses to this article. Thanks Blake.

[MikeJazz]

 

But in the end, it's all about noise and jitter, isn't it? If the server rips the music properly, and I assume using something like DB poweramp or whatever will get an accurate rip, then it's all about delivery of the signal, no? So my basic question here is, based on everything I've read about the BADA converter, it basically eliminates and removes the noise and jitter issues arising from delivering the signal from computer/server via USB. Is there really more to this? I know it can't be that easy, and I'm clearly a novice, so be easy on me, but a basic computer or inexpensive purpose built server, plus the BADA USB converter, should be the equivalent of the uber-servers, no? Has anyone done a comparison?

 

jeff if you want to lower noise and keep it simple, address the following two points

 

A) storage

- (a friendly NAS such as Synology) in this case you would do your rip using dbpoweramp in a laptop and move your ripped files over the network to your "music" directory in the nas...simple).

- as an alternative for good quality integrated ripping you could source a solution based on vortexbox...you can buy and appliance (hardware and software put together) such as

VortexBox Mini Appliance

but I prefer the system architecture of having my music on a nas and use the functionality that comes with NAS - security, remote access etc.)

 

B) delivery of bits (a "digital transport" with not much to change or tweek, such as Auralic Aries or sotm miniserver (this one with only usb output)

 

So basically avoid the increased noise on a "general-purpose computer-based delivery of bits".

If you only will use usb, you should be ok with the sotm at a lower cost, and it seems that the software put together by Jesus hides away most complexity and allows you to use many server alternatives...

 

Most people here deliberately love the process of tweeking so they will avoid simple and effective solutions and will lead you to their "cages"...

:-)

[Ned Kelly]

This seems right on point as a response to the OP's question. It would be interesting to read responses to this article. Thanks Blake.

 

As a Mac fan, I'd like to believe that it was, indeed, a 'state-of-the-art PC based server'. Windows XP and a Lynx soundcard were barely 'state of the art' the first time I logged into this forum - from memory that wasnt long after Chris started the site somewhere around 2010. Harley lists his XP box only as 'custom fanless and driveless PC server with Lynx AES16 card' - Chris started out with the same card and it remains on the CASH list, but he abandoned it in favor of the SOTM cards within 12-18 months.

 

I appreciate the advantages that OS X brings to the table for those of us looking to get good sound from our computers, but the star of Harley's review is definitely the Alpha USB, despite Harley's assertions that it didnt have the same impact when he tried to use it with his XP machine. I was a little taken aback when Chris embraced Win8 for the CAPS v3, but he makes a good case for it in his articles on each of the designs. I'm not making a case for the CAPS over an iMac or any other readily-available computer, but I still feel that some of that review read more like a marketing exercise on behalf of Apple than anything else - particularly odd when comparing a current model Mac with a machine of largely unknown specifications running an operating system that seemed to have little provision for audio playback out of the box.

[wisnon]

Why not get an Aries and be done then?