Jump to content
IGNORED

Article: Audiophile Optimizer Raises The Bar


Recommended Posts

Really though is to much to expect a genuine comparison of products in the same system?

 

I am guessing that the majority of us have to settle on a single source based at least partly on many of the comments we read here.

 

Has Chris listened to this system, probably at a dealers, consisting of Constelation electronics and Magico speakers before? Compared an of the shelf Aurender, or other server, or CAPS etc on this very system?

 

I am not being critical of the review, I want to read more, but do I buy an Aurender or try this approach, which seems at at least a little difficult to implement?

 

The audio market is an open playing field, why is it seemingly politically incorrect to simply state that in system A product XYZ was better?

 

Even better would be a *blinded* music server shootout between (for example) Aurender ?N100, Auralic Aries, CAPS + AO. Could start with trials determining if the "obvious sonic differences" of PC + AO and other servers were confimed blinded. With Chris' experience I would be thrilled to see one of these solutions come out a clear winner *blinded*. If one came out a blinded winner, I am very likely to go down that solution.

Roon / JRiver with Audiolense XO -> Chord Hugo TT2 -> Cyrus Mono x200 Signatures -> Audiovector Si3 Avantgarde Arretes

Link to comment

As we are discussing differences between computer related sources and asking ourselves how significant these differences are in fact... this is my experience, based on what I have or had:

 

Source-1: Auralic Aries connected via Audioquest Diamond to Weiss DAC1-Mk3

Source-2: PC (Win7, Jriver v20, foobar2k) connected via USB to BelCanto Reflink then via Weiss Chiron Glass-1 to Weiss DAC1-Mk3

Let me add: Source-2 easily violates any hardware related rule for an audiophile PC: it's a watercooled very silent PC with a pump, lots of (slow) fans, fan controller unit... you see, it contains lots of stuff which should be avoided, though it is really well isolated by the Reflink and the Weiss Glass-1 from the DAC and the rest of the chain.

 

Other equipment:

Preamp: Ayre KX-5

Amp: Pass Labs X250.8

Speakers: Apogee Duatta Sig. (fully refurbished 2015)

 

Comparing Sorce-1 with Source-2:

if I fully concentrate, switch as much as I want between then sources, then I identify in most cases (ca. 10 out of 15) the Auralic Aries as the better source.

If my wife activates one source and I enter the room, then it's... just a guess.

 

Opposed to:

- I had a much easier time to distinguish the Ayre preamp from my previous preamp (Headamp GSX-MK2) using Manger MSMc-1 active speakers.

- I had hardly any difficulties to identify the differences between a Weiss DAC202 and the DAC1-Mk3.

- Another magnitude of sonic differences exist between my old active speakers and Apogees driven by a good amp. These are just different worlds.

 

IMO: the different approaches are interesting and one or the other can help to improve overall sound quality in the listening chain. I am sure, I would not be able to distinguish blindly between three or four high quality sources (Aries, CAPS/AO, Aurender)

Link to comment
Even better would be a *blinded* music server shootout between (for example) Aurender ?N100, Auralic Aries, CAPS + AO. Could start with trials determining if the "obvious sonic differences" of PC + AO and other servers were confimed blinded. With Chris' experience I would be thrilled to see one of these solutions come out a clear winner *blinded*. If one came out a blinded winner, I am very likely to go down that solution.

 

It's always possible to wish for the perfect trial and comparison. Unfortunately those conditions rarely exist in the real world, and certainly didn't exist in this instance. Time, money, and lack of availability of equipment almost always come into play.

 

Chris was listening to a system with a DAC he is very familiar with, and I dare say he has heard Magicos before. In addition, he did do a comparison with 2 identical systems, one Running 2012/AO with optimizations, and one running just W7. So his basis for saying the AO system sounded better are highly credible.

 

BTW, to the other poster, nowhere does the report say he was listening to an old fashioned computer; my guess is the situation was just the opposite.

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to comment
BTW, to the other poster, nowhere does the report say he was listening to an old fashioned computer; my guess is the situation was just the opposite.

 

 

I meant a traditional computer motherboard etc. as opposed to something like an Aries or Aurender which is purposely designed for audio.

Link to comment

If one is able to improve sound quality by shutting down processes in a computer OS, does that not mean that since a computer OS can never be pared down to the level of a CD player, that anyone really seeking the highest in sound quality would have to use a disc player to achieve it?

 

Does that not mean that computers are inherently detrimental to sound quality?

HP Pavilion Mini - Roon - iFi Micro - Arcam AV9 - Emotiva UP7 - Nola Boxer speakers

Link to comment
If one is able to improve sound quality by shutting down processes in a computer OS, does that not mean that since a computer OS can never be pared down to the level of a CD player, that anyone really seeking the highest in sound quality would have to use a disc player to achieve it?

 

Your premise is incorrect. The CD player is electrically "noisy," and adds mechanical noise and vibration to that with the disc spinning mechanism.

 

Does that not mean that computers are inherently detrimental to sound quality?

 

Mechanical and electrical noise and vibration are, so the idea is to minimize the amounts of these going on in the DAC.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
If one is able to improve sound quality by shutting down processes in a computer OS, does that not mean that since a computer OS can never be pared down to the level of a CD player, that anyone really seeking the highest in sound quality would have to use a disc player to achieve it?

 

Does that not mean that computers are inherently detrimental to sound quality?

 

A physical motor is much simpler than a computer OS, yes. So is a lawnmotor motor. What is your point? Noise is not the byproduct of sophistication. AO, and other worthy attempts to reduce "unncessary" processes, are trying to reduce possible sources of noise produced by electricity, friction and heat, to name a few. But those sources begin as orders of magnitude less noisy than a physical motor spinning a plastic disc (or cutting a lawn). Just because the goal is to reduce irrelevant processes and prioritize the good ones doesn't equate to "get as simple as possible, use a motor".

Link to comment
A physical motor is much simpler than a computer OS, yes. So is a lawnmotor motor. What is your point? Noise is not the byproduct of sophistication. AO, and other worthy attempts to reduce "unncessary" processes, are trying to reduce possible sources of noise produced by electricity, friction and heat, to name a few. But those sources begin as orders of magnitude less noisy than a physical motor spinning a plastic disc (or cutting a lawn). Just because the goal is to reduce irrelevant processes and prioritize the good ones doesn't equate to "get as simple as possible, use a motor".

 

Given that, would it not mean that linux is then by far a superior platform? You can install a very barebones install of CentOS or one of the Raspberry Pi distros that have far fewer processes than Windows.

 

And by that definition a "good" process creates just as much noise as an irrelevant one.

 

In fact, since a Raspberry Pi only needs a 5V adapter to run, isn't it then the ultimate music playback device? Very barebones OS, very little current, very few onboard devices...

HP Pavilion Mini - Roon - iFi Micro - Arcam AV9 - Emotiva UP7 - Nola Boxer speakers

Link to comment
Given that, would it not mean that linux is then by far a superior platform? You can install a very barebones install of CentOS or one of the Raspberry Pi distros that have far fewer processes than Windows.

 

And by that definition a "good" process creates just as much noise as an irrelevant one.

 

In fact, since a Raspberry Pi only needs a 5V adapter to run, isn't it then the ultimate music playback device? Very barebones OS, very little current, very few onboard devices...

 

Yes, this is why Linux is the ultimate as you could even go down to kernel-level tweaks if you want to, and also why the HQ Player client-server mode with a smaller Network-attached audio device is a good solution too, as are well-designed dedicated players.

 

The cPlay website has a lot of good info.

Dedicated Line DSD/DXD | Audirvana+ | iFi iDSD Nano | SET Tube Amp | Totem Mites

Surround: VLC | M-Audio FastTrack Pro | Mac Opt | Panasonic SA-HE100 | Logitech Z623

DIY: SET Tube Amp | Low-Noise Linear Regulated Power Supply | USB, Power, Speaker Cables | Speaker Stands | Acoustic Panels

Link to comment
Given that, would it not mean that linux is then by far a superior platform? You can install a very barebones install of CentOS or one of the Raspberry Pi distros that have far fewer processes than Windows.

 

And by that definition a "good" process creates just as much noise as an irrelevant one.

 

In fact, since a Raspberry Pi only needs a 5V adapter to run, isn't it then the ultimate music playback device? Very barebones OS, very little current, very few onboard devices...

You must also take hardware into account. Linux is a great platform for customization and tweaking. However, devices such as the Raspberry Pi have subpar USB implementations that share the same physical chip as the Ethernet controller.

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
Yes, this is why Linux is the ultimate as you could even go down to kernel-level tweaks if you want to, and also why the HQ Player client-server mode with a smaller Network-attached audio device is a good solution too, as are well-designed dedicated players.

 

The cPlay website has a lot of good info.

 

That's what I was thinking. If turning off of processes makes a big difference in sound quality, instead of spending $800 for Windows server and SO, you could install Linux for free and actually have even fewer processes running, have a system that's even more barebones.

HP Pavilion Mini - Roon - iFi Micro - Arcam AV9 - Emotiva UP7 - Nola Boxer speakers

Link to comment

Again...there's a real danger in reaching single threaded conclusions. Barebones does not equal sound quality; it is only part. I had a Linux MPD Alix box, run off an SD card. The sq was....guess what, lightweight with no heft or balls. Likely had some thing to do with OS, parts, power supply reserves, etc.

Link to comment
That's what I was thinking. If turning off of processes makes a big difference in sound quality, instead of spending $800 for Windows server and SO, you could install Linux for free and actually have even fewer processes running, have a system that's even more barebones.

 

I've actually done this with both Linux and FreeBSD, going so far as to run the (minimal) OS and music player from the command line.

 

Players like HQPlayer, XXHighEnd (which has facilities for minimizing Windows) and Audirvana Plus sound far better. It's not close. That's because there's far more to playback than minimizing hardware and software demands, though that plays a part.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Given that, would it not mean that linux is then by far a superior platform? You can install a very barebones install of CentOS or one of the Raspberry Pi distros that have far fewer processes than Windows.

 

And by that definition a "good" process creates just as much noise as an irrelevant one.

 

In fact, since a Raspberry Pi only needs a 5V adapter to run, isn't it then the ultimate music playback device? Very barebones OS, very little current, very few onboard devices...

 

Less processes certainly help, but the clock accuracy, USB implementation, and memory quality all play a role in SQ, with the result that simple Linux boxes can not compete in SQ with good full mobo's running WS2012 or Win 10

Sound Test, Monaco

Consultant to Sound Galleries Monaco, and Taiko Audio Holland

e-mail [email protected]

Link to comment
Yes, this is why Linux is the ultimate as you could even go down to kernel-level tweaks if you want to, and also why the HQ Player client-server mode with a smaller Network-attached audio device is a good solution too, as are well-designed dedicated players.

 

The cPlay website has a lot of good info.

 

Well the ultimate... ok... Have actually done much of what you have mentioned. Linux on different platforms and a number of devices and have not achieved near the sound quality I have with

Server 2012 R2, AO and JPlay 6.1 Streamer.

Link to comment
Less processes certainly help, but the clock accuracy, USB implementation, and memory quality all play a role in SQ, with the result that simple Linux boxes can not compete in SQ with good full mobo's running WS2012 or Win 10

 

So why is it that Auralic, Aurender and others who make custom CPU boards for their products haven't figured out how to make a renderer/server that sounds better than a Windows system?

Link to comment
That's what I was thinking. If turning off of processes makes a big difference in sound quality, instead of spending $800 for Windows server and SO, you could install Linux for free and actually have even fewer processes running, have a system that's even more barebones.

 

And that is why some enjoy a NAS (linux) through optical network to a streamer/DAC combo. No USB, no SPDIF, no Mac, no Win. But I guess I have wandered off topic.

Link to comment
Less processes certainly help, but the clock accuracy, USB implementation, and memory quality all play a role in SQ, with the result that simple Linux boxes can not compete in SQ with good full mobo's running WS2012 or Win 10

 

But you can take that same motherboard and instead of running Windows on it, run Linux. So not the clock, USB, and memory are all the same. You have a barebones OS with fewer processes than a Windows box can ever have.

 

If sound quality is greatly improved by limiting processes, I'm wondering why Linux on the same hardware wouldn't always sound better.

HP Pavilion Mini - Roon - iFi Micro - Arcam AV9 - Emotiva UP7 - Nola Boxer speakers

Link to comment
But you can take that same motherboard and instead of running Windows on it, run Linux. So not the clock, USB, and memory are all the same. You have a barebones OS with fewer processes than a Windows box can ever have.

 

If sound quality is greatly improved by limiting processes, I'm wondering why Linux on the same hardware wouldn't always sound better.

 

In that example., yes, it's a good candidate for Linux. However, Linux brings its own hurdles, such as lack of DAC drivers (if DAC is not UAC2 compatible), lack of users Linux experience (and I'm not talking expertise, just understanding and overall familiarity with simple troubleshooting), lack of real world guides like those that come with AO. Linux still, unfortunately, remains very much a DIY or serious hobbyist platform for many of us. But yes, it's ability to run a dedicated audio OS is pretty beneficial. Aurender is still the best Linux platform I've heard/owned (Alix, Aries, Auraliti...and other A words).

 

Net/net, you can clearly skin this music server cat a thousand ways, with Windows optimized OS's, with Linux kernels, with OSX mods, with NASes running Minimserver, with dedicated (usually some form of Linux) Aurender or other preconfig'd server products.....etc. If there was one best way, we'd have nothing to debate about. :)

Link to comment
Or will optimiser for Windows Nano server be out next week?

 

No Nano Server for audiophiles, sorry -> http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f10-music-servers/whos-used-audiophile-optimizer-windows-2012-server-or-windows-8-a-17897/index70.html#post427366

ıllıllı [  ...AO 4.00 BETA... ] ıllıllı
____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Shop | Reviews | Reference System | AudiophileOptimizer 3.00 | PDF Guide

 

Link to comment
But you can take that same motherboard and instead of running Windows on it, run Linux. So not the clock, USB, and memory are all the same. You have a barebones OS with fewer processes than a Windows box can ever have.

 

If sound quality is greatly improved by limiting processes, I'm wondering why Linux on the same hardware wouldn't always sound better.

 

limiting Process, disabling services, etc. helps a lot to avoid dpc spikes. It helps to keep latency down etc, helps to prevent hickups and dropouts and all that.

 

what really matters for SQ are many other things... I told and wrote many times, all the disabling of services etc. is only a VERY small percentage of what AO does for a system.

ıllıllı [  ...AO 4.00 BETA... ] ıllıllı
____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Shop | Reviews | Reference System | AudiophileOptimizer 3.00 | PDF Guide

 

Link to comment
But you can take that same motherboard and instead of running Windows on it, run Linux. So not the clock, USB, and memory are all the same. You have a barebones OS with fewer processes than a Windows box can ever have.

 

If sound quality is greatly improved by limiting processes, I'm wondering why Linux on the same hardware wouldn't always sound better.

 

Since folks have already answered this same question several times, rather than repeating the answer yet again I'll just say go for it, and I hope you achieve a system that brings you enjoyment.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

I am using a dual streamer setup with PPA components/cables, JPlay, AudiophileOptimizer and Tidal for over 2,5 years now. Paired with a dCS Paganini it is on par with the top of disc players. I could imagine having this hobby without these streamers. One thing I really like is the fact that every now and then there are updates for JPlay or AO. The improvements in SQ is like getting free new hardware every now and then.

Mobile: iPhone 6s 128Gb > Chord Hugo > Shure 846

Stereo: PPA dual streamer setup with JPlay and AO > Lampizator Golden Gate SE > Classe Omega Preamp MKII > 2xNord On UP NC500DM > Linkwitz LX521

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...