A novel way to massively improve the SQ of computer audio streaming

[jabbr]

I agree. I'm waiting for someone to develop an internet modem/router/switch with linear regulators, a really good clock and built-in optical isolation.

 

You can get a small SFP switch that accepts an external Linear or battery supply. The "optical isolation" thread has many specific examples.

[jabbr]

The idea that the switch has deleterious effect on SQ has no basis when optical Ethernet is used, and when LPS or batteries are used to supply the switch. I suppose a faulty piece of equipment could be a problem but generally the optical switch will reclock and clean any signal degradation.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jabbr]

Yeah @scan80269

 

How does it sound? [emoji442] [emoji848]

 

Diskless boot sounds terrific -- my NAA is battery powered, diskless and boots from fiberoptic Ethernet

[jabbr]

I hear you. I have optical ethernet employed in my system with the receiving FMC powered by an LPS-1. I also employ a Paul Pang switch with TCXO clock powered by an LPS-1 within 1 meter of my music server to do just what you describe and yet none of this matters. Direct connection still sounds better. Way better

 

That's not what I mean --

First I guess your TXCO copper Ethernet switch doesn't work well.

Second, my whole house is fiber Ethernet and by direct connection I mean direct fiber connection from PC and NAS and NAA each to fiber switch.

[jabbr]

So I am a mess. Win10 did not want me to save two IP settings (direct and ethernet) with same gateway, and now where the f do I even have a chance to put the microRendu ip address in? All I get is my two NICs and a new ethernet 3, which I assume is the bridge? They simply ask for THEIR ip addresses.

 

Multihomed networking is difficult. Microsoft does not envision that you'd be doing this at home.

[jabbr]

I'm wondering, with my Diablo fiber switch, whether this will even make a diff. Plus, when I move the NAA to my Windows pc (when doing multichannel with exaSound, which doesn't talk to the microRendu NAA) I assume I have other static IP issues? I think I will bail for now.

I would be curious to hear if it does make a difference for you. Regarding your windows NAA, have you tried the PicoPSU 12V battery UPS or the OpenUPS2 (lithium)? No reason to think better than the LPS-1 just curious to know if worse...

[jabbr]

You have a great network setup but unfortunately, we are talking about apples and oranges. As this is about the microRendu and sMS-200, then copper has to be involved in some capacity. It's possible what you have sounds better than this direct connection but there's no way to know without actually listening and comparing. If you are claiming superiority based on theoretical grounds alone, then we get nowhere because there's no good explanation for why this direct connection should sound good at all.

 

Regarding fiber, all it is good for is blocking noise and I'm not convinced this is just about noise. As we know, fiber certainly isn't a panacea for all things that ail high-end audio, otherwise, we would all be using Toslink connections to our DACs and with my Chord DAVE, USB sounds better. Having recently compared an Apple branded Thunderbolt cable against a Synergistic Research Active SE copper Thunderbolt cable against a Corning optical Thunderbolt cable, I had assumed the Corning optical would sound best and it actually sounded the worst of the three.

 

As for my switch not working well, it's possible yours sounds better but as I stated, when I removed my switch from the chain, it actually sounded worse. It is definitely not causing harm as far as I can tell. You should also understand that my internet modem/router sits about 1 meter from my music server. Wifi is not turned on (Wifi duties are being handled by a separate Wifi router in my equipment closet 20 meters away). From internet modem/router to my music server, we are talking about a total of 2 meters of copper wiring total with a short run of optical cable in between to assure galvanic isolation. This is a very short and direct signal path and there is no benefit to me using optical elsewhere within my house since my music is streamed from a local drive. From the receiving FMC up until the music server, all power is provided by my LPS-1 and so nothing is connected to ground that could impact my network beyond the FMC. With respect to these 2 NAAs, I don't know how much better my network can be and yet this direct connection sounds better. Go figure.

 

If this works for you then great.

 

I would like to point out the misconception that a "direct" connection is somehow fundamentally different than using a switch or router. Routers themselves very frequently run a variant of Linux e.g. pfSense so all this really depends on is the quality of the hardware : many many people here obsess over details of PC hardware / disc drives/ different types of power supplies yet hardly any thought regarding different types of switches and routers.

 

An FMC is itself a simple switch ... and replacing the power supply and/or clocks can be considered for not a great deal of $$

 

So all else equal: no big deal. However it's taking a lot or work to get Windows to work in bridged mode: duh -- it's not designed to be a router/switch.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jabbr]

If the router is fiber isolated from the switch, it's really hard to see how it would affect the SQ -- except perhaps if the SMPS injects noise/leakage into the house. Could test by turning it off

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jabbr]

My custom build NAA is really cheap -- doesn't even have a disk drive of any type -- just an Intel x520 NIC that it network boots from... Powered by an "ultra el-cheapo" LPS to a picoPSU

[jabbr]

9 hours ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Not looking for a lecture on clocks.  We already know empirically that the sCLK-EX clock replacement improves audio performance immensely.

Actually you don’t have that empirical knowledge unless you have measured the system phase error which you haven’t. Empirical means something.

[jabbr]

Just a hint to folks: if you look back at my posts from a few years ago, Ive discussed and investigated some of these issues, and well this prompted me to do a great deal of reading and more investigation.

 

I don’t believe in taking anything or anyone at face value and @JohnSwenson certainly has a long history of professional experience with power supply & pdn... that said @marce also has extensive professional experience with high speed design — clicks being an important aspect of this — dismiss if you wish but at your own peril of bad results. 

 

My advice: listen

[jabbr]

21 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Yes, like listening with our ears in comparison.  Thatis empirical enough for this group.  Otherwise we could be waiting for a long time for any instrument to be constructed that confirms what we already heard.

Right so believe what you want and who knows why you hear what you hear . and arbitrarily choose to believe who you want to believe. Sounds random to me.

 

What actual evidence do you have that this entire thread isn’t just a couple of blokes who agree with each other at a pub?

 

Thats fine, but that’s all.

[jabbr]

1 hour ago, austinpop said:

Why don't I just stipulate up front that this thread is intended for people who trust their ears, and are willing to share their listening impressions. Audio science and measurement skeptics are welcome to start another thread.

 

No problem, there is very little harm allowing monkeys to sit at typewriters ?

 

Have a great thread.

[jabbr]

5 hours ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Then I apologize if you feel that way, that was never my intention.  We welcome any information that adds to the collective understanding.

 Ok but what you said was:

18 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

Funny - I recently met several folks ("blokes") from this thread at a "pub" at RMAF. Can't say we agreed about much of anything, least of all what to drink!

 

But in all seriousness, I am going to invoke my OP privileges here: we are NOT going down this rathole. If we do, I will be getting Chris's help to delete posts as needed.

 

Why don't I just stipulate up front that this thread is intended for people who trust their ears, and are willing to share their listening impressions. Audio science and measurement skeptics are welcome to start another thread.

 

The definitional error is in the active rejection you are exhibiting toward measurement in an electronics field. In the days of Benjamin Franklin, primary senses has a critical role in advancing our understanding of electricity but in the past few centuries, our collective understanding has become so advanced that the active rejection of measurements is ludicrous. Particularly when the discussion is about clock upgrades which is itself s highly technical topic. 

 

If you don’t want to learn that is your choice. Do you have any idea why the path a clock takes to its target is important?

[jabbr]

23 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

Yes, I do. I could write a short treatise on proper termination, impedance matching, and the importance of clock cable length. Oh wait - if you bother to actually go back to the index and look, I’ve done that before, as have others.

 

Are you here to participate and contribute to the subject of this thread? If so, welcome!

 

But if you are here to lecture us, and try to convince us that we couldn’t possibly be hearing what we are hearing, then please move along. Nothing to see here.

 

The fundamental premise of this thread seems to be that bridging on a PC has "massively" better "SQ" than going through an ethernet switch. Not only does this massively go against my own personal experience but I really have no idea what the fundamental difference between switch and PC hardware is supposed to be that might create such a difference. 

 

For example, my NAA box, the Solid-Run Clearfog is designed to be used as a network appliance/switch/router. This device has an SFP port which accepts direct fiber input and serves as my NAA (connects to my DAC). Alternately the device which had been my NAA now runs XXHE and this also has a direct fiberoptic input. This connects to my NOS1a G3. I have several of the ASRock Q1900M motherboards, all LPS, including one of Paul Pang's "reclocked" which was a complete waste of money (for me). I have extensive personal listening experience. 

 

I have all sorts of network equipment, and at least via fiber, none of my switches have any sonic signature. Not on my system. I won't make that claim for copper (but am not currently using copper so perhaps different factors apply)

 

I have no doubt that you are hearing what you hear, although I would be very hard pressed to say that I've ever heard an ethernet switch to have a "massive" effect on "SQ" so don't be surprised that I am skeptical. 

 

In any case I use LPS and batteries as standard power supplies in everything close to my audio. 

 

My own network switches if anything improve the sound on my own system which I am quite pleased with. I see zero improvement going direct renderer to NAA or direct to NAS ... but that's my own equipment and I can't say that yours doesn't sound different.

 

Now if you are interested in upgrading clocks, for ~$20 the Crystek: http://www.crystek.com/crystal/spec-sheets/clock/CCHD-575.pdf  and I'd recommend using this (or similar from NHT) perhaps with a small adapter board, to directly replace the clock on the board, without cables, or connectors. Of course the power supply is absolutely critical.

 

Consider me a data point. Of course if your goal is only to hear subjective impressions that validate your viewpoint, then of course your conclusions will be what they are.

[jabbr]

1 hour ago, lmitche said:

For those of you with Asus Intel motherboards I found this little nougat in the bios manual of my new motherboard:

 

BCLK Spread Spectrum
This item allows you to reduce the EMI. Disable to get more accurate base clocks.
Configuration options: [Auto] [Disabled]

 

Setting it to Disabled is audible, wow!

 

Oh yeah, and for all of y'a who've been hearing improvements with clock replacements and who've had spread spectrum enabled, you need to go back and rethink what and why you are hearing what you are hearing ... jus' sayin'

[jabbr]

12 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

Oh yeah, and for all of y'a who've been hearing improvements with clock replacements and who've had spread spectrum enabled, you need to go back and rethink what and why you are hearing what you are hearing ... jus' sayin'

 

Let me add this: despite commonly used spread spectrum clocking on the main board, a 10 Gbe 10GBase-X end-to-end jitter remains as specified in the pico second range --- this strongly demonstrates how proper buffering/reclocking effectively walls off upstream jitter.

[jabbr]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

that could be your sig.

 

I’m still having a big ??‍♂️ moment here ... how long is it going to take for everyone here to turn off spread spectrum and then repeat this thread ... ?

[jabbr]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

 Are you suggesting that What you lose on the swings, you gain on the roundabouts  ?

 

To be clear: if the system is creating jitter in the system clock on purpose, a more precise clock oscillator doesn’t change that.

 

Just because the PC otherwise emits more EMI, it doesn’t mean that the EMI necessarily gets into the audio ... it  doesn’t on my system.

[jabbr]

5 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 I don't have a horse in this race, but many members appear to be claiming  that a more precise clock oscillator results in an improvement, despite using Spread Spectrum. ( perhaps unwittingly)

 

 

[jabbr]

3 hours ago, LTG2010 said:

The variations in the process clock frequency modulation can cause measurable jitter over 20ns according to some chipset manufacturers. The Jittered signal might explain the audible difference, unless you are of the opinion that jitter is dealt succesfully by the DACS buffers, then its not an explanation.

 

See here's the thing: adding spread spectrum by definition adds waaaaayyyy more than 20ns jitter, so it totally swamps variations in logic process (very real) as well as clock oscillator.

[jabbr]

3 hours ago, vortecjr said:

John S. has a hypothesis that oscillators can negatively  impact each other. Unfortunately, I don't think that his research is far enough along to comment on the exact mechanism. My contention has been since this is so hard to measure its impact most be very small. Understand that he is having to build very low noise hardware to even start the investigation. Having said that....it's probably not a good idea to add more noise:) 

 

Einstein described this long before John S. was born, nor hypothesized. It remains an active area of research ?http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/04/einstein-s-spooky-action-distance-spotted-objects-almost-big-enough-see

[jabbr]

13 minutes ago, mansr said:

Uh, could you clarify that a bit? For PCIe and USB3, we're talking about modulating the unit interval by 1 ps or less. Where are you getting 20 ns?

 

I was quoting to quickly. The 20ns number isn't right because PCIe allows no more than 12ns skew. Its also roughly the width of a DAC clock cyle (if roughly 50 Mhz). Process phase error variation is often in the ps to 10s to 100s range. Misread ns as ps...

 

The point is that going with a "femotosecond" clock which is the topic of this read doesn't make sense when spread spectrum is adding 0.5% jitter -- the actual number. The amount in ps depends on the particular clock.

 

https://www.microsemi.com/document-portal/doc_view/135439-white-paper-spread-spectrum-clocking

 

 

 

[jabbr]

11 minutes ago, mansr said:

Nobody is applying spread spectrum to the DAC clock. That would be insane.

Yes but what is being talked about is reclocking the system clock. 

[jabbr]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

A lot of things are being talked about.

Let me summarize the actual situation: 

 

Modern miniaturized logic uses sharper and sharper rise times, which leads to increased ringing at logic interfaces as well as increased EMI in certain situations, as well as increased switching noise. These noises can be averaged out by adding phase noise to the clock and de syncing the logic. 

 

For audiophile purposes the true solution is to redesign  the logic itself and properly reduce ground plane noise as well as EMI. 

That ain’t likely to happen in a mass market PC motherboard. Good luck trying to fix that with good power supplies and Femto clocks.