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

[ElviaCaprice]

Jplay has been a long time advocate for using a separate Ethernet card to connect their Audio PC and Control PC.

 

BTW, speaking of improving microRendu and SOtM sMS-200 performance - try putting Jcat isolator (Intona) and Wyred Recovery inseries after the microRendu (uR > Intona > Wyred Recovery, with uR powered by LPS-1). HUGE gain in dynamic contrast, soundstage dimensionality and clarity. My jaw literally hit the floor yesterday, when I first tried this combination (and that was after trying all sorts of PSUs on those gizmos, which also brought some improvement).

 

How does it sound without the uR in comparison, using your Jcat Femot USB card powered by an LPS-1 which in turn powers the Intona? Direct USB to the DAC. ? How to power the Wyred Recovery if used?

[ElviaCaprice]

Would be nice to see a renderer (like mRendu) that doesn't require any router connection. Maybe two ethernet inputs? Or just one if it could input data and controls?

Must be a way to simplify this process and yet gain the benefits of the audiophile renderer without all the networking headaches?

 

Does such a device exist today with the SQ quality/format versatility of the mRendu or Sms-200? Although video/hires streaming remains a problem? Thus I remain in the USB only universe.

[ElviaCaprice]

Ok, another new revelation. The improvement I am hearing with this direct connection has nothing to do with bypassing the switch. At least, it has nothing to do with bypassing my Paul Pang 100Mbit switch with TCXO clock powered by my LPS-1. This switch has no noisy switching regulators. It is a 5V device as is the TXCO clock. Previously, as I had stated, it resulted in a small but meaningful difference in my system. I have now connected it in my "direct" path. It is flanked on both ends by a short SOtM black LAN cable. One cable connects directly to my Mac Mini and the other connects to my sMS-200. The improvement is now even larger with a bigger soundstage and even crisper details, easily heard with guitar plucks. While the improvement is not anywhere as huge as the direct connection, it is now MUCH more pronounced than when I had it connected before my Mac Mini! This switch is staying exactly where it's at.

 

I bought this switch used from another CA member for $99 and figured it was worth the risk. It's turning out to be a truly excellent buy. For those interested, you can buy one new from Paul Pang himself. It appears he no longer sells the slower 100Mbit switch that I have although it's unclear to me if one speed sounds any better than the other.

 

SHOPPING AREA: AUDIO GRADE SWITCH

 

Regarding the LPS-1, this is an excellent indication for this PSU. Compared to my switching 5V PSU, the improvement is very significant.

 

Tomorrow, I will see if my FMCs in this "direct" path results in any benefit.

 

These kind of discoveries make me wonder if an Ethernet based direct connection to a renderer have anything over a server only tweaked USB stream. Whereas the galvanically isolated power supplies (LPS-1) have changed the game for both.

[ElviaCaprice]

This is a very good question. I have a lot of experience with various single box purpose-built music servers with USB streams including a TotalDac-d1 server, Aurender N100 with Ken Lau PSU, Aurender N10, Aurender W20, Lumin U1, CAD CAT, Auralic Aries with femto clock and LPS, various custom-built CAPS servers and more. Here is the thread I started on Head-Fi:

 

 

REVIEW: Comparison of 5 High End Digital Music Servers - Aurender N10, CAD CAT server, TotalDac d1-Server, Auralic Aries, Audiophile Vortex Box

 

None of those single box units ever sounded anywhere close to what I am hearing now. That is how special both the microRendu and sMS-200 are, imo. This direct connection has much to do with it also but so does my Paul Hynes SR7 which I just got recently. I am finding these things to be the key pieces so far.

 

 

But then you didn't have the LPS-1 to make the comparison fair?? The LPS-1 has transformed my USB stream.

[ElviaCaprice]

I have high respect for my LPS-1 and it is my highest value PSU by far. For sure, it is playing a role in why my current setup sounds better but presently, it is only powering my switch and one of my FMCs. Compared to my SR7, the SR7 is better although to be fair to the LPS-1, the SR7 is better than PSUs I have from Kenneth Lau, Paul Pang, HDPlex and Teradak by an even wider margin. It is expensive but it is the finest PSU I have ever experienced and it has very significantly transformed my sMS-200, mR, Mac Mini and internet modem/router. I now have another Paul Hynes SR7 on order but this time, it will be Paul's very best as the outputs will have double regulation and between 150-160dB of line rejection.

 

If I had to prioritize the key reasons for why my current setup sounds so good (better than anything I have tried before), as I stated, I believe it is largely due to the sMS-200/mR, this direct connection and the Paul Hynes SR (in no particular order) but as always, everything matters.

 

I don't doubt SR7 is a fine power supply, go to know, thank you. But it still has no relevancy as to making a comparison of a server tweaked USB using todays superb power supplies as opposed to doing so with a renderer via Ethernet/USB. I also find USB chords irrelevant to my SQ. In fact, upon eliminating the 5Vbus, even distance is irrelevant between the Intona and Regen. Would be nice to see a comparison today with the newer power supplies. Everything does matter or does it?

[ElviaCaprice]

The Supra USB cable made my system sound better quite a lot, and I'm not a cable fatishist.

 

So you ran a supra USB cable from your sMS-200 to your Schiit gungnir? And the cable made a difference in SQ?

[ElviaCaprice]

Yes, a simple USB cable between the Sotm and the gungnir was replaced by the Supra. It made quite a significant improvement.

 

You probably have some ground loop or stray AC current in that segment of the stream. Get rid of this and the USB chord shouldn't matter other than proper impedance (Supra being a good cable for this, best a Regen plus adapter at the DAC).

Eliminate the 5Vbus if possible for your DAC.

[ElviaCaprice]

I really appreciate this post and that you are hearing an improvement with W2012R2 over W10! While I am very happy with my Mac Mini, despite running the CAD optimization script on my El Capitan OS, I still have nearly 120 processes running and so I have remained very curious how Windows coupled with AO might improve things. Given the problems some have reported with W2012R2 and bridging, I was thinking of going to Windows 10 Pro but as Phil Hobi believes that the differences between W2012R2 in minimal server mode and Windows 10 Pro are "night and day," this has been difficult for me to ignore.

 

Funny, the folks doing their own optimization scripts work on Windows 10 Pro are finding Windows 10 Pro far better than Windows Server 2012 AO.

[ElviaCaprice]

I have certainly heard arguments for both sides and I may ultimately compare both but because of the fact that you can get W2012R2 down to less than 10 open processes, at least on paper, it would make sense to me that W2012R2 should have the edge.

 

Have never heard of anyone making this claim. If so, yes, 10 processes open total would better than my 22 processes open total with Windows 10 Pro.

[ElviaCaprice]

Sorry, let me correct that. Here are Phil Hobi's exact words:

 

"A Windows Server 2012 R2 system in core mode, fully optimized with the AudiophileOptimizer, runs only 5 to 7 services and about 15-20 processes."

 

Okay, that's much closer. Would come down to sound signature at that point. That is where I think some folks are finding Windows 10 Pro better. Myself no experience, only use Windows 10 Pro, never would use Server due to cost and non support by JRiver.

[ElviaCaprice]

 

To add to the confusion, as I have mentioned before, I have a Paul Pang switch with TXCO clock and this "reclocking" switch resulted in a very small improvement in my previous configuration (between router and Mac Mini) but when placed in the direct connection path (between Mac Mini and sMS-200/mR), the improvement is considerable, enough so that I have ordered another switch with a much better clock just to see where it leads me.

Romaz, am I correct in saying that your finding the above tweak and improvement in SQ for data only (USB) being sent from control PC to Renderer? But the Renderer is playing/streaming (UAC2) the sound to the DAC?

[ElviaCaprice]

Hmmm, I'm not sure I understand your question. My control PC passes data to my renderer via ethernet (not USB) but yes, the renderer, in this case my mR or sMS-200, streams directly to DAC via USB 2.0.

 

If you are referring to my "reclocking" switch, I am finding that it seems to make a much larger difference when I place it directly between my Mac Mini and sMS-200 or mR versus placing this same switch before my Mac Mini. The only logical conclusion I can draw is that since my Mac Mini has no special clocks and as there are at least 3 points of clocking that occur with my Mac Mini once a music signal enters from my Thunderbolt hub, these clocks must somehow degrade the signal enough that reclocking post-Mac Mini makes a significant difference. This is obviously the concept behind audiophile grade USB ports such as those made by Paul Pang or SOtM as they incorporate much higher quality clocks.

 

It was also theorized by many (including myself) initially that maybe this switch was actually causing harm in my previous (conventional) setup but it's clear the switch was never the problem. At this point, I believe the router is the culprit but why does even an unoptimized Mac Pro (which I would guess is just as noisy as a router) sound better when directly connected to the mR or sMS-200? I have no clue.

 

Yes, of course, thanks Romaz. Sometimes I wonder where my head is.

Is the renderer saving the data via Ethernet to memory first and then streaming UAC2? Just trying to determine what the renderer is exactly doing.

[ElviaCaprice]

Yes, I agree.

 

What I found was that the direct path sounds better - overall - but it's not cut and dried. The FMCs do seem to grow the soundstage, but I also noticed more glare and harshness.

 

So I agree - there are likely competing forces at play with FMCs in the path, and depending on the rest of the chain, the net result could either tilt in favor of FMCs or without.

 

I really wonder what something like an Etalon isolator would do instead. Anyone want to send one along for testing?

 

Here you go, Austinpop. This is the same last model made by Topaz. I bought a cleaner looking one, but I know this guy will take $70 on offer with shipping. Great deal for someone who wants a good isolator. These 1kva units are made for 120V and have male/female receptacle built in. He has 2 left.

 

MGE UPS SYSTEMS 1.0KVA 120VAC ULTRA-ISOLATION TRANSFORMER 91001-32T *JCH* | eBay

[ElviaCaprice]

No, none of Paul's supplies use ultracaps. They are connected to ground.

 

You are absolutely correct, we each have different listening environments and so you will need to figure out what part of my listening experience will be applicable to your own. Having said that, I have had other DACs come through my system recently (brought in by members of our local audiophile society) for comparison against my DAVE that don't have USB galvanic isolation and regardless of the DAC used, there has been unanimous consensus of which is better.

Probably the overall system isolation would have more to do with individual results of power supplies isolated or not. Hoping my new Topaz isolation transformer may make my HDPlex a much better power supply.

[ElviaCaprice]

Ive seen comments of users running an Intona with sotm sms-200. This is really needed only if the dac doesn't have galvanic isolation, am I right?

Sorry for the off topic.

 

No, it's not that simple. Galvanic isolation claims can vary widely. Really testing is the only way to know how good a DAC's claims are.

[ElviaCaprice]

Well, this is where things get complicated, isn't it? Yes, in my current chain, I do have an Intona and RUR between streamer and DAC. And yes, the Intona does improve SQ. But the Intona would qualify as a bad clock, compared to the precision of the new SOtM sCLK-EX. So the chain would then become:

 

sMS-200Ultra ---------------> Intona --------------> tX-USBUltra -----------> DAC

(good clock) -----------------(bad clock) -------------(good clock)

 

The questions then becomes:

1. does the benefit of the Intona (galvanic isolation) outweigh the harm (bad clock)?
   
2. If yes, then is the good clock on the sMS-200 Ultra wasted?
   

 

I guess the only way to answer this will have to be to compare:

1. sMS-200 Ultra ---> DAC
   
2. sMS-200Ultra ---> Intona ---> tX-USBUltra ---> DAC
   
3. sMS-200 ---> Intona ---> tX-USBUltra ---> DAC
   

 

I'd have to score some review samples to try that!

Yes, and I would like to know if one dropped the sms-200 and just went with the tx-USBUltra direct to the DAC, with and without the Intona preceding. This would be preferable in my case so as to allow high res video playback on my HTPC.

[ElviaCaprice]

Larry, thanks for your input concerning upsampling with HQP. I have fought over the notion of going this route instead of bit perfect, but every time I think it through, I pause, and finally give up on the notion. My concerns, other than lack of functionality with HQP, like library and video, is that by making the first part of the streamer process such a noisy high powered component, that one is doomed from the get go injecting noise into the USB stream. How do you find this balance between the advantages of HQP upsampling/filtering over the noisy high power needed?

 

Also, I would think that because of the noisy PC, one would definitely need an NAA or renderer to try and mitigate those initial negative effects? And that brings up another host of possible issues?

[ElviaCaprice]

Hi Elvia,

 

I agree, there needs to be two galvanically isolated zones for good SQ, one for the upsampling PC, the other for USB input to the DAC. Over here using the Adnaco USB fiber solution, the fiber separates the atx power supply, CPU, memory, motherboard and hard disk from the USB signal. The fiber to copper conversion happens on the other side of the fiber in a low current device powered by an LPS1.

 

So it's kinda like the NAA design idea, with less processing and noise in the DAC side gear.

 

Also, if I have it right, this same design idea will also be possible with the new ISO REGEN product from Uptone which I look forward to hearing.

 

Despite the galvanic isolation between the PC and USB sides, my recent tweak of replacing the SSD with a hard disk for boot and music storage had a surprisingly positive impact on sound quality. Think of those situations where you are between two mirrors and the image disappears into the vanishing point.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=mirror+into+mirror&client=tablet-android-lenovo&prmd=isvn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi3zbb787fSAhUF4oMKHb4SBHEQ_AUIBygB&biw=800&bih=1280#tbm=isch&q=mirror+into+mirror+reflection&*&imgrc=Qbu1Y3yEIXmoJM:

 

Replacing the SSD creates a "one mirror" level of clarity that is rather jaw dropping in the level of presence and sense of being in the room with the performers. I hear a lot of live music, and can finally hear the room in its entirety which is especially exciting on live performances.

 

Clearly local music retrieval without the network in combination with reduced EMI from the SSD delivers this result.

 

This is all with HQplayer, so pretty good for a non-bit-perfect approach.

 

I hope this answers your question.

Thanks Larry,

I can't help but find this result after your care for galvanic isolation with the Adnaco (I take it this is the one your using, Adnaco-S3B?), a bit troubling? Makes me wonder how much more positive effect your main PC would have instead under a low power, pico-itx mobo powered by a great LPS? Obviously one would have to drop the upsampling HQP?

Again, to upsample filter before the DAC, noisy? or within the DAC but under an isolated low powering system?

[ElviaCaprice]

Have any of you guys tried running your windows 10 pc displays at 600 x 800 resolution? The display picture is smaller but oh my does it sound good. I normally set my display at 1280 x 1000 (or something like this) and wow does it look good but not sound as good as the lower resolution.

 

My display is pitch black with only JRiver showing, usually minimized to the corner of the screen while playback occurs. But I could imagine any power resource reduced would be better, just that I like to play videos with hi quality sound from time to time.

 

EDIT: Just gave it a try at 600 X 800. Good call, does make a difference in SQ for the better.

[ElviaCaprice]

This is too weird! OK, you and Theobetley agree it works, but I wonder why it makes a difference if you aren't running explorer.exe and you run JRiver minimized.

 

Your still sending a video signal. By reducing the amount of video data, pixel rate, being transmitted, you lower the amount of resource use on the CPU, less electrical needs?

 

Obviously, no video would be the best. But then you would need to communicate via Ethernet and it's resources needed, which I don't currently use. I'm beginning to think that I'm going to need two separate systems. One with video playback direct USB, the other, no video via Renderer, audio only.

 

No matter what, it seems, however you begin the playback of media it is influenced by the component/software. Makes sense to handle with as much care the beginning process all the way to the end, the DAC. This is why I can't fathom using HQP as an upsampling, filtering media player. How can all that CPU usage not be detrimental to sound quality regardless of the gains? Far better to allow a more passive audio built device such as a Chord DAC to do the filtering?

[ElviaCaprice]

Yes, you want to uninstall any Intel graphics driver. Once done this will force the display into 800x600 VGA mode and turn off the internal GPU increasing SQ.

 

I assume you are running headless with rdp or vnc or something.

 

Nope. I'm using my only mobo video output, HDMI to my monitor. I only reduced the resolution manually via windows 10 display settings. Afterward I shut down Windows Explorer and Task Manager. Larry, I'm not aware how to run headless without any Ethernet connection? Is there a way to shut down the internal GPU from task manager? Restart it from keyboard?

 

NOTE: I currently want the ability for better graphics display on video hi res playback when desired.

[ElviaCaprice]

Over here I have still have my Ethernet connected but shutdown the Windows networks services. The only apps on the network are tightvnc server for control from my laptop and Roon links to Tidal.

 

The Windows PC has only three wires connected, AC power from a 1 to 1 isolation transformer, fiber to the USB box, and ethernet connected via EMOsystems isolation to a wireless adapter. Connecting a monitor breaks the isolation, so I only use a monitor when access to the BIOS is needed, otherwise it's disconnected.

 

Make sense?

 

Yes, Larry, makes sense. HDMI is hot swappable. I suppose I could just turn off the monitor and disconnect the HDMI. At least this would isolate the PC. I have found ground loops from HDMI before.

[ElviaCaprice]

OK, so following on yesterday's success with the M.2 SATA adapter, I decided to install an Intel pcie x1 NIC card and turn off the motherboard NIC. This and 5 of the six SATA ports were disabled in the BIOS.

 

Here is yet another nice jump in SQ.

 

All the more reason to start with a much smaller mobo to begin with.

[ElviaCaprice]

With just a titanium class ATX SMPS here, things sound terrific! I am not sure that a linear power supply is warranted anymore. I am using what may be the most expensive ATX power supply an EVGA 1600 watt titanium model, but since it was purchased several manufacturers have shipped lower wattage titanium models including EVGA and Seasonic that cost half as much. My guess is that these models will sound as good or better then what I have here. The Seasonic just got a score of 10 out of 10 on a leading reviewers website.

 

I am certainly in no rush to buy a linear power supply for my rig anytime soon. It's not even on the radar of future enhancements. If one came my way for testing I'd have listen, but I'd be surprised if it mattered much.

 

Larry,

I can understand the reluctance to pursue a very expensive if not impossible task to power a HQP server, properly. But everything we seem to be discovering about power supplies and their huge influence on sound quality of the stream, would suggest that those ATX switching power supplies are in no way a good thing for SQ. That is why I am so reluctant to want to go down the HQP path. I am not convinced that the benefits of HQP can overcome the deficiencies in those poor PSU's and the need for high power computations. Thus I will stick to Chord DAC's and their extensive filtering for better SQ and build a better low power (as low as possible) mobo with a great PSU. I am convinced that it is critical to start the audio stream as clean and precise as possible. Romaz and others findings have helped solidify this notion I've had.

In no way is the HDPlex a great power supply. It's just a stepping stone at the moment. I'll definitely be looking to use an LPS-1, SR7 or Rossi power supply for my future mobo build.

[ElviaCaprice]

Elvia,

Here is what a friend with a duplicate of my system wrote when he removed his boot SSD and moved to a hard disk.

"Simply unbelievable…everything you said…presence, imaging, warmth…I see why you said you were done…"

He is using a fanless Seasonic ATX SMPS to power his system. We both use a LPS-1 to power an Adnaco fiber (PCIE) to copper (USB) box.

 

I don't disagree with this finding, but I don't think it reflects on any specific power supply, but the hard drive in itself and it's influence on sound signature.

 

So I agree, good power supplies matter. I am just not sure you need anything more then a good ATX SMPS for the motherboard, CPU/RAM and a 12 volt 3.5 inch hard disk.

 

I would agree, a large gaming/server ATX mobo probably could not even benefit from anything more than what your doing with a quality ATX power supply. Since your dirty already, yeah, go for the full 3.5" HDD, that's what I would do with a HQP server. Do I think this is the path for superior SQ? Hardly convinced, a dead end and limited in my mind. What is the alternative, not so great either, yet, but I think we are fast approaching to a very small mobo, great clocking, very low power, low impedance.

 

We won't know for sure until a high quality, high current power supply is tested against the SMPS solutions. Besides the hdplex, I can't think of one lps powerful enough for the 6700k. Even then there will still be a need for a DC to DC SMPS to break down the voltages to the various requirements for a motherboard.

 

I agree, I think the good Seasonic ATX is probably better than the HDPlex, or at least not much worse. What would be nice is a comparison of a high powered ATX HQP server, any DAC, up against a low clean power mobo server playing bit perfect to a Chord DAC. That would be interesting.