Jump to content
IGNORED

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


Message added by The Computer Audiophile

Important and useful information about this thread

Posting guidelines

History and index of useful posts

Most important: please realize this thread is about bleeding edge experimentation and discovery. No one has The Answer™. If you are not into tweaking, just know that you can have a musically satisfying system without doing any of the nutty things we do here.

Recommended Posts

My method for a PC connected to mR directly with HQplayer running without static IP.

 

System: Win10 Ent 64 on a PC

Steps:

1. Onboard LAN1(to router), PCIe LAN2(to mR) and USB WiFi3 adapter(dummy, connect to nothing) form a network bridge. IP of mR is now designated.

2. Run HQPlayer NAA as backend. (mR is now found by HQPlayer)

3. Remove WiFi3 (I use the safely remove device method). HQPlayer still works.

4. Disable LAN1. (Now complete isolation.). HQPlayer still works.

5. Stop and then start HQPlayer again as a check. It should be running.

 

Need to repeat the steps once PC after rebooting PC.

Link to comment
Thanks for sharing what you've done, GreenLeo. I imagine that at some point, you'll have to go through these steps again as the mR won't retain its IP address indefinitely. What was your purpose for disconnecting your router altogether? Did you feel that complete isolation from the router led to further SQ improvement in your system? I can't imagine that it would.

 

Hi Romaz,

 

The credit belongs to you and Clipper?.

I tried the setup very late last night and it worked for a few songs, and then I slept. It still worked this morning (a good 6 hours) before I left for work. I will need to check it again tonight to see if the setting is repeatble. If the IP of mR is lost, quit HQPlayer, enable LAN1 again (wait a short time for identifying the network) and launch HQPlayer again will do. No need to go through every step again if the PC haven't been rebooted.

 

I tried this setup

for fun,

 

for interested parties to test why the SQ has been improved:

There was a debate of why SQ has been improved and the role of the router. My setup is very simple, with or without the router. If the setups sound identical, then the jitter(or anything unknown) from the router is immaterial in this setup. The SQ improvements come from the direct connection.

 

for future comparison:

I saw walk throughs here that showbhow to set a fixed IP for the SoTM. I found the walk through intimidating because I'm not Linux guy. The reason to reimplement a fixed IP seems to have a direct connection between a computer(PC or Mac) and the SoTM with only one onboard LAN port (or isolate this connection from the one that connects to Internet). The reason of doing this, at least to me, is for a better SQ. Now we may tell if it's worthwhile to go through the walkthrough of setting up the fixed IP.

 

for saving money:Each PS counts and we all know that the PS for the router counts for the SQ as indicated in your findings and we all agree in general. Without a router means less money to me☺

 

for being a member:

I'm a newbie here and have learnt a lot. I found members here are pretty willing to share their experiments. Sometime it works in other systems and sometimes not. Hence I offer my 2 cents hoping that it may work in other systems and can be further improved.

 

 

 

 

 

Finally, I haven't golden ears and my modest system may not be resolving enough at the moment. I'll leave the listening test for others.

 

Cheers

Link to comment

Last night and this morning I tried the setup again. The following are my findings.

 

1.HQPlayer can run consistently for at least two hours. As I rarely may use my system for more than an hour, this is good enough for me.

 

2. HQPlayer did stop within 3 hours or less in one occassion. I then quited HQPlayer, enabled LAN1, reinserted USB WiFi. (No need to setup the bridge again), and then launched HQPlayer. It's up again. The whole process took less than 2 mins.

Link to comment
Good evening,

I've got some troubles using the network bridge and hqplayer NAA. I've got it working using my SOTM-200 as a Roon Ready endpoint however.

Steps I've taken following different guides in this topic:

Copied my ethernetadapter connected to router's (ethernet 1) ip, subnet, gateway and dns to my newly created network bridge. Internet works,SOTM-200 interface by typing IPadress works, Roonready endpoint works, HQplayer doesn't.

According to some posts, changed the ipadress of the bridge to an unbinded ipadress; Roonready endpoint still works, SOTM-200 interface by typing IPadress works, HQplayer doesn't.

HQ player can't find my SOTM-200 as an ipv4 endpoint in the settings menu. I've activated the HQplayer endpoint in the SOTM-200 before doing this.

I think the problem lies in DNS.

Before my networkbridge I could connect to my SOTM-200 by typing "eunhasu" in a browser. Now I only can acces the SOTM-200 by typing the ipadress.

I've got a headless server burried in a closed, so I'm little afraid changing network setting on a trial and error basis.

Used parameters:

Bridge:

ip:10.0.0.12

subnet: 255.255.255.0

gateway and dns: 10.0.0.1

SOTM-200 get's ip adress 10.0.0.130, static by router.

Thanks in advance.

What OS are you using?

 

You have only two LAN ports, right? If so, consider add in a USB WiFi adapter. Read post#700, or other posts in this thread for the setup. So far it always works.

 

I use Win Ent 64 with an onboard LAN, PCIe LAN connected to mR and a USB WiFi adapter. All these three use DHCP. Just setup a bridge. Wait a short time. Launch HQPlayer. Done, once and for all. No need to remove the USB WiFi nor disable the onboard LAN. This system will run for hours, should run after reboot as well.

 

No need to fiddle the IPs of the bridge nor the individual LAN card. Really simple☺

Link to comment

Hi Romaz,

Thank you for your sharing, which as usual, is very useful and interesting.

 

Did you compare the sMS-200 ultra powered by LPS-1 vs mR by LPS-1 and what's the verdict? This would be very valuable given that your current SR7 (let alone the coming one) could be an unobtainimum, at least to quite a few of us.

 

Thanks again for the sharing.

Link to comment
Hi GreenLeo,

 

I stated my LPS-1 experience with both of these NAAs in my post:

 

With the stock sMS-200 vs the mR and with each powered by a switching 9V iFi PSU, I actually prefer the mR. The sMS-200 sounds more detailed but the presentation is quite thin and anemic whereas the mR has nicer body. When powered by the LPS-1, this thinness improves considerably and while both the mR and sMS-200 benefit greatly from a superior low-impedance PSU like the LPS-1, the sMS-200 scales better to my ears -- it is more resolute.

 

I want to reiterate that while the Paul Hynes SR7 is something very special (and not as expensive as you might think given the performance it provides), by no means is the LPS-1 something to look down on. With the exception of Paul's SR-7, I have yet to hear a PSU sound as good as my LPS-1 with either the sMS-200 or mR. In fact, I have a 2nd LPS-1 on order and so it will continue to play an important role in my chain. I would wholeheartedly recommend the LPS-1 for either of these NAAs to anyone.

 

Hi Romaz,

 

I did read very carefully the post which is stock sMS-200 vs mR with LPS-1. I am asking sMS-200 Ultra vs mR with LPS-1 impressions.

 

Regards

Link to comment
Guys, can you please help me get working roon + hqplayer on one PC(Win10, two ethernet PCI-E devices) with direct connect of mR.

I tried many times, the same problem, PC doesnt see mR in NAA mode. In RoonReady it works fine, roon sees it without a problem.

...

As i understood i have to give to mR ip from another subnet during the bridge mode, but its impossible, as windows gives an option to adjust IP of a bridge and do other magic by itself.

 

I'm using Win 10 as well. No need to set separate subnet.

Onboard LAN to router (DHCP)

PCIe LAN to mR (DHCP) then add both of this to form a network bridge (DHCP)

Attach a WiFi dongle then add it to the bridge.

Then HQPlayer should be able to find mR in NAA mode and play.

You may now eject the dongle.

 

Never try roon. Hope this method helps. I tried to used DHCP server in Win10 but didn't work out.

Link to comment
Big thanks to clipper, now my PC sees directly connected mR in NAA mode!

So what i did.

I plugged mR to PC, PC to router via ethernet, i also plugged wifi usb adapter to PC and connected PC with router via wifi (installed all drivers and checked connection). Then chose all of them and created bridge, rebooted PC and mR, then added static IP to bridge.

Rebooted again. Now i see mR on PC.

But i realized, if i remove wifi adaptor, no longer HQPLayer sees mR, but if i turn off wifi in menu, music still works, so wifi adaptor will be connected there forever!

 

Glad to see that your system is now working. Clipper helped me as well.

 

You may even eject and remove the WiFi adapter. HQP still works. You may check if this sounds better :-)

You may disable the LAN that connected to the router as well. HQP still works for at least two hours (see my earlier post) and a total isolation from the router and the WiFi dongle is possible. You may check if this sound better :-)

This is fun :-)

But if your system restarts, you need to setup the bridge again :-( but it just take 2 minutes. What I did was to enable the LAN before shutting down Win10 and reinsert the WiFi adapter just before starting up Win10. The bridge will be re-built automatically so far.

 

Cheers.

 

Enjoy.

Link to comment
I have a GUI installation of Windows 2016. I have tried all differents ways possible but couldn't make it working ... In fact I see the problem: when I create the bridge, the new connection doesn't receive an IP Address from the DHCP. I can manually configure the IP Address but that doesn't work either. If I do exactly the same on Win2012 or Win10 on the same computer, that works directly. So, that could be related to a driver problem of my Intel server mainboard. Does someone have similar problems when trying to create a network bridge in Win 2016?

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Was the bridge for HQPlayer or what?

 

For the bridge that you've set up, have you used ipconfig to check the IP addresses of the tow LANs and then use ipconfig to check the IP address of the bridge formed? I will use DHCP for both of the LANs initially to check if the bridge have been setup correctly.

 

Hope this helps.

Link to comment
Thanks for suggestions, greenleo!

 

I tried to remove the wifi adaptor, doesnt work for me, HQPlayer is loosing mR, but its really funny, as i turned off wifi for this adaptor and just kept it in usb plug and it works :) And as i have raid on that PC i cant isolate it from network, but im still thinking to buy sonicTransporter and NAS, maybe i will get even better SQ.

 

Best wishes.

Thanks for the info.

 

Yeap, the adapter may be disabled and the bridge always works.

 

In my case, I can eject the adapter and disable the onboard LAN. I guess it's system dependent then and I'm just lucky.

 

It seems somebody has already tried using sonicTransporter but reverted back to PC ->mR -> USB DAC for better SQ. You may check. Again, I guess it's DAC dependent.

 

Best wishes

Link to comment
Thanks Roy for initiating this project. I was thinking that it must take something quite special to lure you away from Head-fi!

 

We previously discussed via PM that I was holding off on improving the digital side of things given how fast things were moving and that it was daft to spend big bucks on the server side of things. Recently, I found some spare time (and courage) to read through all 922 posts in this thread. I have compiled a word document of the comparatively significant findings (highlighting different types of findings with colour code).

...

 

What a courage. Would you mind to share the doc?

Link to comment
What I want to know are the MEASURABLE differences or based on listening only? Just asking.

That's what I've learnt from a quote: "If it sounds good and measures bad, you've measured the wrong things."

 

Did not answer your question but I find it quite true most of the time. Somehow CAS is not an exact science like Physics(that in general the evolution of a system is pretty much predictable) but something like Biology that too many factors affect a living thing. As a side note, I guess why vinyl or CD player(at least few years ago) sound so good when compare to CAS may be explained by reading this thread--the signal path is much simpler and the parts that needs improvement is much clear cut.

 

Regards

Link to comment
Well CD players are not that simple - they are similar to Computer Audio. They have a digital source, a DAC and have to output to you pre-, integrated, etc. Computer Audio can be just more distributed is all. I am not sure all this tweaking is doing anything - reclocking and reclocking an reclocking? I can see once, maybe. The trick is the computer needs a good PS and a name brand MB with good components. I would like to see a blind test on this.

 

 

CD as transport is relatively simple:

Rotate the disc in constant speed, read it through the laser head, and then output to the DAC. No error correction (real time). Hence the name CD transport, and why a good CD sounds better than some music files stored in CDs with less quality.

Of course in this case a DAC is needed. In the old days that Sony just launched their Discman, the DAC was integrated into the CD player and the term CD transport or CD as an transport carries very little meaning.

 

 

For the blind test, I encourage you to go ahead. There are situations that blind test are even not needed because the differences were (and are) so obvious.

 

Romaz, among many other CA members, has explained things happening in the signal path eloquently and I won't repeat here. A computer with good PS and quality components is just the beginning (let alone the definition of good and quality), not an end.

 

Enjoy.☺

Link to comment
That is incorrect. Real-time CD playback does have the disc rotating at a constant speed, and there is error correction--but it is based on interpolation.

 

You may want read up on Reed-Solomon encoding and eight-to-fourteen modulation.

 

In fact the single largest factor in "computer audio" (where CDs are ripped, stored, and played back) being superior to conventional CD transports is the utilization of CD ROM drive database mode extraction--instead of realtime, variable-speed, Reed-Solomon error correction, etc.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

 

Hi Superdad,

 

If the interpolation is taken as the true error correction, then I agree with you. But, the interpolation is the best guess if the data is allowed to read only once. This attempt to do correctioin doesn't guarantee exactly the same results or physically poor quality CD would sound the same as that of good physical quality.

 

My point is that the actual signal path and the actual processing took place affects the SQ. I am a CAS user (or I'll not be here☺) rather than a CD player promoter. However, the simple signal path of a good CD player that contributes to the SQ may not be ignored.

 

For the data extraction mode of CDs, it has been done for many years. However, the same music file sounds differently in different players (say foobar, JPlaymini), and two bit-by-bit-wise identical files sound differently on the same music players tells that CAS still has a long way to go because there are simply too many factors affecting the SQ. I feel that this journey contributes to the fun of being a CA. Lol.

Link to comment
Romaz, very interesting. Was wondering if you have consider this new computer you building would replace your NAS? By replacing the system and LAN clocks, this should ensure greater accuracy streamed to your end-point directly, given there are 2 LAN ports.

is Romaz using NAS? Would an NAS that run so many things at the same time give negative impacts to the SQ?

Link to comment
Right now, only Lexar makes them (the VPG-20). They've been discontinued but I found a distributor that has a stash of them.

 

Do you need a SATA adapter for the CF cards?

 

I believe Pang advised to use CF as disk drive as well for its smallest electrical noise long time ago.

Link to comment
CF type 1 cards are permitted to draw up to a max of 0.07A per spec. CF type 2 cards are allowed to draw up to 0.5A and so those should be avoided. I have noticed some SDXC cards can draw as much as 0.6A and so a 64GB SDXC card potentially could draw nearly 10x more current than even a 512GB type 1 CF card! SD cards consume fewer watts than SSDs but because most SD cards are 3.3V devices (as opposed to 5V devices), the more power hungry SD cards (the very fastest ones) actually draw the same amount of current as an SSD. Regardless, I am finding an SDXC card to have none of the HF issues as my SSD but to put this in proper context, when connected via my Pachanko SATA Reference cable and when powered by my LPS-1, SSD still sounds very good and so I will need to weigh the conveniences and much higher capacity of an SSD vs the slightly better SQ of CF and SD cards when used as a music storage drive. As for the OS, I'm fairly certain I will be going with CF SLC.

 

Yes, I plan to interface my CF cards via SATA using devices like the following. The top device will be used for my OS drive:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]33788[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]33789[/ATTACH]

This is the Lexar reader I am using now to do my testing:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]33790[/ATTACH]

 

Mine connects via USB 3.0 and contains both SD and CF readers and so I can do easy A/B comparisons. I am not presently using an audiophile-grade USB 3.0 cable and so I'm sure SQ could improve further. The nice thing about this reader is that you can power it with an LPS-1 at 5V and not surprisingly, it makes a difference vs the stock switching wall wart and also against a bus-powered reader that I have. I will see how it compares against the internal devices I listed above which connects via the lower latency SATA bus compared to USB. The internal device that I plan to use for my OS drive also contains a replaceable clock and I am intrigued to know whether replacing this clock will result in further improvement.

 

 

Can't wait your findings.

I heard Pang Pang had a discounted product that uses CF for OS. Have you tried?

 

After recollect my impressions in this very fruitful thread, I'm thinking if the clock of a LAN card may be upgraded to improve the sound but no good at soldiering. May be somebody can try as well.

Link to comment
Yes, as I stated previously, I had contemplated a server build using Paul's CF to SATA adapter that also incorporated his OCXO clock. Paul likes to put his clocks on almost everything he makes that has a clock as he insists it makes a difference. Here is the adapter that he sells and it can be fitted with either his TCXO or OCXO clock. As you'll see from his website, his offerings aren't inexpensive:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]33805[/ATTACH]http://ppaproduct.blogspot.tw/2016/05/cf-to-sata-adapter.html

 

In my build, I am expecting that replacing the clock on my LAN card to result in at least the same (or larger) magnitude of difference as what I am getting from my current reclocking switch. Obviously, doing so will not only provide a cleaner and better timed stream going out but I also expect it to do the same thing with the incoming stream from the router. This is where I am hoping to improve SQ from Tidal.

What NIC are you using? A thread here discuss how to upgrade the clock in a NIC. A member suggested that the clock of Intel X520 is already very good.

 

Following the hypothesis that putting the best clock as close to DAC and the direct connection, the modding of the NIC should be the way to try. I hope that one day we may have a NIC that can be powered externally.

Link to comment
Can you please point us to that thread, GreenLeo?

 

Yes, I have high hopes for what this reclocked Intel NIC card will offer, both for the incoming stream but also for the outgoing stream. While it cannot be powered externally, it will at least have it's switching regulators replaced with SOtM's ultra low noise linear regulators which should help.

The thread:http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f22-networking-networked-audio-and-streaming/network-card-clock-upgrade-31824/

It was pretty hot there☺. There were things pretty technical in that thread.

 

Any pricing info for replacing the regulator on the Intel NIC? I believe this is one of the most important tweaks in CAS and look forward to your future findings. I tried to use Windows Server but found it very troublesome--lots of drivers would be missing for my humble mono and one of them is the onboard Intel NIC. I bought a cheap PICe NIC to solve the problem LOL.

Link to comment
Thanks for the link, GL. Obviously, a lot of contentious debate about the wisdom of replacing the clock on a LAN card and some good points were brought up by some. I have my own speculative comments which I cannot definitively prove but they are borne from consistent observations.

 

The point was brought up repeatedly that if you disconnect the ethernet cable, music will continue to play. This is not really a new revelation and I have posted on it before. Roon themselves have indicated that they employ a fixed memory buffer where if you disconnect the incoming data stream, music will continue to play. In my testing, this buffer lasts for about 1-2 tracks and some players have even larger buffers where whole albums can be stored and played back from memory. The implication here is that the quality of the ethernet cable should have absolutely no impact on SQ and neither should the clock from the preceding LAN port since playback is occurring off of a memory buffer within the server and not from a steady ethernet stream.

 

Here is another way to look at the concept of buffers (ie memory playback). As far as I am aware, without exception, anything with a clock also has a buffer that is associated with it because for a clock to do its job properly, it requires a continuous and uninterrupted stream of data which is achieved by means of a buffer. Taking this concept further, all interfaces that contain clocks would, therefore, also contain buffers and this would include any network device such as NICs, switches and FMCs and of course digital components like music servers and DACs. In the same way that your music server buffers the ethernet stream it receives before rendering and reclocking it, your USB DAC also buffers the incoming USB stream and so all such devices, to some degree, employ "memory playback."

 

Now, looking specifically at DACS, if the argument that any cables or clocks that precede its buffer should have zero impact on SQ was true, then that would mean any jitter introduced by a bad clock and RF noise introduced by a bad cable should have zero effect. Conversely, any jitter that was reduced by a good clock or RF noise that was reduced by a well shielded cable should also have zero effect. It would, therefore, be logical to deduce that devices like the mR or sMS-200 should have zero impact on the DAC with respect to SQ and that as long as the stream is "bit-perfect", all sources should sound the same, whether it be a Raspberry Pi or an Aurender W20. As we know, this is a common argument of many "bits are bits" theorists and yet, for many of us who are willing to listen and compare, our ears have told us differently and that feeding a component a signal with high integrity can make a difference.

 

As to the impact of clocking (or reclocking), I think that anything that has direct contact with the signal has the potential to imprint on that signal (for better or worse) and that this imprint can potentially be carried forward all the way to your speakers. Those that have done comparative testing between SSDs and compact flash cards know that there are notable SQ differences between these media despite the understanding that the signal is ultimately buffered by the OS into memory downstream. As I have given the subject of clocking more thought, I can think of few things with greater potential impact on SQ than a clock. Not only does a bad clock directly contribute to jitter but a poorly powered clock is also a source of substrate noise given its location within the signal path and given how many bad clocks are in the typical signal path, my guess is that their collective impact is not insubstantial. Whether replacing a certain clock (like a LAN clock) will make a difference, I think it depends on where in the chain it will be placed and whether it will be followed by a bad clock. If placed before a stock NUC or Mac Mini, it probably would have minimal impact. If placed within the "direct connection" path and followed by something like the sMS-200 Ultra, based on my observations thus far, I would expect it to have a tremendous impact.

 

 

 

$50 per regulator and $20 per capacitor.

 

Thank you Romaz for your reply and I'm with you. I left that thread because some of the discussions were too high level and some are too difficult for me.

I believe that everything in the path matters and we're trying to find the bottlenecks and remove them (then the 2nd order becomes 1st order bottleneck) until diminishing return is encountered.

 

Given that the NIC is connected to the net-player (mR, sms200,...) directly, this would be my 1st order bottleneck ☺. I guess an Audio grade NIC will come out soon given your great discovery of the direct connection and I truly look forward to it.

 

How did you ask Sotm to change the regulator and the regulator? Is it an open service?

Link to comment

At this point, I don't know how much energy I have to want to compare SQ among different RAM with various timings and different brands of SLC CF cards (Apacer, Delkin, Silicon Tech) and so I have decided to move ahead with the recommendations of others, specifically Phil Hobi of AO and Marcin of JPLAY:

 

https://www.highend-audiopc.com/PDF/reference-system.pdf

 

SSD Sound differences - eSATA SSD vs. PCI-E SSD vs. mSATA SSD - Computer Audio - JPLAY - hi-end audio player for Windows

 

Hi Romaz,

 

I've read the JPlay thread and it states that the Pang's modified CF SATA card is no longer available. What CF SATA card will you use to connect your CF card to the mono?

Link to comment
I'll refer you back to my post #972:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f10-music-servers/novel-way-massively-improve-sq-sms-200-and-microrendu-31110/index39.html#post643108

The only difference between Paul's adapter and the one I am buying is his adapter utilizes either his TCXO or OCXO. I plan to use one of the clocks on the sCLK-EX board. It remains unclear to me how putting a clock here makes a difference when I am already planning on replacing the motherboard's system clock but Paul insists there is a worthwhile difference and so all the drives that he sells come with his clocks.

I see, you will buy a CF SATA converter and then do a mod. Loo forward to your findings.

Link to comment

As a rule, with Process Lasso, you let it handle CPU power management on the fly rather than set a fixed power management scheme and I have found it works quite effectively with regards to being efficient and responsive when it needs to be but also being able to shut down cores when not in use but perhaps, there is a better way.

 

So you just use the default mode of Lasso without any tweaking? Is the improvements in the SQ obvious? Given so many optimizers like AO, Fidelizer, Lasso and JPlay, I've bought AO and find the improvements obvious and am wondering if I should try other optimizers as well.

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...