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

[jeti]

4 hours ago, austinpop said:

Minor system updates

 

SR-7 Molex cables: In my last update, I mentioned how I determined that my precious DR SR-7 rails gave the best SQ powering my switch and tX-USBultra rather than the server. Those findings were using Paul's "standard" DC6FSXL DC cables with pigtails from Ghent to adapt 5.5x2.5 barrel connectors to 6-pin and 8-pin Molex. I had explored suitable cables for servers with Paul Hynes some months ago, and I recently received a set he made me. Here are a couple of pictures:

 

        

 

These are essentially a bundle of 3 (for 6-pin) or 4 (for 8-pin) of his standard DC3FS cables - Paul designates them as DC3-3FS and DC3-4FS - with Jaeger on one end and Molex on the other. These things look and feel as beautiful as they are substantial. Using these in place of the standard cables + adapters, the SQ of the server has risen substantially. I also have a Ghent JSSG360 OCC Jaeger-to-8pin EPS Molex cable on hand, and the Paul Hynes cable is notably better. Just more refined, with better transparency and bass slam.

 

With this rise in SQ with these cables, my findings have reversed. I have gone back to powering the server with DR SR-7 rails and reverted to SR SR7 rails for my switch and tX-USBultra. I hope to try the DXP-1A5S boxes that @romaz and @seeteeyou have mentioned with these SR rails to see how much closer I can get to DR-level SQ. I am waiting for @[email protected] to get back to me after his holiday travels.

 

These cables are expensive, but man the SQ is impressive.

 

USB cables: Speaking of expensive cables - I've been using - and quite happy with - a pair Lush^2 cables from server -> tX-USBultra -> M-Scaler for some time now. Having read the glowing reports on the Intona cables, I got a chance to evaluate both the Reference ($729/1m) and Ultimate ($2279/1m). Intona's claims regarding what distinguishes their USB cables is here: https://intona.eu/en/stories/cable.

 

I tried these in both the upstream leg (server -> tX-USBultra) and the downstream leg (tX-USBultra -> M-Scaler).

 

The hype is real. These are outstanding cables. With USB cables, as they get better, I find the biggest attribute to improve is dimensionality - i.e. the extent to which instruments appear more "fleshed-out" and real, actually occupying 3-dimensions. The Reference is a big step up from the Lush^2. It is dead neutral, while sounding more open, spacious, and transparent.

 

I was really hoping the difference between the Reference and the Ultimate would be modest, but no such luck. As good as the Reference is, the Ultimate just takes it to another level. It's the same attributes as the Reference, just more - a lot more open, spacious, and transparent, and dimensional. If price is not a concern, the Ultimate is a no-brainer, and I can see why Roy was so impressed with it. For those like me who struggle to justify the lofty expense, the Reference is a great option, and this is likely the one I'll keep.

 

Finally - as regards which position benefited the most - in my system in its current state, the Intona cables improved SQ the most in the downstream position - tX_USBultra -> M-Scaler. This is what usually seems logical, but I (and many others here) have observed situations where upgrading the upstream leg led to a bigger gain. Not this time.

 

 

Did you try using Itona cables from Server to M-scaler directly? Would like to know how it scales against with tX-USBultra sitting in between .