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

[Geir-T]

23 minutes ago, Superdad said:

 

Terje:

You ought to disclose in your signature that you are a member of the trade. That is a rule on this web site.

 

And the fact that you are also a reseller of SOtM products brings questions of bias.  http://www.andervikaudio.no/andre-produkter/

 

By the way, plenty of other comparisons between the SOtM sPS-500 and the UpTone UltraCap LPS-1.2 have been made and published--here in this thread and elsewhere--with quite the opposite results.  So we invite readers to try for themselves.

 

Regards,

--Alex C.

I can confirm the listening impressions as reported by andervt on the NUCPJYH/Akasa fanless vs. SOTM-SMS-200 Ultra Neo  > tx-USBultra and LPS 1.2 vs. SPS-500. I am the one initiating this comparison since I am the owner of the NUC and the LPS 1.2 used in the test. 

 

I have been a long time lurker on this thread and have used the listening impressions reported here to decide what changes to apply in my own system. This has led to several changes over the past couple of years and the latest one change was to replace my Microrendu with a NUCPJYH built into an Akasa fanless case. This led to a clear improvement in my system and I decided to find out how this compared to the SOtM-SMS-200 Ultra Neo  & tx-USBultra. Based on the findings reported here, I expected the NUC alternative to be better, but to my surprise I found the opposite to be the case.

 

The following equipment were used in the test:

Paul Pang server full of the OCXO stuff running Roon Core

SOtM sNH-10G w/sCLK-EX

SOtM-SMS-200 Ultra Neo  & tx-USBultra powered by SPS500's

Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC 

Mola Mola Kaluga monoblocks

Respons Magna Musicum loudpeakers

Paul Pang cat 6 cables

Spiral Groove Strange Attractors under ALL boxes

More Furutech equipment than I can ever afford

Dedicated listening room with practically no remaining surface left acoustically untreated. 

 

A couple of the albums used for testing: Doug MacLeoud There's a Time (24 bit/Reference Recordings), Marta Gomez Entre Cada Palabra (24 bit). 

 

The SOtM-SMS-200 Ultra Neo  & tx-USBultra powered by SPS500's w/ SOtM silver DC cable were first swapped out for the NUC/Akasa/LPS 1.2/Ghent Neotech (JSSG360) cable (LPS 1.2 powered by SPS500)

 

It became evident that the NUC alternative lacks some definition in the bass region compared to the SOtM kit. Localization of instruments is also less precise in the NUC and the soundstage is smaller especially in width. Resolution in the highs is reduced with resulting less air and transparency. The difference was not subltle in this system.

 

Based on this result I wanted to find out how much of the difference came from the power supply of the NUC, so we swapped out the LPS 1.2 with the SPS500. In short the difference between the NUC and the SOtM rig was cut in half. The SPS500 improved all qualities of the sound. (Please note that power cables and DC cables used for the SPS500 are 2-3 X cost of the SPS500 itself, so result is not with stock cables)

 

A third finding of the test was that the NUC benefited from Spiral Groove Strange Attractors under its belly. It resulted in a slightly blacker background and also a slight improvement in resolution.

 

Since the first two findings are not in accordance with the impression I get when reading through this thread, I think it is of importance to report it.  

 

I plan to test the SPS500 replacing the LPS 1.2 in my own (more modest) system in the near future to see if I end up at the same conclusion or not. I am also curious about how the SR4 compares, but I guess I need to buy one to be able to find out. There are no Paul Hynes shops around here.

 

 

 

[Geir-T]

35 minutes ago, jean-michel6 said:

 

 I have 2 SOTM SPS500 and 2 lps 1.2 in my system .The sps500 is a nice lps in term of flexibility voltage and amp. 

However in term of sq the lps 1.2 is clearly superior. 

Did you use any filtering on the SPS500 reducing the amount of noise this SMPS supply to the mains possibly "polluting" other (unfiltered?) components in your system? 

[Geir-T]

33 minutes ago, the_doc735 said:

wonder if this verdict was the result of a backhand deal? (£xxxx)

I can confirm no. By the way, testing was done using the latest Eanhasu software (v. 0.4.5.1).

[Geir-T]

8 hours ago, rickca said:

As I suggested earlier, you need to compare NUC7PJYH + tX-USBultra to sMS-200ultra Neo + tX-USBultra ... or just NUC7PJYH vs sMS-200ultra.

 

The Paul Hynes SR4 is wonderful with the NUC7PJYH.  I don't have an sPS-500 so I can't tell you how they compare.  The only way to buy an SR4 is to order directly from Paul Hynes ([email protected]).

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Paul Hynes SR4 is absolutely on my radar, and I will decide on whether to buy one to check it out after I have tested how the SPS500 compares against the LPS 1.2 in my own system.  

 

My expectations to how the NUC7PJYH would compare to 200 Ultra Neo +tX-USBultra was influenced from info in this thread. After all users of the full «spaghetti solution» including external master clock have changed to the NUC alternative. 

 

Based on my experience so far comparing these products, I can understand the change to NUC from a cost perspective. After all the NUC alternative is unbeatable in value for money and easily betters my MicroRendu. 

 

 

[Geir-T]

24 minutes ago, the_doc735 said:

is your M.R. 1.3 or 1.4?

I have the 1.3 version with the upgrade to latest version of Sonicorbiter