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

[ElviaCaprice]

Sometimes a photo can give a much better perspective.  Again, some hookups, power wise are temporary, uggh.  Seems everything is temporary these days, lol.

 

 

1st photo to give you a shot of the free standing sCLK EX board, 4LPS-1's.  Second photo, I try to give you a perspective of the PCIe adapter running out of the NUC mini pcie, it's green board is upside down with the tXUSBexp pcie card attached.  Had to do this to make the connection work with the 90 degree USPCB into the 2Qute.  Also gives it better stability.   The red PPA SATA chord I just happened to have laying around, is running from the 2.5" HDD, encased, to the NUC.

[austinpop]

16 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

I'm using this model JBC311U93, Celeron quad core @ 7.5W.  But really any model that fits your needs will do.  This one just happened to come up on ebay for a deal.  Really I was planning on using a Pico-ITX, but the barebones model I received was depopulated of the SATA II connection.  Also I found the Pico-ITX a bit lacking for hi res video playback.    Go here to see all the model NUC's by Jetway.  Whichever one fits your needs will work.  Yes, sorry for the notation, "mod 3 sCLK-EX is for 3 clocks used.   This NUC I use is 9 to 24 DC jack input.

 

I am not very clear on how the sCLK mod process works on computer builds. Please indulge some silly questions.

1. Do you know what frequencies the sCLK is replacing in your NUC? I think you listed these earlier, did you?
2. Your data (music) is on an LPS-1 powered SATA-II drive? Is the SATA interface on the NUC sCLK-modded too?
3. Do you run Windows 10 off of a separate drive? Also sCLK-ed?
4. Is there room in the NUC enclosure to mount the necessary sCLK-EX board? If not, are there enclosures where that's possible?

I would love someone to define a BoM for a Roon Server build that could be modified to extend the sCLK goodness upstream of the trifecta. IOW, not to replace the trifecta, but to extend it. Specifically, I'd want:

• sCLK-ed Ethernet on both bridged interfaces
• sCLK-ed system clocks
• sCLK-ed path to data (and OS) - SATA?
• under 50W, so can be powered by sPS-500
• under 25W (12V or less) would make it even better, since could use SR4 or VR Mini

If I could do this with one sCLK tap left over, I could use it to sCLK my modem/router like Roy. That would give me end-to-end sCLK'ing.

 

Hmm.

[austinpop]

3 hours ago, rickca said:

What is your assessment of the trifecta+Codex vs standalone QX-5 (ethernet or USB)?  

 

Charles Hansen can tell a compelling story about all the impressive engineering in the QX-5, but if trifecta+Codex sounds better ... you get the picture.

 

Yup, that comparo on me list, matey.

[ElviaCaprice]

34 minutes ago, austinpop said:

 

I am not very clear on how the sCLK mod process works on computer builds. Please indulge some silly questions.

1. Do you know what frequencies the sCLK is replacing in your NUC? I think you listed these earlier, did you?
2. Your data (music) is on an LPS-1 powered SATA-II drive? Is the SATA interface on the NUC sCLK-modded too?
3. Do you run Windows 10 off of a separate drive? Also sCLK-ed?
4. Is there room in the NUC enclosure to mount the necessary sCLK-EX board? If not, are there enclosures where that's possible?

I would love someone to define a BoM for a Roon Server build that could be modified to extend the sCLK goodness upstream of the trifecta. IOW, not to replace the trifecta, but to extend it. Specifically, I'd want:

• sCLK-ed Ethernet on both bridged interfaces
• sCLK-ed system clocks
• sCLK-ed path to data (and OS) - SATA?
• under 50W, so can be powered by sPS-500
• under 25W (12V or less) would make it even better, since could use SR4 or VR Mini

If I could do this with one sCLK tap left over, I could use it to sCLK my modem/router like Roy. That would give me end-to-end sCLK'ing.

 

Hmm.

1.  Yes, I did previously on an older posting.  The main thing here, if your going to do this, is to allow SOtM the liberty to change out the clocks as they see fit.  On the mobo board I can see that they have used several connections to expand the number of clocks modded.

2.  My data (music) and OS are on the same 2.5" 5V HDD, partitioned.  I could use the msata SSD and I still may, after testing, just don't have the luxury of separating the power from the NUC to a LPS-1, like I can with the HDD.  The HDD is a normal SATA III capable drive.  The Jetway NUC mobo I have is rated for SATA II.  The HDD is backward compatible.  I'm not sure if SOtM changed out the clock on the SATA mobo, or if they could?  I pretty much gave them liberty to do as they saw fit with some restrictions of what I was going to use and not use.

3.  No, I do not do as Roy is doing with the tX hub for connecting a drive.   If I had an extra tX hub laying around I would have  done the same.  I don't think this is critical for results.  I use JRiver, which loads to memory and plays back from there. 

4.  No, as you can see from the photos, there is no room for anything extra in the NUC enclosure.  Once I get the SOtM master clock and Paul Hynes in place, then I will probably enclose the SCLK-EX into an enclosure like I did for the 2.5" HDD.  Would be easy to do.

 

You would be breaking new ground with a Roon Server build via sCLK-EX.

[seeteeyou]

If a clock mod were done by SOtM, obviously they'll figure out the frequencies for their customers.

 

Otherwise, most likely some numbers could be found on the surface of a crystal but it's gotta be checked in person because pictures aren't clear enough

 

Stuff like USB 2.0 and Ethernet should be pretty much a standard with 24 MHz and 25 MHz respectively

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_oscillator_frequencies

 

For those of us who aren't ready to pay for / wait for SR4 or SR7, recently there's something great that just came out and it's good for up to 1A

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/LT3045-A-Ultralow-noise-0-8-Vrms-LDO-linear-regulator-0V-15V-1A-Fixed-out-/253165364635

 

Do a search on LT3045 and Dubai since there were so many happy campers, @tapatrick and others already shared their overwhelmingly positive experiences earlier

 

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/30634-the-true-experimental-tweak-thread/?page=97&tab=comments#comment-720390

 

That could even further improve the output of LPS-1 as mentioned below

 

http://www.usaudiomart.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=6915#p6915

 

It's actually a regulator but we could also start with a decent linear PSU (e.g. TeraDak DC-30W) first. Then we could piggyback 2 pieces of LT3045 and get a super clean DC output.

 

Jetway did post the power consumption of each and every motherboard / barebone on their site, just pick anything with DC power inputs and take a quick look. The combined power consumption of a motherboard plus a HDD / SSD are most likely less than 1A and it's only exceeding that number while running the most demanding benchmark software.

 

Let's say we're powering an Intel X25-E with two pieces of LT3045 first, and then two more pieces for the motherboard. All of them could be fed by a single linear PSU with Y cables, we'll still be able to get away with only 1A and the motherboard won't draw more power than LT3045 could handle.

[Johnseye]

38 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

1.  Yes, I did previously on an older posting.  The main thing here, if your going to do this, is to allow SOtM the liberty to change out the clocks as they see fit.  On the mobo board I can see that they have used several connections to expand the number of clocks modded.

2.  My data (music) and OS are on the same 2.5" 5V HDD, partitioned.  I could use the msata SSD and I still may, after testing, just don't have the luxury of separating the power from the NUC to a LPS-1, like I can with the HDD.  The HDD is a normal SATA III capable drive.  The Jetway NUC mobo I have is rated for SATA II.  The HDD is backward compatible.  I'm not sure if SOtM changed out the clock on the SATA mobo, or if they could?  I pretty much gave them liberty to do as they saw fit with some restrictions of what I was going to use and not use.

3.  No, I do not do as Roy is doing with the tX hub for connecting a drive.   If I had an extra tX hub laying around I would have  done the same.  I don't think this is critical for results.  I use JRiver, which loads to memory and plays back from there. 

4.  No, as you can see from the photos, there is no room for anything extra in the NUC enclosure.  Once I get the SOtM master clock and Paul Hynes in place, then I will probably enclose the SCLK-EX into an enclosure like I did for the 2.5" HDD.  Would be easy to do.

 

You would be breaking new ground with a Roon Server build via sCLK-EX.

 

Would you hypothesize there's no need for a tx-USBultra with the modded tXUSBexp making that an ultra?  Unless you have directly compared it with a tx-USBultra in line.

[ElviaCaprice]

12 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

 

Would you hypothesize there's no need for a tx-USBultra with the modded tXUSBexp making that an ultra?  Unless you have directly compared it with a tx-USBultra in line.

Correct.  Roy sums it up in his recent posts.   In fact, he goes as far as to clarify that SOtM consider the tXUSBexp pcie card one of their top of the line components. 

That being said, if one had a tx-USBultra, you could use it in addition to the server mods and or tXUSBexp pcie card.  It would house the sCLK-EX, use the remaining 3 clocks for the mobo and or pcie card.

 

But for means of simplification, if using the tXUSBexp and all sCLK EX clocks are being used by it and the mobo, there would be no need for the tX-USBultra.

I have never used a tX-USBultra.  Just going off Roy's findings here.

[rickca]

47 minutes ago, austinpop said:

I would love someone to define a BoM for a Roon Server build that could be modified to extend the sCLK goodness upstream of the trifecta.

I've found the motherboard NIC doesn't sound that great, even when it's Intel.  

 

I recently experimented with a galvanically isolated USB3 ethernet NIC, and it sounds much better.  I did it with an iFi iGalvanic, but you could also use an Adnaco S3B.  The same devices can be used for GI of a SATA drive in a USB3 enclosure.  It's easy to use a high quality LPS with such external devices.  This approach may also reduce the motherboard power consumption, because you can disable the motherboard NIC and SATA in the BIOS.

 

Just another potential refinement.  I wonder whether isolation or clocking is more important for things like ethernet and disk.

 

 

[Johnseye]

11 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Correct.  Roy sums it up in his recent posts.   In fact, he goes as far as to clarify that SOtM consider the tXUSBexp pcie card one of their top of the line components. 

That being said, if one had a tx-USBultra, you could use it in addition to the server mods and or tXUSBexp pcie card.  It would house the sCLK-EX, use the remaining 3 clocks for the mobo and or pcie card.

 

But for means of simplification, if using the tXUSBexp and all sCLK EX clocks are being used by it and the mobo, there would be no need for the tX-USBultra.

I have never used a tX-USBultra.  Just going off Roy's findings here.

 

That's what I thought.  I don't own a tx-USBultra but since that costs $900 while an sCLK EX is $850 then using it for the two mobo clocks and the tx-USBexp would be a good solution.  The only problem with that is I'd like to get my switch modded and that's one more clock than the tx-USBultra can offer.  The ability to have the tx-USBultra as a stand alone for future use is appealing.

[ElviaCaprice]

7 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

 

That's what I thought.  I don't own a tx-USBultra but since that costs $900 while an sCLK EX is $850 then using it for the two mobo clocks and the tx-USBexp would be a good solution.  The only problem with that is I'd like to get my switch modded and that's one more clock than the tx-USBultra can offer.  The ability to have the tx-USBultra as a stand alone for future use is appealing.

SOtM says they can run more than one clock off of one clock sCLK-EX ouput, as long as the clocks specs match.  I don't see why you couldn't run the tX USBUltra and tXUSBexp off the same output?  Ask SOtM for clarification. 

I would have maybe done the same, used the tXUSBUltra, but I don't like it's input/output design.  Would require a USB cable, uggghh, too tight.

[Johnseye]

2 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

SOtM says they can run more than one clock off of one clock sCLK-EX ouput, as long as the clocks specs match.  I don't see why you couldn't run the tX USBUltra and tXUSBexp off the same output?  Ask SOtM for clarification.

 

Thanks, I'm asking exactly that from May.  Hopefully that's the case.

[rickca]

4 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

 

Thanks, I'm asking exactly that from May.  Hopefully that's the case.

Isn't that going to require a rather long clock cable to run tX-USBultra and tX-USBexp from the same sCLK-EX?

[Johnseye]

Just now, rickca said:

Isn't that going to require a rather long clock cable to run tX-USBultra and tX-USBexp from the same sCLK-EX?

 

The height of my Streacom server case is about as tall as the tx-USBultra.  They could be a couple inches apart without an issue, but I guess it all depends on how the tx-USBultra and sCLK-EX get tapped.

[ElviaCaprice]

5 minutes ago, rickca said:

Isn't that going to require a rather long clock cable to run tX-USBultra and tX-USBexp from the same sCLK-EX?

Nope, not an issue.  Cables used by SOtM are plenty long.  See Roy's caveats about this.

[rickca]

12 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Nope, not an issue.  Cables used by SOtM are plenty long.  See Roy's caveats about this.

Sure you can get long enough cables, but sound quality degrades with cable length according to Roy.

[ElviaCaprice]

4 minutes ago, rickca said:

Sure you can get long enough cables, but sound quality degrades with cable length according to Roy.

Yup, choose you poison.  Fact is that you may want to eventually replace all the cables with others outside of SOtM stock ones.   I would worry about that problem when there is more evidence about what that would encompass.  Meanwhile the cables by SOtM work great and sound great.  Ignorance is bliss.

[mozes]

2 hours ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Sometimes a photo can give a much better perspective.  Again, some hookups, power wise are temporary, uggh.  Seems everything is temporary these days, lol.

 

 

1st photo to give you a shot of the free standing sCLK EX board, 4LPS-1's.  Second photo, I try to give you a perspective of the PCIe adapter running out of the NUC mini pcie, it's green board is upside down with the tXUSBexp pcie card attached.  Had to do this to make the connection work with the 90 degree USPCB into the 2Qute.  Also gives it better stability.   The red PPA SATA chord I just happened to have laying around, is running from the 2.5" HDD, encased, to the NUC.

And I thought my setup is messy

[rickca]

Does SOtM have a good solution for putting the sCLK-EX somewhere in a mid-tower case?  Where do they put it in their servers?  I see the tX-USBexp in an x1 card, and I have two x1 slots available.  @romaz said he would have gotten 2 x tX-USBexp rather than 1 x tX-USBexp and 1 x tX-USBhubIN if he had enough PCIe slots.

 

Then there's the question of how you connect the sCLK-EX master clock connector to the sCLK-OCX10 when your sCLK-EX is sitting inside your case.

 

It's still spaghetti, but it's spaghetti in a box.

[mozes]

2 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

I am not very clear on how the sCLK mod process works on computer builds. Please indulge some silly questions.

1. Do you know what frequencies the sCLK is replacing in your NUC? I think you listed these earlier, did you?
2. Your data (music) is on an LPS-1 powered SATA-II drive? Is the SATA interface on the NUC sCLK-modded too?
3. Do you run Windows 10 off of a separate drive? Also sCLK-ed?
4. Is there room in the NUC enclosure to mount the necessary sCLK-EX board? If not, are there enclosures where that's possible?

I would love someone to define a BoM for a Roon Server build that could be modified to extend the sCLK goodness upstream of the trifecta. IOW, not to replace the trifecta, but to extend it. Specifically, I'd want:

• sCLK-ed Ethernet on both bridged interfaces
• sCLK-ed system clocks
• sCLK-ed path to data (and OS) - SATA?
• under 50W, so can be powered by sPS-500
• under 25W (12V or less) would make it even better, since could use SR4 or VR Mini

If I could do this with one sCLK tap left over, I could use it to sCLK my modem/router like Roy. That would give me end-to-end sCLK'ing.

 

Hmm.

If there is one product that deserves an award this year, it is the sCLK-EX board! 

 

[mozes]

2 hours ago, ElviaCaprice said:

use JRiver, which loads to memory and plays back from there. 

I also use Jriver, do you set this in the buffer settings? For now I have it set on  "minimal hardware"  

[mozes]

1 hour ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Correct.  Roy sums it up in his recent posts.   In fact, he goes as far as to clarify that SOtM consider the tXUSBexp pcie card one of their top of the line components. 

That being said, if one had a tx-USBultra, you could use it in addition to the server mods and or tXUSBexp pcie card.  It would house the sCLK-EX, use the remaining 3 clocks for the mobo and or pcie card.

 

But for means of simplification, if using the tXUSBexp and all sCLK EX clocks are being used by it and the mobo, there would be no need for the tX-USBultra.

I have never used a tX-USBultra.  Just going off Roy's findings here.

I have 2 tX-USBultras and one of them controls my switch. This leaves me with 5 spare sCLK EX output taps that I can use.  I need to think of how to leverage them without some crazy spaghetti  

[ElviaCaprice]

7 minutes ago, mozes said:

I also use Jriver, do you set this in the buffer settings? For now I have it set on  "minimal hardware"  

Buffer settings is different.  More of a timing issue.

In settings, JRiver gives you an option to load to memory.  I choose decoded (ex. flac to WAV).   JRiver 23 will now load a whole album to memory if you have adequate memory.  I would also update to the 64 bit version.  Faster.

[rickca]

3 minutes ago, mozes said:

I have 2 tX-USBultras and one of them controls my switch. This leaves me with 5 spare sCLK EX output taps that I can use.  I need to think of how to leverage them without some crazy spaghetti  

It's too bad SOtM doesn't have a product that you can turn into a tX-USBultra by using a clock point from an sCLK-EX card.

[ElviaCaprice]

2 minutes ago, rickca said:

It's too bad SOtM doesn't have a product that you can turn into a tX-USBultra by using a clock point from an sCLK-EX card.

They do, 2 to be exact.  The tX hub is basically just that.  The tX-USBultra is a tXhub with an sCLK-EX card.   Then you have the superior filtered tXUSBexp PCIe card.

[rickca]

3 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

They do, 2 to be exact.  The tX hub is basically just that.  The tX-USBultra is a tXhub with an sCLK-EX card.   Then you have the superior filtered tXUSBexp PCIe card.

So instead of getting 2 x tX-USBultra, @mozes could have gotten 1 x tX-USBultra and 1 x tX-USBhubEX and used an sCLK-EX clock point from the tX-USBultra to turn the tX-USBhubEX into a 2nd tX-USBultra?