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

[lmitche]

1 hour ago, romaz said:

Several have asked about the specifics of my current build.  It has been in continual flux until recently but finally, I have reached my final build.  I don't claim it to be the best there is but it is the best that I know how to put together and the best that I have thus far heard.  To be honest, this is not what I envisioned it would look like when I first started this thread back in January but for those who have followed along, as you know, there were exciting and unexpected revelations that came to light and so this digital front end has become a much more ambitious build than I initially expected it to be.  At so many points, it was sounding so good that I felt like finalizing my build but it was hard to stop when each successive gain seemed so significant.  Along the way, many of you made constructive suggestions, some that I had never considered, and for that, I am grateful.  They didn't always work out but the lessons learned and the perspective gained have proven to be invaluable.  To that extent, I consider this build to have been a community effort and so I am happy to share what I have learned.

 

Server chassis - Streacom FC9 Alpha ($285)

 

I have used Streacom cases on numerous occasions in the past as I have found them to be attractive, well-constructed and minimally resonant.  I chose the version that can hold a CD-ROM drive but eventually decided that I wanted nothing that would vibrate within the chassis as I felt this might adversely impact the sCLK-EX board and so I opted for an external CD-ROM drive to rip my CDs instead.  This also provided me much needed space inside.  If I could do it over, I would have gone with the cleaner look of the FC9 Alpha without the CD slot as pictured below (although I went with black instead of silver):

 

 

Streacom makes smaller cases but I went with this larger case for flexibility.  As you can see in the photo, when used with a mini-ITX motherboard, I was able to install my sCLK-EX board adjacent to the motherboard which allowed me to use very short 15cm clock cables.  Also installed adjacent to the motherboard is my Intel X25-E SATA II OS drive.

 

 

For those who want to go for the ultimate, Stillpoints makes standoffs that supposedly incorporate the same level of isolation as their Ultra Minis that could have been used to isolate my motherboard, SSD, and sCLK-EX board from the chassis.  At $45 per standoff and since 12 standoffs were necessary, that would have cost me $540 for standoffs alone and so I passed.  Instead, I bought a trio of Stillpoints Ultra Minis ($375 although I found a used set of 3 for $250) to use under the chassis and I have confirmed that these absolutely make a difference with respect to detail clarity (a larger difference than the inexpensive Black Raviolis I was previously using) although the overall improvement is small.  

 

 

SOtM eABS-200 paper ($120 for 1 sheet)

 

I have used this type of EMI-absorbing paper in the past with several builds, specifically the Stillpoints ERS sheets but I have found the SOtM eABS-200 to be considerably more impactful with regards to a calmer and blacker presentation.  If you are finding your server to sound fatiguing and bright, you might find this paper to be very helpful.  Unlike other products, this paper supposedly absorbs a broad range of EMI and converts it to heat, thereby actually removing EMI instead of just scattering it.  This product is so powerful that Lee advised caution as he indicated it was was possible to use too much resulting in an overdamped sound.  I applied it to most of my chassis, to my RAM, and to my SSD and I have heard only good things.  I even applied it to the inside of my tX-USBultra chassis and its collective impact is very easy to hear.  I have found it well worth the $120.

 

 

DFI BW171 motherboard ($331 which includes an embedded Celeron CPU)

 

Finding a suitable motherboard was extremely difficult and it became s a matter of finding the motherboard with the least compromises.  DFI was willing to design a motherboard for me to my specifications, however, it would have cost $1,500 minimum to get the project off the ground.  I discussed the prospect of doing this with Lee of SOtM while in Munich and while he expressed interest, he told me he believed he had already figured out how to filter out most of the noise from a noisy motherboard with his tX-USBexp card.   While I suspect there would have been something to be gained by designing my own motherboard devoid of unnecessary noisy components and noisy switching regulators, the time, effort and expense didn't appeal to me and so I ended up going with Lee's tX-USBexp card instead.

 

Having built many servers over the years, none of the servers I had built could match the wonderful SQ I got from the $9k CAD CAT that I purchased in 2015.  I opened this machine up and studied it carefully and realized that this was essentially a minimalist PC with detuned components (ie both the quad-core i7 and RAM were both detuned to run at 800MHz).  At that time, for an i7-based PC with 4GB of RAM and 3TB of SSD storage to draw less than 20 watts was not a common thing to see.  When I first got this machine, I went online to download some drivers and noticed that this thing ran as slow as molasses but boy, did this machine sound good.  Heavily shielded SATA cables were used (made by Paul Pang) along with point-to-point DC cabling, EMI paper throughout, and finally a custom-specified PCIe-based USB card with a special clock.  The whole thing was powered by a quad-rail custom HDPlex LPSU.  I found this setup to be superior to a TotalDac d1-Server and to an Aurender N10 that I had on hand and so I bought the CAD CAT but I also knew this server could be improved upon (especially with regards to its power supply).

 

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/review-comparison-of-5-high-end-digital-music-servers-aurender-n10-cad-cat-server-totaldac-d1-server-auralic-aries-audiophile-vortex-box.787020/

 

As far as choosing an actual motherboard for this build,  based on my experience with my CAD CAT and as I had no intention of oversampling, I knew I wanted a low power setup.  I was further convinced when I directly compared the SQ from a very powerful HP workstation (with dual Xeon CPUs, 64GB of RAM, and PCIe-based SSDs) against a powerful Mac Pro (with a 12-core Xeon, 64GB of RAM and 1TB of PCIe-SSD storage) and found that the SQ I got from a much less powerful stock Mac Mini with the OS running off of a low power SD card to be easily superior.  With the Mac Mini modified to accept 12V power from a Paul Hynes SR7, it was no contest.  The SR7 was such a difference maker that I chose to only look at options that allowed me to use my SR7.

 

Having tried various motherboards from Gigabyte, AsRock, SuperMicro and Dell, I ended up with the DFI BW171 for the following reasons:

 

1.  SoC (System on a Chip) architecture that did away with the slower (higher latency) processor controller hub (PCH).

2.  Mini-ITX form factor resulting in shorter data paths

3.  Simple Celeron CPU with only 6w TDP

4.  Could be powered from a 12V rail from my SR7

 

If there is a downside to these types of motherboards, they generally only contain 1 PCIe slot (usually a PCIe x4 or slower).  If they contain an M.2 slot, they run off the slower SATA bus and not the faster (lower latency) NVMe bus.

 

There are other motherboards that could have fit the bill but I went with this company because they had presented me the option of designing a new motherboard from scratch for me if I found this motherboard to be unacceptable.  Thus far, I have been very pleased.  As an industrial motherboard, it has not only proven to be very reliable running 24/7 but even prior to modification, I found it to sound at least as good as my Mac Mini with SD card even though my OS was running off a noisier SSD.  With this motherboard running Windows Server 2016 + Audiophile Optimizer (something that a Mac Mini with SD card cannot run), this machine was sounding even better.

 

Intel X25-E Sata II SSD ($80) + SOtM SATA II filter ($65) + Pachanko Reference SATA cable (about $250) for OS storage

 

Those of you who have followed this thread from early on know that in my testing, I had found the impact of the OS drive to be greater than a separate data storage drive with respect to SQ and this is probably due to the fact that OS drives are in perpetual use, especially with Windows, while a separate data storage drive is only in use up until the digital file has been buffered into memory, at which time it becomes idle.

 

Those of you who have followed this thread from the beginning also know that while I was initially quite happy with my Mac Mini with its MacOS running off of an SD card, I was also looking for a way to run WIndows Server 2012R2 + Audiophile Optimizer.  Unfortunately, no recent flavor of Windows Server can boot from either an SD or compact flash card and so I purchased a 2nd Mac Mini but this time, it had a PCIe SSD card installed.  I was successful in installing Windows Server 2012R2 + Audiophile Optimizer and while I was pleased with the improvement over MacOS, I also noticed a fatiguing HF harshness that was not present with my Mac Mini with the SD card and no matter what I did, I couldn't get rid of it.  It was one of those annoyances that you may not initially notice is there but every time I went back to my other Mac Mini with the SD card, I found myself not wanting to switch back as the SSD setup was more irritating and fatiguing.  While SSDs are acoustically silent, it turns out they are electrically very noisy, especially the faster and more powerful SATA III SSDs that are being sold today as they apparently emit noise in the 6GHz range that is very difficult to mitigate even when powered by something like an LPS-1.  There are many who have come up to me and have suggested that they aren't hearing the harshness that I'm hearing with their SSDs but those that have had a chance to compare my 2 Mac Minis have easily picked up how much calmer and less fatiguing my Mac Mini with SD card sounds.

 

Based on this experience, I felt challenged to find a way to install Windows Server onto a compact flash card and I eventually succeeded but ultimately had to give it up since compact flash boot drives are only possible with motherboards that incorporate a BIOS that allows for the older PATA drives and unfortunately, none of the SoC motherboards I wanted to use allow for this legacy option.  I considered the option of using a spinning hard drive for my OS which I had confirmed is electrically quieter than an SSD but I didn't like the idea that I would have a spinning and vibrating drive in the same chassis as SOtM's sensitive clock board.  Over on the JPlay forum but also on Paul Pang's website were reports of how SATA II SSDs sounded better than SATA III SSDs with SLC sounding better than MLC or TLC and so I went ahead and purchased a NOS (new old stock) Intel X25-E 64GB SLC SSD for about $80 from EBay.  This turned out to be a very good purchase as indeed, this lower power, slower SSD drive was sounding less harsh and fatiguing then my Samsung 850 EVO SSD.  The downside of older SATA II SLC SSDs is that they're not available as high capacity drives and so they can function just fine as an OS drive but they don't have enough capacity to store much of a music collection.  Based on the limited capacities of SLC SATA II SSDs, I elected to go with the Intel X25-E for my OS drive and with compact flash cards for the storage of music files.

 

Here is where things get really interesting.  When combined with the Pachanko Reference SATA cable, with my DFI motherboard, I felt I had equaled the SQ I was getting from my Mac Mini with SD card as a boot drive and so I found myself quite content with this solution.  While at Munich, May realized I was using a SATA II drive for my OS (and not a SATA III drive) and so she strongly suggested that I try SOtM's SATA II filter.  I knew they made both a SATA II and a SATA III filter and I asked if the SATA III filter was the improved version.  I was surprised to hear May tell me that their SATA II filter is better but unfortunately, this filter does not work with SATA III drives and so they were forced to design a new SATA III filter.  What the SATA II filter apparently does that the SATA III filter does not is that it filters both the SSD's power and data lines (their SATA III filter only filters the power line).

 

Here is a picture of their SATA II filter:

 

Here is a picture of their SATA III filter:

 

Those that know Lee knows that he is a filter specialist.  In the same way that his filtering methods have transformed products like the tX-USBultra but also SOtM's dCBL-CAT7 and their new USB cable, this SATA filter does the same for SATA II drives and the impact is astonishing with respect to a lower noise floor devoid of any HF harshness but also this more open soundstage.  The impact of this filter is eye opening in terms of just how much noise OS SSD drives create.  This $65 filter is definitely one of the stars of the show and something that I consider a "must have."  I would say its impact is considerably greater than the Pachanko SATA cable or the Intel X25-E SSD.

 

Operating System - Windows Server 2016 Essentials ($124) + Audiophile Optimizer ($129)

 

I believe the full version costs more but I was able to purchase a license for the Essentials version for only $124 from an online vendor. Even the GUI version of WIndows Server 2016 sounds better than the Core version of Windows Server 2012R2 and so for now, I am sticking with this version.  Combined with the latest AO beta and its digital filters and sound signatures, it is the best sounding OS solution I have yet heard for music playback for Roon but also for ripping CDs via dBPowerAmp.  The benefit of Windows above and beyond the Linux OS's I have heard is software compatibility.  With Windows, I know I can (or will be able to) run just about anything now and in the future.  More than that, I am finding Chord's ASIO driver for Windows to be superior to the stock Linux and Mac drivers for my DAVE.  With my sMS-200ultra or microRendu, any time I chose to play DSD128 or DSD256 files, I frequently got skips and pauses.  Not a problem at all with Chord's ASIO driver for Windows as now I am capable of smooth native DSD playback of all my DSD tracks.  Also, Windows Server 2016 has been super stable.  I haven't had to reboot yet due to a lock up or some system instability since I installed it.

 

sCLK-EX board ($850 with 4 clock outputs activated)

 

Along with Chord's new Blu Mk 2, this device probably gets my vote for most revolutionary product of the year.  This clock board has opened up new vistas I never knew were possible just a year ago and upon replacing clock after clock, I am just amazed at how my system has become transformed.  Even without connecting to an external master clock, the impact of replacing 8 clocks in my setup using this board has just been astonishing.  It is this clock board that makes my build different from any other server on the market today (except for SOtM's own sMS-1000SQ server).  When people tell me their server has this or that, knowing that their system probably still contains a bunch of noisy clocks and having now experienced just how big the impact of replacing clocks can be, I know their server can still sound so much better.

 

With the sCLK-EX board in my server chassis, I am using 1 clock for the motherboard's 25Mhz system clock, 1 clock to concurrently replace both of the integrated LAN clocks, 1 clock to replace the stock clock in SOtM's tX-USBexp and tX-USBhubIN.  

 

WIth the sCLK-EX board housed in my tX-USBultra, 1 clock is being used for the tX-USBultra itself, 1 clock is being used for my modified ISO-Regen, and 2 clocks are being used for my Netgear integrated internet modem/router/switch.

 

SOtM tX-USBexp ($350)

 

Considering the importance of this card in my system, I consider it's $350 price a bargain.  As previously stated, according to Lee, this is his best product.  The photo below compares the tX-USBexp to the tX-USBhubIN and you will see that the tX-USBexp is nearly twice as large with many more parts.  

 

 

While this card has been around for awhile, I believe it has gone through improvements with time.  While the newer tX-USBhubIN is still using a USB 2.0 chipset, the tX-USBexp is using what Lee considers to be a better sounding USB 3.0 chipset.  This card also incorporates his best regulator circuit and better filtration.  What is interesting is that SOtM is an OEM supplier for other music server builders and I noticed that both Antipodes and Baetis have chosen to use SOtM's tX-USBhubIN for their servers.  When I asked Lee why they would do this, all he could say is that "they didn't know any better.  I designed both of these cards and I know which one is better."  With SOtM's own sMS-1000SQ, this is the card they use.  What is interesting is both the tX-USBexp and the tX-USBhubIN cost the same.

 

SOtM tX-USBhubIN ($350)

 

Based on what Lee has told me, if I had 2 free PCIe slots, I would have gone with 2 tX-USBexp cards, especially since they cost the same.  At the same time, I am extremely happy this option exists.  Even though my motherboard has only 1 free PCIe slot, my Streacom chassis has 3 available slots in the back.  This card occupies one of those free slots and then connects to my motherboard via its USB 2.0 header.  In the same way that SOtM's SATA II filter significantly improves the SQ of my OS drive, this card does the same for my data storage drives.  Compared against the motherboard's stock USB ports, there is greater immediacy but also a more open soundstage.  Even with the clocks replaced on my router, using the identical track played from my compact flash drive connected to the USB port on the back of my router (you could consider this a NAS) vs the same compact flash card connected to the tX-USBhubIN, playback through the tX-USBhubIN sounds noticeably better. 

 

Here's another benefit of having both the tX-USBexp and the tX-USBhubIN.  When ripping a CD, I can now connect my external USB CD-ROM drive to my tX-USBultra USB port (which is directly connected to my tX-USBexp) and the files rip directly onto my compact flash drive connected to my tX-USBhubIN.  Using dBpowerAmp on Windows Server 2016 + AO, these are the now very best CD rips I have ever made. 

 

Lexar HR-1 Compact Flash Hub (approx $90 + $23 for each additional CF reader)

 

This device can be powered with a 5V iFi PSU (no difference heard compared against an LPS-1).  It has the capacity for 4 readers (CF, SD, microSD, USB, etc) and works very well for its intended use.  Other devices would probably sound just as good when connected to the tX-USBhubIN but I already had this one on hand.  Lexar has discontinued their 512GB Compact Flash cards although I was able to buy several of them from B&H Photo for $199 each during their closeout sale.

 

 

ISO-Regen ($325)

 

I purchased mine used from another CA member.  I didn't find it as resolving as the tX-USBultra (my main complaint with it is that it tends to flatten the sound) but it added a certain smoothness and a weight to my piano tracks that I found very much to my liking.  In this sense, I am using the ISO-Regen as more of a tuning aid but I definitely like what it adds when placed between my tX-USBexp and my tX-USBultra.  Replacing its clock has definitely improved it.

 

 

tX-USBultra with 12V option and 75ohm Master Clock connectors ($1,200)

 

If I didn't need the extra clock taps in the tX-USBultra for my router, I could have easily skipped the tX-USBultra (and ISO Regen) because my single box server paired with the REF10 is already so good, however, adding a reclocked ISO-Regen and tX-USBultra definitely adds further improvement and for those looking to go to infinity and beyond, I believe this gets you there.  Having opened up my tX-USBultra, I can see why Lee couldn't fit the tX-USBexp into the chassis, it's just too big.  Most of this chassis is occupied by the sCLK-EX.

 

 

Netgear C3000 cable modem / router / switch ($90)

 

This particular Netgear device that integrates a cable modem, router and switch into one small chassis was chosen for its low power characteristics.  As I don't use this device for its wi-fi capabilities, not only did I save a fair amount of money not having to buy an expensive NightHawk (for up to $400) but I found this low power device (12V/1.5A) to sound a bit better than a $400 Nighthawk and so I sent it along to SOtM for modification.  One thing that is interesting but not surprising, when I connect my Mac Mini to this device, even with the assistance of an SOtM dCBL-CAT cable and iSO-CAT6 LAN isolator, the improvement heard is there but it's small.  The improvement is much larger when connected to my server that has it's LAN clock replaced.  Undoubtedly, it has improved Tidal streaming and considering how little I paid for it, this was a very worthwhile thing to do.  I am currently powering this router with my sPS-500 and it does a very good job.

 

 

Mutec REF10 + 2 Habst Cables (approx $4k)

 

The REF10 is the icing on the cake and it is what elevates my setup to simply otherworldly status.  Even with the REF10 turned off, this new setup is already the very best I have heard in my system at home sound but with the REF10 turned on, the first thing that becomes immediately apparent is this sense of buttery smoothness that I have never before experienced (especially when combined with Blu Mk 2), even when compared against the best turntables I have heard.  The benefits provided by each component with just the sCLK-EX in place are enhanced to a higher level with the REF10 activated but it is this smoothness (ie complete lack of glare) that is so mesmerizing.  

 

It's quite possible that SOtM's new external master clock will be better, especially since it can be powered by something like an SR7 but if you compare one against the other, I suspect it will be a matter of splitting hairs meaning they both will sound very good.  Where the real benefits become apparent are when you replace multiple clocks and especially when you replace every clock in your chain.  

 

USB cables  (SOtM USB cable with filter block - $1,000, Phasure Lush USB cable - approx $275, Uptone Audio USPCB adapter - $35)

 

Like many of you, I purchased a Lush USB cable from Phasure.  Mine is 0.75m long and I paid 237 Euros.  Unlike many of you, I don't care for this cable as much.  It does some nice things with respect to tone and warmth but it flattens sound.  The perceived loss of spatial resolution when compared against SOtM's new USB cable with filter block is quite stark and even greater than ISO Regen vs tX-USBultra.  With my setup already so very smooth and tonally rich, I'm not sure the small benefits it imparts are worth the very significant downside although I haven't completely made up my mind to sell it.  At the present time, I am using it to connect the ISO Regen to the tX-USBexp but I am thinking my Clarity Cables Natural is sounding better at this position.  I am then using the USPCB cable came with the ISO Regen to connect it to my tX-USBultra.  At this time, I am finding USPCB cable preferable to the Lush.  I am using my very best USB cable, SOtM's latest USB cable with filter block to connect the tX-USBultra to the USB input on my Chord Blu Mk 2.

 

Regarding SOtM's new USB cable with filter block, I believe this cable will be officially showcased for the first time at RMAF in a few days.  It is now the best USB cable I have heard although I suspect there are some who will still prefer the tonality of the Lush.  It uses the same filter block as the dCBL-CAT7, however, I find its impact to be greater and I believe I know why.  With the dCBL-CAT7, I was using it before the sMS-200ultra or before the reclocking switch.  With SOtM's new USB cable, I can use this cable much closer to my DAC where it is imparting a greater effect.  If I swap this cable with the USPCB adapter or worse yet, the Lush (meaning I place it back further in the chain), it's impact is significantly diminished.  Placed right before the Blu Mk2, the soundstage opens up beautifully.  I went with UPOCC silver as a conductor and the improved detail resolution over the Lush is quite evident.  

 

Paul Hynes SR7

 

I would be remiss not to mention the SR7 as I consider it the foundation of my digital system behind only my DAVE and my Blu Mk 2.  If I could get Paul to build all my power supplies, I would be a very happy man as this guy has a magic touch.  Yes, there's a long wait for one and even now, I'm waiting patiently for him to build me another SR7 but I'll happily wait as long as I need to.  

 

Other tweaks - Synergistic Research Tranquility Base XL UEF ($3,250)

 

I found one used for $1,300 and so I took a chance on it.  It was used at an audio show and it had some obvious cosmetic wear but was in perfect operational condition.  At the very least, it would serve as a means of mechanical isolation in my equipment cabinet and perched on top of a trio of Synergistic Research's MIG 2.0 footers, it did a very nice job.  When you turned this device on, however, I found it to be transformational in its impact.  I didn't think it was possible but detail clarity improved further and the improvement was not subtle.  This impact was remarkable enough that I felt compelled to squeeze every electronic component I had onto this 20" x 23" base including the REF10, server, tX-USBultra, Chord DAVE and Blu Mk2.  They just barely fit and while the whole arrangement isn't as aesthetically tasteful as what I had before, I cannot deny what this thing does and the resultant improvement in detail clarity.  This thing supposedly addresses airborne EMI but also EMI in your electric components.  Just when you thought you had sufficiently addressed EMI, this device tells you there's still so much more of it.  I was sure this was voodoo when I first heard about it but having heard a brief demo at an audio show, I felt compelled to give it a shot at home.  At $3,250, I would question its value but at the price I paid, I consider it a must have.

 

 

 

This will likely be my last post of this depth and detail.  I hope to see some of you at RMAF in a few days.

Another epic post! Many thanks Roy, very useful.

 

Larry

[Johnseye]

2 hours ago, romaz said:

For those who want to go for the ultimate, Stillpoints makes standoffs that supposedly incorporate the same level of isolation as their Ultra Minis that could have been used to isolate my motherboard, SSD, and sCLK-EX board from the chassis.  At $45 per standoff and since 12 standoffs were necessary, that would have cost me $540 for standoffs alone and so I passed.  Instead, I bought a trio of Stillpoints Ultra Minis ($375 although I found a used set of 3 for $250) to use under the chassis and I have confirmed that these absolutely make a difference with respect to detail clarity (a larger difference than the inexpensive Black Raviolis I was previously using) although the overall improvement is small.  

 

Have you tried or considered Barry Diament's roller bearing isolation solution?

 

2 hours ago, romaz said:

Combined with the latest AO beta and its digital filters and sound signatures, it is the best sounding OS solution I have yet heard for music playback for Roon but also for ripping CDs via dBPowerAmp.

 

What AO filters and signatures are you using?

 

2 hours ago, romaz said:

 

With the sCLK-EX board in my server chassis, I am using 1 clock for the motherboard's 25Mhz system clock, 1 clock to concurrently replace both of the integrated LAN clocks, 1 clock to replace the stock clock in SOtM's tX-USBexp and tX-USBhubIN.

 

Why did you replace both ethernet clocks on the motherboard?

 

2 hours ago, romaz said:

 

 

Using dBpowerAmp on Windows Server 2016 + AO, these are the now very best CD rips I have ever made. 

 

Do you believe the sound of the extracted data of the CDs are improved by your configuration?

 

Have you incorporated any type of grounding?

 

Thanks for the details of your system.

 

[ElviaCaprice]

Great job Roy,

What a contrast to my economical sCLK-EX direct USB build.

NUC (used $100)

tXUSBexp (used $150)

USPCB ($35)

Chord 2Qute (used $900)

2-old HDD enclosures ($20)

1 PPA SATA chord (used $20)

Omega Super 8XRS Speakers ($2420)

2-DIY canare speaker/interconnect cables ($16)

1KVA Topaz Isolation Transformer (used $200)

1 tripplite 20V power strip, 12 outlets ($30)

2- LPS-1's ($760)

Paul Hynes SR7 MR4 ($1950)

5TB 2.5" HDD - (Ebay $130)

sCLK-EX loaded, installation, shipping, master clock option - ($1185)

sCLK OCX-10 Reference (once released) - ($1500)???

USB mouse and keyboard - ($15)

ASUS monitor I've been using for a few years, all PC's attached.

I do my own optimization on Windows 10, no need for others software, other than JRiver.

 

Shocking!! still comes to ($9431) give or take on final cost of SOtM master clock and some DIY Canare DC chords.    And I thought I was being economically wise in choosing my components carefully for the biggest bang in SQ.  Nice little exercise for others to do from Server/streamer to Speaker or headphones, what ever is your preferred listening means.

[romaz]

8 hours ago, seeteeyou said:

 

 

Many thanks for posting everything in great detail.

 

Lee should have mentioned that fiber optic would add jitter and that's why SOtM would prefer filtering instead of isolation.

 

Is that why you'd rather forgo the option of Adnaco-S1B even if that were giving you extra PCIe slots plus the advantage of distancing tX-USBexp cards from other components?

 

http://www.adnaco.com/products/s1b/

 

Anyways, it's already a challenge to cram everything on top of Tranquility Base XL UEF so that's really no biggie.

 

BTW, you've gotta take a picture when Rob Watts drops his jaw after listening to your latest and greatest rig.

 

Yes, you're correct. Lee does not like optical solutions due to high jitter.  As it was Lee that personally modified the Adnaco I sent him, he got a chance to listen to it and even with its 3 clocks replaced, he told me he thought it was a step back because It was sounding flat. It was at that point that he encouraged me to try his tX-USBexp. 

 

I knew I needed to hear it for myself and so he went ahead and completed the mod of the Adnaco per my request which included the replacing of several capacitors.  Once I received the modified Adnaco back, I felt it had definitely improved and I liked the smoother and more solid image it was portraying.  Around the time I received the modified Adnaco back, I was also able to audition the ISO Regen and I found the ISO Regen to be so good that in its stock form, it was equivalent to the modified Adnaco.  Around this time, I was able to access an SOtM tX-USBexp (non Ultra) and so I compared it to the modified Adnaco. I found Lee to be correct, even the non-ultra tX-USBexp was sounding more impressive to me than the modified Adnaco and when I added the ISO Regen to the tX-USBexp, this combo was easily better than the Adnaco.  Better yet, tX-USBexp + ISO Regen only utilized 2 clocks while the Adnaco solution by itself utilized 3 clocks although this combo costs more than the Adnaco.

 

Having said that, the Adnaco definitely has merit and it does some nice things. For those who have a thin sounding system, you might really like what the Adnaco does and regardless of jitter, optical isolation definitely lowers the noise floor.  For those who wish to keep their server in a different room or even a different building, you can purchase very long optical cables for very little money and still get excellent sound while remaining "straight USB." If you follow the Adnaco with a tX-USBultra, you come reasonably close to what the SOtM trifecta provides.

[Johnseye]

9 hours ago, Johnseye said:

 

Have you tried or considered Barry Diament's roller bearing isolation solution?

 

 

What AO filters and signatures are you using?

 

 

Why did you replace both ethernet clocks on the motherboard?

 

 

Do you believe the sound of the extracted data of the CDs are improved by your configuration?

 

Have you incorporated any type of grounding?

 

Thanks for the details of your system.

 

 

Please ignore this question: Why did you replace both ethernet clocks on the motherboard?  I just realized you stated concurrent.

[romaz]

13 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Have you tried or considered Barry Diament's roller bearing isolation solution?

 

No, I have never heard of those but I do find ball bearing-type solutions from the likes of Stillpoints and Symposium Acoustics to generally be more effective then the rubber or sorbothane-type footers. 

 

13 hours ago, Johnseye said:

What AO filters and signatures are you using?

 

It depends.  For large orchestral music or music with a lot of atmosphere, I am liking 4D.  It provides the most depth.  However, when I want tighter imaging, I'll go down to 3C.  Signatures 1 and 2 sound too mechanical for my setup.

 

13 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Why did you replace both ethernet clocks on the motherboard?

 

Because I could do so while only utilizing 1 clock from my sCLK-EX board.  I don't plan to build 2 servers although I have 2 listening rooms (home office with desktop setup and my main listening room).  What I envision eventually is to bridge both LAN ports and then run CAT6/7 cabling from one of these bridged ports directly to my home office where I will install a SOtM trifecta.  That way, both systems can benefit from this server.  This is where the Adnaco solution could have worked well, however, my server only has 1 PCIe slot.

 

13 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Do you believe the sound of the extracted data of the CDs are improved by your configuration?

 

Yes.  While it makes no sense, it would appear that what's good for streaming is also good for CD ripping.  Whether its due to noise that gets embedded into the stream that makes its way into the rip, I'm not sure.

 

Paul Pang advocates a certain type of DVD-ROM drive for ripping CDs, specifically an ASUS model with a MediaTek chip that utilizes no internal clock of its own (presuming this clock adds noise to the stream). 

 

http://ppastudio.blogspot.com/2016/05/cd-ripping.html

 

I bought a portable USB version of one of these these drives and I will run some tests to see if it makes a difference.  

 

13 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Have you incorporated any type of grounding?

 

Yes.  As recently posted, I have tried grounding my DAVE via an Entreq Poseidon with Atlantis grounding cables via DAVE's XLR output, a Synergistic Research grounding block with HiDef grounding cable and most recently with Sound Galleries latest D2 grounding blocks and they made no difference.  I have 2 of these D2 grounding blocks and have applied them to my music server but also to the spare USB port on my tX-USBultra and they result in improvements in those positions although the bigger difference is on my server.  

 

[romaz]

7 hours ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Great job Roy,

What a contrast to my economical sCLK-EX direct USB build.

NUC (used $100)

tXUSBexp (used $150)

USPCB ($35)

Chord 2Qute (used $900)

2-old HDD enclosures ($20)

1 PPA SATA chord (used $20)

Omega Super 8XRS Speakers ($2420)

2-DIY canare speaker/interconnect cables ($16)

1KVA Topaz Isolation Transformer (used $200)

1 tripplite 20V power strip, 12 outlets ($30)

2- LPS-1's ($760)

Paul Hynes SR7 MR4 ($1950)

5TB 2.5" HDD - (Ebay $130)

sCLK-EX loaded, installation, shipping, master clock option - ($1185)

sCLK OCX-10 Reference (once released) - ($1500)???

USB mouse and keyboard - ($15)

ASUS monitor I've been using for a few years, all PC's attached.

I do my own optimization on Windows 10, no need for others software, other than JRiver.

 

Shocking!! still comes to ($9431) give or take on final cost of SOtM master clock and some DIY Canare DC chords.    And I thought I was being economically wise in choosing my components carefully for the biggest bang in SQ.  Nice little exercise for others to do from Server/streamer to Speaker or headphones, what ever is your preferred listening means.

 

Thanks, Mark.  Your system is well thought out and so good for you.  In my case, the cost was painfully higher mainly because of so many things that I bought that ended up never making the final cut and so I have a lot of money invested in parts that are now just lying around (i.e. motherboards, CPUs, various RAM, various PCIe cards, USB hubs, the Adnaco, network switches, FMCs, routers, etc.).  This is the price I've paid for knowledge but at least I've now satisfied just about all of my curiosities.

[ElviaCaprice]

41 minutes ago, romaz said:

 

Thanks, Mark.  Your system is well thought out and so good for you.  In my case, the cost was painfully higher mainly because of so many things that I bought that ended up never making the final cut and so I have a lot of money invested in parts that are now just lying around (i.e. motherboards, CPUs, various RAM, various PCIe cards, USB hubs, the Adnaco, network switches, FMCs, routers, etc.).  This is the price I've paid for knowledge but at least I've now satisfied just about all of my curiosities.

    

Roy, your the one that couldn't be thanked enough.  Your experimentation blazed the path that allowed me to cherry pick the components that I felt we're the most important and worked for the right cost, for me.  With others confirmations it made it much easier. 

 

    I agree, now, like you and @mozes said, the sCLK-EX is the most important product of the year.  It's versatility and that of SOtM's to modify products makes it one of the best deals on the market today.  In fact, it's amazing that no one else has yet been able to duplicate this technology or compete with it. 

 

   I may give the SATA II filter a shot upon the release of the SOtM master clock.  I will ask May if it would work on a SATA III HDD being driven by a SATA II connection.  That DATA line filtering may have some benefit. 

 

Meanwhile, I'm just going to enjoy the music.  I haven't been able to get away from it for the past 3 days.   So Good!!

[Johnseye]

58 minutes ago, romaz said:

 

No, I have never heard of those but I do find ball bearing-type solutions from the likes of Stillpoints and Symposium Acoustics to generally be more effective then the rubber or sorbothane-type footers.  

 

An interesting discussion going here with regards to materials used in isolation and vibration.  

[austinpop]

1 hour ago, romaz said:

It depends.  For large orchestral music or music with a lot of atmosphere, I am liking 4D.  It provides the most depth.  However, when I want tighter imaging, I'll go down to 3C.  Signatures 1 and 2 sound too mechanical for my setup.

 

Me too, Roy. Way back when I first got the sMS-200, I settled on 3C as the optimum setting. Recently - after I got my Cybershaft - I decided to revisit AO, and I discovered I liked 4D best, and this is what I'm using.

 

Quote

 

Because I could do so while only utilizing 1 clock from my sCLK-EX board.  I don't plan to build 2 servers although I have 2 listening rooms (home office with desktop setup and my main listening room).  What I envision eventually is to bridge both LAN ports and then run CAT6/7 cabling from one of these bridged ports directly to my home office where I will install a SOtM trifecta.  That way, both systems can benefit from this server.  This is where the Adnaco solution could have worked well, however, my server only has 1 PCIe slot.

 

This is actually something I wanted to ask you. Roy. Is there a streamlined version of your build you would recommend for those of us who want to preserve our trifectas, but just want an sCLK-modded Roon Server upstream?

 

17 hours ago, romaz said:

With the sCLK-EX board in my server chassis, I am using 1 clock for the motherboard's 25Mhz system clock, 1 clock to concurrently replace both of the integrated LAN clocks, 1 clock to replace the stock clock in SOtM's tX-USBexp and tX-USBhubIN.  

 

By my count, your build uses up 3 of the clock taps. Although - I am not sure why the mobo and the Ethernet controllers can't share the same 25MHz clock tap? Different voltages? Or too much current draw?

 

Ideally, I'd like a Roon Server build that used 2 clock taps from the sCLK-EX, leaving 2 free to feed a Netgear router like yours.

 

I'll talk to you about it in Denver.

[austinpop]

Ayre QX-5 listening evaluation - Part 2

 

In Part 1, I concluded that the QX-5 as an Ethernet DAC was no match compared to as a USB DAC, with my digital front-end of SOtM trifecta + Cybershaft clock. Also, the QX-5 headphone amp could not match a dedicated amp like my Cavalli Liquid Gold.

 

So what remains is comparing the QX-5 as a pure DAC. I did extended listening both on my setup, using USB, and on Eric's setup using AES.

 

Comparison 1: QX-5 vs. Codex using USB

 

I compared two chains:

• trifecta medley > Codex
• trifecta medley > QX-5

Result: The QX-5 sounds notably better. The QX-5 sounds smooth, almost silky, and instruments sound wonderfully natural. The Codex in comparison - and I stress, this is a relative statement - sounds just a tad strident, and instruments sound a tad flatter.

 

Price-Performance: Not for me. Yes, the $9000 QX-5 sounds better than the $1800 Codex. But the magnitude is just not worth that much of a price jump. I feel I heard a similar magnitude just with the $1600 Cybershaft. Obviously, if money is no object, then the QX-5 is a fabulous sounding DAC, and improves the SQ over the Codex, for sure.

 

Comparison 2: QX-5 using Ethernet vs. Codex using USB

 

This was at @rickca's request. I compared:

• trifecta medley > Codex
• sCLK-ed switch > Ethernet > QX-5

This is interesting as the two configs are closer in cost. For me, this was a wash overall. Each configuration had its strengths and weaknesses, but if pressed, I would still take the trifecta+Codex. I felt this configuration had the bigger image and air, while the QX-5 had the advantage on smoothness. Very close.

 

Comparison 3: QX-5 vs. Yggdrasil over AES

 

Charles Hansen has stated that the synchronous S/PDIF inputs on the QX-5 are the reference for what the DAC is capable of. We used the AES flavor of synchronous input. We did this comparison on @limniscate's setup. We compared:

• modded switch > sMS-200ultra > ISO-R > dX-USB HD Ultra > AES > Yggy
• modded switch > sMS-200ultra > ISO-R > dX-USB HD Ultra > AES > QX-5

Our findings were different with this test. I heard a similar gap between the QX-5 and the Yggy, with the QX-5 sounding smoother, with more natural instruments. Eric didn't feel he heard as much of a difference.

 

Conclusions

 

As I wrote a while back, when Eric and I listened to the DAVE on our setups - we both found sonic differences between DACs to be relatively small, compared to the the dramatic differences we heard with the front end of the digital chain. Just like with the $13,000 DAVE, we felt the $9000 QX-5 did not deliver an SQ boost commensurate with the cost increase. Moreover, I stand by my statement that your incremental $ is better spent upstream of the DAC, in the front end of your digital chain. Modern DACs today are incredibly good, even at the sub-$2k price point.

 

I know this is an area where @romaz and I have different opinions. Perhaps when my setup achieves the quality of his, I'll hear these magnitudes differently.

[beautiful music]

 

Quite interesting design from Mike Moffat (Schiit Audio), he will show in RMAF the first music signal process (Gadget) in his Manhattan project.

 

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/what-a-long-strange-trip-its-been-robert-hunter.784471/page-306#post-13721286

 

For those who will go there try to audition it and give us your impression.

[lateboomer]

Hi Roy,

 

You said you prefer the mini-itx that can be powered by 12V of SR7. What do you think that since the itx is powered by direct 12V dc, there are still a lot of dc-to-dc noisy switching regulators on-board as some guys here claimed and less ideal compared with ATX power connection type mobo which has separated multiple dc voltages? 

 

I have got another question is if my server OS is extremely small like Daphile which only requires less than 16 GB, what is the best OS media storage to use with reference to your mini-itx mobo rather than the noisier SATA II drive?

 

[rickca]

5 hours ago, austinpop said:

I stand by my statement that your incremental $ is better spent upstream of the DAC, in the front end of your digital chain.

I guess my question now is the relative importance of server clocks/filtering vs trifecta.  

[jean-michel6]

Hi All ,

 

First a very warm thank you to @romaz for such a solid and extremely good contribution to our hobby and also to @austinpop for keeping this very long thread well organised and so interesting .

 

For the last few month i have been also pursuing the improvement of my server/player source with extremely positive and good results even though i have not yet reach the trifecta set-up .

My DAC being the AMR DP777-SE i am using the AES/EBU for digital input .

 

My set up is made of two Gigabyte MB with Celeron processor( server and player ) and of course fanless , i am now feeding these with 4 separate power supply with 12V lead acid batteries one for each processor and one for each pico psu of each mother board .

The separation of power supply specific for each processor is bringing very positive results . 

To go further i have on order an SR7 PS from Paul Hynes to replace those batteries.

I can confirm also that running at the lowest possible processor speed is a key point to achieve good sonic result , i went from 2.1 Ghz to 800Mhz for both processor and ram with a very positive sonic benefit .

I am using roon and very light linux configuration and each os is on it's own SSD with it's down dedicated low noise power supply . 

Music is on two large SSD also on their own dedicated low noise power supply.

 

The output of the player pc is insured through a tx-USBexp card with its own clock board sCLK-48.0 ( this is fed by its own Lifepo4 battery ).

And last i have a dx USB-HD which has been modified by SOTM with the sCLK-EX clock board( word clock and two clock going to the FMC's) , this is fed by an LPS-1

 

Communication between the two pc's is done trough ethernet with a dedicated optical switch and FMC all that of course on their own specific batteries .

 

Sorry for this long introduction to let you know from where i am coming from .

The sonic result i am achieving with this set up today are the best i have ever had in my system with a very natural sounding source ,enjoyable and much closer to the "real thing " .

 

I have found that the much profitable route is not to keep buying more expensive piece of hardware but to work very hard to remove what is embedded in our music and is not music namely the three worst offenders :

- Jitter everywhere ...

- Vibrations of all kind ... even ssd are sensitive 

- Noise in the power supplies ...

 

I am now on the road to explore the new sCLK-EX route  . I have already  dx USB-H with sCLK-EX board .

I have on loan a SMS 200 ultra with it SPS 500 that i will compare to my own PC player set up .

 

Next steps will be to test the Tx USB ultra and also an sCLK-EX board for PC player and or server .

 

Cheers for our wonderful hobby , it is a great time with all those progress achievable today !

 

 

 

[mozes]

9 minutes ago, jean-michel6 said:

Next steps will be to test the Tx USB ultra and also an sCLK-EX board for PC player and or server .

This will be interesting, pls post your findings when get to it.

[mozes]

6 hours ago, austinpop said:

Modern DACs today are incredibly good, even at the sub-$2k price point.

Very true! Also a dac is as good as the signal you feed it. With my front end, a friend told me that my Brooklyn sounds better than Berkeley reference 2. Even if it wasn't, and it shouldn't be, I know where to spend my $$ if I am on a tight budget!

[jean-michel6]

Hi Roy ,

 

I have read your very interesting long last post on your server set-up and i have a few comments and questions .

 

- Did you do listening test to pick up the right MB ? this is a tricky choice . I fully agree with the celeron low horse power pc it keeps the noise lower  . Also much of the hardware on the processor keep thing's efficient  .

 However since you went with one since 12 v power supply , all of the different voltage are supplied through noisy DC-DC  converters including for the processor itself .

I think i will probably compare on my pc player my current set-up with a single mini-its celeron processor as you did

 

-  I see that you are using the Pachinko Reference for the OS data connection to the MB , why you did not went to the Pure Reference which my self i am using ( following i think you recommendations ) . The Pure Reference is a notch better than the Reference mainly on the attack of the notes .

 

- I have picked up from Paul Pang site one thing which work very well . To my surprise SSD are sensitive to vibration and i have attached each of my SSD's to an aluminum bloc( 15 mmm thick ) with very good result . It bring much more clarity to the sound .

In my system it brought a progress similar to the separate power supply for each ssd .

 

- Which power supply are you using to feed the SSD  and also to feed the sCLK-EX board ?

 

- EMI-RFI reduction , you have been using the SOTM paper . I have done the same but with the 3M 5100s pair which is also transform    EMI-RFI to heat . Have you ever compared both since the 3M pair is quite cheaper ?

 

Thank's for everything and i do hop that we can still enjoy from time to time your writings !

[rickca]

6 hours ago, austinpop said:

• trifecta medley > Codex
• sCLK-ed switch > Ethernet > QX-5

What music player apps are you using in these configs?

[BigGuy]

15 hours ago, romaz said:

 

Yes, you're correct. Lee does not like optical solutions due to high jitter.  As it was Lee that personally modified the Adnaco I sent him, he got a chance to listen to it and even with its 3 clocks replaced, he told me he thought it was a step back because It was sounding flat. It was at that point that he encouraged me to try his tX-USBexp. 

 

I knew I needed to hear it for myself and so he went ahead and completed the mod of the Adnaco per my request which included the replacing of several capacitors.  Once I received the modified Adnaco back, I felt it had definitely improved and I liked the smoother and more solid image it was portraying.  Around the time I received the modified Adnaco back, I was also able to audition the ISO Regen and I found the ISO Regen to be so good that in its stock form, it was equivalent to the modified Adnaco.  Around this time, I was able to access an SOtM tX-USBexp (non Ultra) and so I compared it to the modified Adnaco. I found Lee to be correct, even the non-ultra tX-USBexp was sounding more impressive to me than the modified Adnaco and when I added the ISO Regen to the tX-USBexp, this combo was easily better than the Adnaco.  Better yet, tX-USBexp + ISO Regen only utilized 2 clocks while the Adnaco solution by itself utilized 3 clocks although this combo costs more than the Adnaco.

 

Having said that, the Adnaco definitely has merit and it does some nice things. For those who have a thin sounding system, you might really like what the Adnaco does and regardless of jitter, optical isolation definitely lowers the noise floor.  For those who wish to keep their server in a different room or even a different building, you can purchase very long optical cables for very little money and still get excellent sound while remaining "straight USB." If you follow the Adnaco with a tX-USBultra, you come reasonably close to what the SOtM trifecta provides.

Was interested to read that "Lee" does not like optical solutions due to high jitter.  Given the required geographical separation of my PC server and DAC, I chose the Adnaco S3B USB over Fiber set up so I would like to learn more about jitter effects and optical. 

 

At the time it was released, I tried the original Regen with OEM SMPS between the Adnaco receiver module and my DAC but disliked what it did the SQ that I returned the Regen.  Have no idea what the SOtM trifecta is and do not understand all the posts re clocks but might consider adding the tX-USBultra to the chain if the SQ justified the expense.

[austinpop]

1 hour ago, rickca said:

What music player apps are you using in these configs?

 

Yes, that bears explanation.

 

It was Roon.

 

From the Roon control app, I could select either the sMS-200 or the QX-5 as targets to direct the music.

[Johnseye]

5 hours ago, jean-michel6 said:

- EMI-RFI reduction , you have been using the SOTM paper . I have done the same but with the 3M 5100s pair which is also transform    EMI-RFI to heat . Have you ever compared both since the 3M pair is quite cheaper ?

 

The 3M AB 5000S series EMI Absorber, including the AB-5100S, is very similar and may in fact be the same as the SOtM eABS-200.  The 5100S is the same 1m thickness.  The stated applications by 3M are applicable.  3M states it has enhanced absorption at lower frequencies, below 1GHz.  If you look at the chart it shows 6GHz and SOtM says on their site, noise removal up to 6GHz possible.

 

However that model number seems out of production.

 

The new model numbers are showing as halogen free versions AB5100HF or AB5100SHF but they are between 200MHz - 10GHz and 50Mhz - 10GHz respectively.

[jean-michel6]

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

 

The 3M AB 5000S series EMI Absorber, including the AB-5100S, is very similar and may in fact be the same as the SOtM eABS-200.  The 5100S is the same 1m thickness.  The stated applications by 3M are applicable.  3M states it has enhanced absorption at lower frequencies, below 1GHz.  If you look at the chart it shows 6GHz and SOtM says on their site, noise removal up to 6GHz possible.

 

However that model number seems out of production.

 

The new model numbers are showing as halogen free versions AB5100HF or AB5100SHF but they are between 200MHz - 10GHz and 50Mhz - 10GHz respectively.

I think I used the 5100SHF from Digikey. It looks very similar to SOTM paper but cheaper 50$ vs 120$

Anyhow results are good with noise reduction you get darker background in the music. 

[Johnseye]

28 minutes ago, jean-michel6 said:

I think I used the 5100SHF from Digikey. It looks very similar to SOTM paper but cheaper 50$ vs 120$

Anyhow results are good with noise reduction you get darker background in the music. 

 

I can only guess covering more of the frequency range between 6GHz and 10GHz is a good thing.  I wonder why Lee was recommending not using too much.  What could the negative effects be of blocking out EMI?

[rickca]

@romaz what's your take on the best place to start ... on the server with sCLK-EX and tX-USBexp, or downstream with tX-USBultra and maybe a modded switch?  

 

I just read your big post again, and I guess this would be your answer.

If I didn't need the extra clock taps in the tX-USBultra for my router, I could have easily skipped the tX-USBultra (and ISO Regen) because my single box server paired with the REF10 is already so good, however, adding a reclocked ISO-Regen and tX-USBultra definitely adds further improvement and for those looking to go to infinity and beyond, I believe this gets you there.