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

[miguelito]

I have set this up. Works fine.

 

Couple of questions if you don't mind:

 

1- I have attached to microRendu to the Thunderbolt adapter and my switch to the Ethernet port - have you tried to swap this and whether that's any different?

 

 

2- It seems that it is not possible to create a bridge between the Ethernet port in the mini and the wifi - is this true or did I not try hard enough? My preference is to connect the microRendu to the standard Ethernet port in the mini and the mini to the network over wifi but this doesn't seem to be possible

 

 

3- If '2' is not possible at all (there's a comment on the Apple help page about this), what if I used a wifi USB dongle on the mini? Would this work? Or is there something inherently different in wifi connections that does not permit this?

 

Thanks.

[kennyb123]

2- It seems that it is not possible to create a bridge between the Ethernet port in the mini and the wifi - is this true or did I not try hard enough? My preference is to connect the microRendu to the standard Ethernet port in the mini and the mini to the network over wifi but this doesn't seem to be possible

 

I am pretty sure it can't be done. Apple has some logic in there that appears to favor wired over wireless. It seems to send and receive only over wired as soon as a wired network is discovered.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[romaz]

After listening to a direct connection to my NAA PC here are my thoughts:

 

Positives

As others have mentioned there is definitely more clarity. I am able to hear more nuance and detail in the music.

There seems to be more energy in the music. The sound is also bigger. Certain high notes like guitar strings sound very well defined and immediate.

What I like most is how my soundstage is more layered giving it a 3d effect. Vocals are more forward in the soundstage while instruments "appear" further back. Very cool.

 

Negatives

Admittedly, I am more of a wannabe tube guy. I prefer sound a bit on the warm and lush side. The energy and definition the direct connection provides can at times sound a bit harsh to me.

I am also more a mid venue kind of guy in that I prefer the music to be a bit further away from me versus right in front of me. The vocals moving forward in the soundstage makes me feel like the singer is too close to me.

 

Overall, I would say this direct connection definitely changes the sound. At this point I am not convinced if the changes are right for me though.

I'm glad you got it working.

 

This direct connection seems to be a two-edged sword. On the one hand, the improvements (at least in my system) have been so profound that you tend to initially forget all the small things that are not right with your system but at the same time, this direct connection is now much more transparent that as you get used to this improved clarity and soundstage and your excitement begins to settle, you start to also notice the warts in your system all the more.

 

As I go from my electrically noisy Mac Pro with 12-core Xeon which sounds more than just passably pleasing with this direct connection to my highly optimized Mac Mini (OS boots from SD card, OS optimized via CAD script, powered by Paul Hynes SR7), the improvement is quite dramatic, much more so than before. With my Mac Pro, there is definitely a bit of an edge while with the Mac Mini, there is a very obvious smoother and more relaxed effortlessness to the presentation while remaining just as detailed.

 

It would appear to me that this direct connection better reveals both the qualities and flaws of both your NAA and your music server. Should you decide to try an mR or sMS-200, I would be interested to know whether you think either one outperforms your current NAA.

[romaz]

After I managed to get my setup working in bridged mode with a 3-way bridge (NIC1, NIC2, Wifi see my post #340) under W10, I now got it working under W2012R2 in minimal server mode with AO optimization V2.1.

 

The sound quality is certainly much better than under W10!. The SQ is again more transparent, cleaner, better bass, more dynamic. I didn't think it was possible, but it is. It is similar to what tboooe describes above. Including sometimes a bit of harshness? (on my headphones) but not with my tube-amp (Audionote Conqueror)

 

In my previous setup (Jplaystreamer-Dual-PC, with W2012R2 in core-mode plus JCAT USB-card) there is some reason to expect benefits in SQ with the audio-PC directly attached to my DAC. But in my new setup the single audio-server is only attached to the SOMT200, not to my DAC. But yes : there is a remarkable improvement in SQ (again).

 

Making the bridge under W2012 gives a slightly different result : the bridge was not requiring a static IP-address (like under W10), but could use DHCP. What stays the same is, that I could disconnect the Wifi-component from my router, without causing stuttering.

 

There were some network quirks I had to overcome before Jriver MC20 could pickup the SOTM200-renderer. I had to switch on "network detection" by manually turning on some services. I will come back to this point, but I want first to ask AO about this.

I really appreciate this post and that you are hearing an improvement with W2012R2 over W10! While I am very happy with my Mac Mini, despite running the CAD optimization script on my El Capitan OS, I still have nearly 120 processes running and so I have remained very curious how Windows coupled with AO might improve things. Given the problems some have reported with W2012R2 and bridging, I was thinking of going to Windows 10 Pro but as Phil Hobi believes that the differences between W2012R2 in minimal server mode and Windows 10 Pro are "night and day," this has been difficult for me to ignore.

[ElviaCaprice]

I really appreciate this post and that you are hearing an improvement with W2012R2 over W10! While I am very happy with my Mac Mini, despite running the CAD optimization script on my El Capitan OS, I still have nearly 120 processes running and so I have remained very curious how Windows coupled with AO might improve things. Given the problems some have reported with W2012R2 and bridging, I was thinking of going to Windows 10 Pro but as Phil Hobi believes that the differences between W2012R2 in minimal server mode and Windows 10 Pro are "night and day," this has been difficult for me to ignore.

 

Funny, the folks doing their own optimization scripts work on Windows 10 Pro are finding Windows 10 Pro far better than Windows Server 2012 AO.

[tboooe]

It would appear to me that this direct connection better reveals both the qualities and flaws of both your NAA and your music server. Should you decide to try an mR or sMS-200, I would be interested to know whether you think either one outperforms your current NAA.

I did have the chance to compare the mR to my NAA and it was no comparison. The mR and LPS1 combo sounded so much more organic to me. Unfortunately I did this comparison before I tried this direct connection. Once I save up more pennies I will definitely get the mR.

 

Also, I had zero issues with bridging in Server R2. It was so simple and worked right away.

[romaz]

I have set this up. Works fine.

 

Couple of questions if you don't mind:

 

1- I have attached to microRendu to the Thunderbolt adapter and my switch to the Ethernet port - have you tried to swap this and whether that's any different?

 

 

2- It seems that it is not possible to create a bridge between the Ethernet port in the mini and the wifi - is this true or did I not try hard enough? My preference is to connect the microRendu to the standard Ethernet port in the mini and the mini to the network over wifi but this doesn't seem to be possible

 

 

3- If '2' is not possible at all (there's a comment on the Apple help page about this), what if I used a wifi USB dongle on the mini? Would this work? Or is there something inherently different in wifi connections that does not permit this?

 

Thanks.

 

Regarding question #1, I haven't tried swapping to see if one LAN port sounds better than the other but this is a good question. In my situation, however, it probably will not be a good idea since my Thunderbolt hub also contains my CD-ripper and music SSD. I would think you would want the LAN port that is directly connected to the mR to be as free of other traffic as much as possible.

Regarding question #2, yes, Apple indicates you cannot create a bridge that includes wifi with Mac OS and I would presume this would include wifi via a USB dongle although I haven't personally tried it.

[romaz]

Funny, the folks doing their own optimization scripts work on Windows 10 Pro are finding Windows 10 Pro far better than Windows Server 2012 AO.

I have certainly heard arguments for both sides and I may ultimately compare both but because of the fact that you can get W2012R2 down to less than 10 open processes, at least on paper, it would make sense to me that W2012R2 should have the edge.

[ElviaCaprice]

I have certainly heard arguments for both sides and I may ultimately compare both but because of the fact that you can get W2012R2 down to less than 10 open processes, at least on paper, it would make sense to me that W2012R2 should have the edge.

 

Have never heard of anyone making this claim. If so, yes, 10 processes open total would better than my 22 processes open total with Windows 10 Pro.

[romaz]

Have never heard of anyone making this claim. If so, yes, 10 processes open total would better than my 22 processes open total with Windows 10 Pro.

Yes, 5-10 open processes with W2012R2 in Core mode.

[romaz]

Have never heard of anyone making this claim. If so, yes, 10 processes open total would better than my 22 processes open total with Windows 10 Pro.

Sorry, let me correct that. Here are Phil Hobi's exact words:

 

"A Windows Server 2012 R2 system in core mode, fully optimized with the AudiophileOptimizer, runs only 5 to 7 services and about 15-20 processes."

[ElviaCaprice]

Sorry, let me correct that. Here are Phil Hobi's exact words:

 

"A Windows Server 2012 R2 system in core mode, fully optimized with the AudiophileOptimizer, runs only 5 to 7 services and about 15-20 processes."

 

Okay, that's much closer. Would come down to sound signature at that point. That is where I think some folks are finding Windows 10 Pro better. Myself no experience, only use Windows 10 Pro, never would use Server due to cost and non support by JRiver.

[miguelito]

I am pretty sure it can't be done. Apple has some logic in there that appears to favor wired over wireless. It seems to send and receive only over wired as soon as a wired network is discovered.

Not sure why they would do that but it does seem to be the case. I might get a wifi USB dongle just for fun to try it out.

[Superdad]

I have set this up. Works fine.

 

Couple of questions if you don't mind:

 

1- I have attached to microRendu to the Thunderbolt adapter and my switch to the Ethernet port - have you tried to swap this and whether that's any different?

.

 

Hi Miguel:

 

I can tell you beyond any doubt that the built in Ethernet port of the Mac sounds far better than the Thunderbolt>Ethernet dongle. I did that comparison with my Mac>Mac direct connection 3 years ago. (See: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f27-uptone-audio-sponsored/uh-oh-i-beat-my-sd-card-trick%3B-bypass-your-ethernet-switch-and-make-your-external-drives-sound-close-ram-disk-using-apple-thunderbolt-ethernet-adaptor-and-second-network-connection-18475/)

 

Use the Thunderbolt adapter for the connection to you switch.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[udis]

Hi Miguel:

 

I can tell you beyond any doubt that the built in Ethernet port of the Mac sounds far better than the Thunderbolt>Ethernet dongle. I did that comparison with my Mac>Mac direct connection 3 years ago. (See: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f27-uptone-audio-sponsored/uh-oh-i-beat-my-sd-card-trick%3B-bypass-your-ethernet-switch-and-make-your-external-drives-sound-close-ram-disk-using-apple-thunderbolt-ethernet-adaptor-and-second-network-connection-18475/)

 

Use the Thunderbolt adapter for the connection to you switch.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

 

I agree. Tried both and it wasn't even close.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[zettelsm]

I have set this up. Works fine.

 

Couple of questions if you don't mind:

 

1- I have attached to microRendu to the Thunderbolt adapter and my switch to the Ethernet port - have you tried to swap this and whether that's any different?

 

 

2- It seems that it is not possible to create a bridge between the Ethernet port in the mini and the wifi - is this true or did I not try hard enough? My preference is to connect the microRendu to the standard Ethernet port in the mini and the mini to the network over wifi but this doesn't seem to be possible

 

 

3- If '2' is not possible at all (there's a comment on the Apple help page about this), what if I used a wifi USB dongle on the mini? Would this work? Or is there something inherently different in wifi connections that does not permit this?

 

Thanks.

 

I tried both the onboard Ethernet port of my Mini as well as the Thunderbolt-to-Ethernet adapter for direct connection to my microRendu. I'm not sure I heard any improvement one over the other. It's easy enough to try without upsetting an established bridge and network, at least with a Mini and Mac OS -- I simply hot-swapped the two Ethernet cables at the Mini. Everything was still recognized by the bridge and network.

 

I haven't tried getting WiFi to work yet and it appears from the comments since you posted your questions that it probably won't which seems strange because during the initial setup process in the OS Networking panel it allowed me to check WiFi along with the adapter when setting up the bridge.

 

Hope this helps,

 

Steve Z

[Confused]

Going back to Romaz's original suggestion of direct connection via Ethernet, this got me thinking. In my set up the PC is over 6 metres away from the microRendu. Without going into too much detail, the room is perfectly set up (with hard wired Ethernet) for running a mR in the traditional way, that is computer/router/switch/mR. To be honest, whilst I am tempted by the possible sound quality benefits, this is not really an option for me, it's just not practical. However, this did make me think of the Sonic Transporter. Maybe they could make a derivative of this suitable for direct connection? As things stand the Sonic Transporter only has a single Ethernet port, so is not suitable. Maybe there is another product out there that could be configured to optimise this approach? Just a thought! If the sound quality benefits are that apparent, then there could be a market for a properly optimised custom made product.

[miguelito]

Going back to Romaz's original suggestion of direct connection via Ethernet, this got me thinking. In my set up the PC is over 6 metres away from the microRendu. Without going into too much detail, the room is perfectly set up (with hard wired Ethernet) for running a mR in the traditional way, that is computer/router/switch/mR. To be honest, whilst I am tempted by the possible sound quality benefits, this is not really an option for me, it's just not practical. However, this did make me think of the Sonic Transporter. Maybe they could make a derivative of this suitable for direct connection? As things stand the Sonic Transporter only has a single Ethernet port, so is not suitable. Maybe there is another product out there that could be configured to optimise this approach? Just a thought! If the sound quality benefits are that apparent, then there could be a market for a properly optimised custom made product.

If the Sonic Transporter also has a wifi device inside, then the ideal setup in my opinion would be to use the wired connection to the mR and the wifi to the LAN. This is what I would like to setup with the mini, but bridging ethernet and wifi is not an option - internet sharing isn't either because it would put the mR behind a NAT.

[udis]

Going back to Romaz's original suggestion of direct connection via Ethernet, this got me thinking. In my set up the PC is over 6 metres away from the microRendu. Without going into too much detail, the room is perfectly set up (with hard wired Ethernet) for running a mR in the traditional way, that is computer/router/switch/mR. To be honest, whilst I am tempted by the possible sound quality benefits, this is not really an option for me, it's just not practical. However, this did make me think of the Sonic Transporter. Maybe they could make a derivative of this suitable for direct connection? As things stand the Sonic Transporter only has a single Ethernet port, so is not suitable. Maybe there is another product out there that could be configured to optimise this approach? Just a thought! If the sound quality benefits are that apparent, then there could be a market for a properly optimised custom made product.

 

I've exchanged a few emails with Andrew at Small Green Computer (maker of the Sonic Transport) and apparently they are "looking into it" ie, being able to modify existing sTi5 to allow for bridging. Likely accept usb to ethernet adapter. He suggested this would be only possible if you send your device in for the modification. This was a few weeks ago. I haven't heard anything since. In the meantime, I've decommissioned my sTi5 and reintroduced my mac mini into my listening room for bridging duties... and it sounds fabulous. Now considering putting the sTi5 up for sale.

[Peter_T]

After my success with my (3-way) bridge to play under W2012R2-minimal-server mode optimized by AO (see my earlier post), I tried to go one step further and go to core mode.

 

I got it to work, partially that is : with my USB-LAN adapter (Startech USB31000LAN) connected to my router and the Sotm200 connected to my computer's onboard Intel NIC, I could play (Jriver DLNA server) only local tracks : no connection possible to my NAS. But it sounded great! Without stuttering. If I reversed the cables, the PC could see the NAS, but not the Sotm200, so I couldn't play anything.

 

The above result , however, was not reached with my 3-way bridge, but with a "normal" 2-way bridge between the on board NIC and the LAN adapter. So it is possible to get fluent sound without using my Wifi-dongle. But only in W2012R2 core mode?

 

My conclusion : the Startech LAN adapter in the (2-way) bridge leads to stuttering unless used in W2012R2-core-mode, but then it apparently refuses to connect to my router & NAS. Maybe another adapter would work better? Or a PCIe USB card?

[kennyb123]

I've exchanged a few emails with Andrew at Small Green Computer (maker of the Sonic Transport) and apparently they are "looking into it" ie, being able to modify existing sTi5 to allow for bridging. Likely accept usb to ethernet adapter. He suggested this would be only possible if you send your device in for the modification. This was a few weeks ago. I haven't heard anything since. In the meantime, I've decommissioned my sTi5 and reintroduced my mac mini into my listening room for bridging duties... and it sounds fabulous. Now considering putting the sTi5 up for sale.

 

I received the same reply from Andrew as I was hoping to buy a sTi5 that would support two Ethernet ports in a bridged configuration. I hasn't considered the current base of sTi5 customers and what impact it might be on Andrew if they learned he was configuring USB-to-Ethernet adapters for those now buying sTi5s. I would think he'd want to add the ability for users to configure the bridge for themselves using the UI. So maybe that's something he's also looking into.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

[tboooe]

I got it to work, partially that is : with my USB-LAN adapter (Startech USB31000LAN) connected to my router and the Sotm200 connected to my computer's onboard Intel NIC, I could play (Jriver DLNA server) only local tracks : no connection possible to my NAS. But it sounded great! Without stuttering. If I reversed the cables, the PC could see the NAS, but not the Sotm200, so I couldn't play anything.

 

The above result , however, was not reached with my 3-way bridge, but with a "normal" 2-way bridge between the on board NIC and the LAN adapter. So it is possible to get fluent sound without using my Wifi-dongle. But only in W2012R2 core mode?

Interesting. Perhaps some sort of networking resource gets turned off when you go to Core mode? Have you asked Phil about this?

[miguelito]

Going back to Romaz's original suggestion of direct connection via Ethernet, this got me thinking. In my set up the PC is over 6 metres away from the microRendu. Without going into too much detail, the room is perfectly set up (with hard wired Ethernet) for running a mR in the traditional way, that is computer/router/switch/mR. To be honest, whilst I am tempted by the possible sound quality benefits, this is not really an option for me, it's just not practical. However, this did make me think of the Sonic Transporter. Maybe they could make a derivative of this suitable for direct connection? As things stand the Sonic Transporter only has a single Ethernet port, so is not suitable. Maybe there is another product out there that could be configured to optimise this approach? Just a thought! If the sound quality benefits are that apparent, then there could be a market for a properly optimised custom made product.

Could you use a USB-Ethernet adapter on the Sonic Transporter to add a USB port?

[kennyb123]

Could you use a USB-Ethernet adapter on the Sonic Transporter to add a USB port?

 

There's no way for an end user to create an Ethernet bridge themselves on that device.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[miguelito]

There's no way for an end user to create an Ethernet bridge themselves on that device.

Sad.

 

Get a small nice switch. Power it with an LPS.