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

[sandyk]

With the original Sata Filter at least,the  necessary use of physically small electrolytic capacitors is likely to result in a small amount of HF detail increase which some may like.

I found this some time back with a DIY Sata Filter.Fitting much larger value electrolytic capacitors at it's output side gave the best of both worlds with a low end improvement as well.  

Alex

[rickca]

5 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Ultimately I'd like to get to Minimum Latency with as small of a buffer as possible.

Why do you want to use as small a buffer as possible?  I have an iDSD micro on my desk.  iFi's driver used to be limited to 8K samples.  Their latest driver introduced 16K and 32K samples.  In my setup, I use low latency with 16K samples.

 

It's wonderful that your new system has already met or even exceeded your expectations!

[ElviaCaprice]

With my sCLK-EX server, I have set as small of a buffer as possible with minimum latency in JRiver.  Never a drop out PCM or DSD (DOP) bit perfect.  I use the Chord ASIO driver for Windows 10.

 

Also, when I used the ISO Regen, I never had any problems either.  I just choose not to change the sound signature of the sCLK-EX server with any add on devices,  sounds best direct to the DAC via USPCB.

[zephyr24069]

On 11/6/2017 at 6:34 PM, austinpop said:

Clock Distribution and Termination

 

I wanted to update this thread with some information I have gleaned from recent discussions with Kenji Hasegawa-san of Cybershaft, May from SOtM, as well as @zephyr24069, who has provided me very valuable advice with regards to clocks.

 

Important Considerations with Clock Distribution

 

With all the interest in the SOtM sCLK-EX and master reference clocks, it's important not to lost sight of the basic tenets of clock distribution. At the frequencies of interest here, in the 10-54 MHz range, a clock cable acts as a transmission line. Transmission lines are defined by their characteristic impedance. For the SOtM, Mutec, and Cybershaft being discussed here, they are designed to use cables with 50 or 75 ohm characteristic impedance. It is also necessary for clock cables to be terminated at both ends, with the correct impedance (50 or 75 ohm). Proper termination is necessary to minimize reflections, which occurs on the transmission line if there is an impedance mismatch.

 

Point to Point

 

We have almost exclusively been discussing point to point clock connections in this thread. Examples of this are:

1. Cybershaft clock <-> tX-USBultra master clock input via 50 ohm BNC
2. Mutec Ref 10 <-> Mutec MC-3+ USB via 75 ohm BNC
3. sCLK-EX clock point <-> modded component (switch, router, sMS-200, etc) via 50 ohm SMB

In all these cases, it's important to know that the source and target connections are internally terminated. In scenario 1, for example, the Cybershaft output is terminated with a 50 ohm impedance, as is the master clock input of the tX-USBultra. I have confirmed this with both Cybershaft and SOtM. The Mutec Ref 10 uses an internal distribution amp to provide 8 independent clock outputs, but each of these is internally terminated, and expects a properly terminated target as well.

 

In case you are wondering, SOtM handles the termination internally when you send them components to mod. For each sCLK-EX clock point, both the source and the target are appropriately terminated.

 

But what about the case, where you're a cheapskate like me, who doesn't want to spring for multi-output clocks like the Ref 10 or the upcoming SOtM sMS-OCX10? Can I use a single high-quality clock like the OP-14 and drive multiple outputs?

 

This is where things get interesting.

 

Daisy Chaining

 

Yes, you can daisy chain, but you have to consider the entire length of the cable across the chain as a single transmission line, and you must have termination on each end equal to the characteristic impedance of the cable. For this to work, you have to have devices whose inputs can be selectively configured to be terminated (i.e. have an input impedance of 50 or 75 ohms as needed), or unterminated, in which case the input impedance of the input is very high. In the quote from Kenji below, he calls this "Hi-Z."

 

Regarding distribution of clock T plugs, it is possible under certain conditions.

For example, in the case of a daisy chain

 

1.

Clock output(50ohm) ------T--------T--------T-(50ohm)Terminator

                                      (Hi-z)   (Hi-z)    (Hiz)

                               Device1   Device2   Device3

2.

Clock output(50ohm) ------T--------T- non

                                     (Hi-z)   (50ohm) 

                                  Device1   Device2 

 

( Hi-z = High impedance) 

Be sure to have one 50 ohm impedance at the end and the other relay point must be Hi-z.

Therefore, T plug can be used only when the clock input can be set to Hi-z.

For reference, I attach a connection diagram of CH presision CH and D1. Please be aware that each relay point is Hi-z.

If, for example, there are 50 ohm points in two places, the impedance will be 25 ohm, the current will overload and destroy the output circuit of clock due to long-term use.

SOtM tX - USBultra can not set the input impedance to Hi - z. So SOtM tX - USBultra does not use T plug in the situation.

Also, due to the use of T plugs, noises of each device can interfere and clocks that can be transmitted can not be transmitted. I do not recommend using T plug.

The best way to distribute the clock is to use an ultralow noise distribution amplifier.

However, I could not find a low-cost ultra low noise distribution amplifier of less than $ 1000 from the world market.

We are developing to sell low-cost distributors by next spring.

 

Pay particular note to his point about overloading the output circuit of the clock due to it "seeing" a lower impedance than designed. The second consequence of not paying careful attention to termination is that impedance mismatches cause reflections, that degrade the signal integrity of the clock, which negates the whole point in the first place.

 

The other point to note is that he discourages the use of daisy chaining, and promotes the use of an ultra low noise distribution amplifier. I got the same feedback from May and I believe (although I'd have to check) Mutec also discourages daisy chaining. With the Ref 10, it's self evident due to the provision of 8 clock outputs!

 

So what does this all mean

1. Don't daisy chain, if at all possible. Even without the other complications, daisy chains necessitate longer cable lengths, which degrades clock quality
2. If you must, design your chain to ensure that all devices in the chain can be configured to be unterminated, and that there is proper termination of the right impedance on both ends, using tees and terminators.
3. At least for the SOtM Ultra components, SOtM does not currently provide a way to switch between terminated and unterminated. I'm pretty sure that upon request, they can configure a device whichever way you want it.

For me, this means that if I get to the point where I have more than one component with a master clock input that I want to drive, I'll want to spring for a Ref 10 or OCX-10. Ouch!

Excellent write-up!!!

[jean-michel6]

12 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Intel X25 E and SATA II filter

 

Hi 

Thank's for ''tis very interesting feedback. 

I have also x25 E ssd that I should get in a few weeks. 

I am interested if you can test in your system how the sotm Sata II filter improves the sound. As I have sotm  sata III filter only.  

[Johnseye]

15 hours ago, rickca said:

Why do you want to use as small a buffer as possible?  I have an iDSD micro on my desk.  iFi's driver used to be limited to 8K samples.  Their latest driver introduced 16K and 32K samples.  In my setup, I use low latency with 16K samples.

 

It's wonderful that your new system has already met or even exceeded your expectations!

 

This was always a best practice I've followed.  I know it has practical applications in recording, but am not sure of its impact in playback.  Both settings in the USB control panel are effectively buffers.  The Audiophile Optimizer instructions recommend's streaming mode set to minimum latency but do not mention the ASIO buffer size.  Logically it shouldn't matter.  Not sure if anyone else has insight into this.

 

14 hours ago, ElviaCaprice said:

With my sCLK-EX server, I have set as small of a buffer as possible with minimum latency in JRiver.  Never a drop out PCM or DSD (DOP) bit perfect.  I use the Chord ASIO driver for Windows 10.

 

Also, when I used the ISO Regen, I never had any problems either.  I just choose not to change the sound signature of the sCLK-EX server with any add on devices,  sounds best direct to the DAC via USPCB.

 

I tried it with HQPlayer direct and experienced the same issue at minimum latency and a 2048 buffer.  I'll try it with JRiver but expect it's the same.  I removed the tX-USBexp from the chain, coming out the mobo's USB and it's the same.  I still need to test direct from mobo USB to DAC.  I unbridged my NICs and disabled one of them in the BIOS and it's the same.  My next test will be to install Windows 2016 on the M.2 drive to see if it's related to the X25.  I've been using a single 4GB stick of DDR RAM.  I ordered a pair of 2GB for dual channel.  It probably won't have an impact, but I thought I'd find out.  If I experience the same thing, it comes back to the board.  I'll be getting shorter RF leads for some connections to the sCLK-EX.  When I used this mobo prior to the mod I didn't have the issue, but I never tested it direct USB.  I will also put the sMS-200 back in the mix and see if that changes things.  I won't go back to using the sMS in this chain regardless.  It was a miss by me in testing the board direct USB prior to modifying.  In the end having a large buffer shouldn't be a big deal, I just prefer it isn't.

 

The ISO Regen issues are specific to that device.  My ISO feature has never worked.  This is commonly reported.  Rebooting devices, connecting them or starting them up in a certain order can result in at least the Regen working.  I think it has to do with grounding and may be dependent on the DAC's requirements.

[Johnseye]

8 hours ago, jean-michel6 said:

Hi 

Thank's for ''tis very interesting feedback. 

I have also x25 E ssd that I should get in a few weeks. 

I am interested if you can test in your system how the sotm Sata II filter improves the sound. As I have sotm  sata III filter only.  

 

I will be testing the X25 with and without the filter tonight.

[Johnseye]

Tonight I compared the X25 E drive with and without the SOtM SATA II filter. First I listened to a handful of songs, then listened intently to two in particular for sounds to key in on. I pulled the filter out and repeated. 

 

The difference is very noticeable. It is the same as I previously experienced when comparing it to the M.2 drive. By recollection alone, I don't think there was much of a difference between the X25 and M.2.  What this filter does is eliminates the noise coming from the drive which contributes to a harsher digital edge sound. By eliminating this noise the sound becomes much more organic, natural and analog like. The soundstage expansion of width, height and depth or dimensionality remained without the SATA filter. I believe that is from the tX-USBexp and tX-USBultra.  The SATA filter tames the digital beast. It's the best $65 you can spend.

 

I have to say what you all probably have guessed. Roy was right. That guy is not only sharp as a tack but he has a great ear. His recommendations were spot on. That doesn't mean I would blindly follow, but I've tried many of his suggestions and haven't been misled. Right now my digital system is sounding incredible.  My recommendation is to try the SATA II filter for yourself. I don't think you need the X25 drive. Other SATA II drives will work. It's the filter that makes the difference. 

 

 

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

Tonight I compared the X25 E drive with and without the SOtM SATA II filter. First I listened to a handful of songs, then listened intently to two in particular for sounds to key in on. I pulled the filter out and repeated. 

 

The difference is very noticeable. It is the same as I previously experienced when comparing it to the M.2 drive. By recollection alone, I don't think there was much of a difference between the X25 and M.2.  What this filter does is eliminates the noise coming from the drive which contributes to a harsher digital edge sound. By eliminating this noise the sound becomes much more organic, natural and analog like. The soundstage expansion of width, height and depth or dimensionality remained without the SATA filter. I believe that is from the tX-USBexp and tX-USBultra.  The SATA filter tames the digital beast. It's the best $65 you can spend.

 

I have to say what you all probably have guessed. Roy was right. That guy is not only sharp as a tack but he has a great ear. His recommendations were spot on. That doesn't mean I would blindly follow, but I've tried many of his suggestions and haven't been misled. Right now my digital system is sounding incredible.  My recommendation is to try the SATA II filter for yourself. I don't think you need the X25 drive. Other SATA II drives will work. It's the filter that makes the difference. 

 

 

 

It could be interesting to compare the 40uV ebay voltage regulator powered from 12V and set to +5V Out, against the Filter.

 I would expect that an even better +5V regulator would outperform the Filter.

It would depend on how much room you have inside though.

 

[Johnseye]

4 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

It could be interesting to compare the 40uV ebay voltage regulator powered from 12V and set to +5V Out, against the Filter.

 I would expect that an even better +5V regulator would outperform the Filter.

It would depend on how much room you have inside though.

 

 

The SOtM device filters both the power and data lines.

Can you link the ebay reg?.

 

[LTG2010]

@Johnseye the sata ii filter is not for sale in most places it appears to have been superseded by the Sata iii version. Although you can still get it to order. I think the version iii only filters the power line. Did you go for the version ii by recomendation either from sotm or Roy? Did you get any feedback on the sound quality differences between the 2?

[Johnseye]

Just now, LTG2010 said:

@Johnseye the sata ii filter is not for sale in most places it appears to have been superseded by the Sata iii version. Although you can still get it to order. I think the version iii only filters the power line. Did you go for the version ii by recomendation either from sotm or Roy? Did you get any feedback on the sound quality differences between the 2?

 

I never tried the sata III filter. I don't know the SQ differences.  Roy recommended the II version.  My understanding is the sata III version only filters power.  I suspect some filtering is better than none.  

[Jiffi32]

31 minutes ago, LTG2010 said:

@Johnseye the sata ii filter is not for sale in most places it appears to have been superseded by the Sata iii version. Although you can still get it to order. I think the version iii only filters the power line. Did you go for the version ii by recomendation either from sotm or Roy? Did you get any feedback on the sound quality differences between the 2?

The SATA II filter is still available, it's on audiophile optimiser's web store to order from stock

[jean-michel6]

9 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Tonight I compared the X25 E drive with and without the SOtM SATA II filter. First I listened to a handful of songs, then listened intently to two in particular for sounds to key in on. I pulled the filter out and repeated. 

 

The difference is very noticeable. It is the same as I previously experienced when comparing it to the M.2 drive. By recollection alone, I don't think there was much of a difference between the X25 and M.2.  What this filter does is eliminates the noise coming from the drive which contributes to a harsher digital edge sound. By eliminating this noise the sound becomes much more organic, natural and analog like. The soundstage expansion of width, height and depth or dimensionality remained without the SATA filter. I believe that is from the tX-USBexp and tX-USBultra.  The SATA filter tames the digital beast. It's the best $65 you can spend.

 

I have to say what you all probably have guessed. Roy was right. That guy is not only sharp as a tack but he has a great ear. His recommendations were spot on. That doesn't mean I would blindly follow, but I've tried many of his suggestions and haven't been misled. Right now my digital system is sounding incredible.  My recommendation is to try the SATA II filter for yourself. I don't think you need the X25 drive. Other SATA II drives will work. It's the filter that makes the difference. 

 

 

Hi ,

 

Thank's so much to tae the time and trouble to run this test . I will definitely go ahead and order some sata II filter .

 

You are right Roy was spot on when he mentioned that this filter had the biggest impact improvement on  SQ , better than the impact of sac ssd or a better sata cable .

 

By the way in my system a dual pc set up running roon i have replaced all sata cables with Pachanko pure reference . They are extremely good and do a very good job for the ssd with my music library . For the OS ssd it does also a good job but the impact is not as important as on the music library ssd.

I use to have a PPA sata red they are just much much better than the PPA red.

 

On my OS SSD on the player PC ( samsung Evo sata III ssd ) i have a SOTM sata III filter . My ssd are each individually powered by their own dedicated 5v power supply .

I have seen no benefit with the use of the sata iii filter . I recommend going the sata ii ssd and sot filter .

[LTG2010]

1 hour ago, Jiffi32 said:

The SATA II filter is still available, it's on audiophile optimiser's web store to order from stock

Thanks for that might email them for more details between the 2. I have this one which filters the power line and seems to work for me, quieter background better bass etc. will try Sotm's version ii. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nobsound®-Elfidelity-Filtering-PC-HiFi-Computer/dp/B00WWQAYG0

[sandyk]

electronics-salon no longer appears to have this item available. They were purchased by several C.A. members. http://www.audiowind.com/pdf/A-270V2.pdf
 The key advantage of most of this vendor's PSU modules is the larger than usual heat sinks that they use.

This vendor has a large number of general purpose PSU modules currently available.

 

Finally found it !

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Ultra-low-Noise-40-V-Adjustable-Voltage-Regulator-Module-1-25-20V-1-5-Amp-/161492352376?hash=item2599b1bd78

 

Incidentally, some members have found that filtering the SATA Data lines is not always a good idea.

 

http://stores.ebay.com.au/Electronics-Salon/Power-Supply-Regulator-/_i.html?_fsub=969807219&_sid=804830199&_trksid=p4634.c0.m322

 

[Johnseye]

9 hours ago, sandyk said:

electronics-salon no longer appears to have this item available. They were purchased by several C.A. members. http://www.audiowind.com/pdf/A-270V2.pdf
 The key advantage of most of this vendor's PSU modules is the larger than usual heat sinks that they use.

This vendor has a large number of general purpose PSU modules currently available.

 

Finally found it !

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Ultra-low-Noise-40-V-Adjustable-Voltage-Regulator-Module-1-25-20V-1-5-Amp-/161492352376?hash=item2599b1bd78

 

Incidentally, some members have found that filtering the SATA Data lines is not always a good idea.

 

http://stores.ebay.com.au/Electronics-Salon/Power-Supply-Regulator-/_i.html?_fsub=969807219&_sid=804830199&_trksid=p4634.c0.m322

 

 

Thanks. I like what I'm hearing quite a bit. The SATA filter is just part of it but I'm amazed at what the music sounds like with this hardware. 

[front242]

Some thoughts on network bridging with Windows 10.
I had problems with this setup:
Windows 10 Pro x64 (1709, build 16299.64) running Roon.
PC with:
NIC 1: built-in network card Intel I219V on Asus MAXIMUS VIII GENE motherboard
NIC 2: addon network PCI-Express card: Edimax (Realtek RTL8168E chipset)
All the newest drivers from Asus, Intel and Realtek.
PS Audio DirectStream Junior DAC (DS)

My network setup consists of internet router (running DHCP server), Netgear switch connected to the router.
Everything works when the PC and DS are connected directly to the switch (standard setup, no bridging).
When I bridged the network cards my PC couldn't get network settings from DHCP. Yellow exclamation mark, no internet. So I used static IP, subnet mask, gateway and dns server on the network bridge. Internet started to work. Then I connected DS to the other, bridged network card. DS could get network setting from DHCP server, no problem.
But the music started and stopped after 1-2 s. Nothing helped. It wasn't just Roon but LMS also had hiccup.
Then realized that copying files from the PC to another PC is extremely slow, 20KB/s...and the transfer was the reason.
I changed in advanced settings in the Microsoft Network Adapter Multiplexor Driver (device manager):
Large Send Offload v2 (IPv4) to Disabled
Large Send Offload v2 (IPv6) to Disabled (this one is not necesery, just for sure).
And everything started to work. Music good, transfers about 110-115 MB/s - normal for a gigabit network.
Contrary to this article:
https://www.windowscentral.com/how-set-and-manage-network-bridge-connection-windows-10
I discovered that changing Jumbo Frame from disabled to 9KB on the network card connected to the switch allows you to get DHCP server setting without the need to use static IP, etc. You can even leave Large Send Offload to enabled in Microsoft Network Adapter Multiplexor Driver (I assume that enabling Jumbo Frames disables Large Send Offload by default).
I ended up with Jumbo Frames disabled (standard settings) because all your network devices should support it. And Large Send Offload to disabled.
I set static IP, etc in the network bridge and DS - I have feeling that this makes the devices to appear faster in Roon. The network bridge slows down network a little.
With Network Bridge the internet is somehow slower - but I think it's obvious. Is just virtual, software adapter.

Of course I know it may be my specific hardware/software problem/solution but I hope it'll help someone.

P.S.
Large Send Offload settings is often a problem with virtual adapters like VMware ones or microsoft network bridge in this case:
http://www.peerwisdom.org/2013/04/03/large-send-offload-and-network-performance/

[austinpop]

4 hours ago, front242 said:

Some thoughts on network bridging with Windows 10.
I had problems with this setup:
Windows 10 Pro x64 (1709, build 16299.64) running Roon.
PC with:
NIC 1: built-in network card Intel I219V on Asus MAXIMUS VIII GENE motherboard
NIC 2: addon network PCI-Express card: Edimax (Realtek RTL8168E chipset)
All the newest drivers from Asus, Intel and Realtek.
PS Audio DirectStream Junior DAC (DS)

My network setup consists of internet router (running DHCP server), Netgear switch connected to the router.
Everything works when the PC and DS are connected directly to the switch (standard setup, no bridging).
When I bridged the network cards my PC couldn't get network settings from DHCP. Yellow exclamation mark, no internet. So I used static IP, subnet mask, gateway and dns server on the network bridge. Internet started to work. Then I connected DS to the other, bridged network card. DS could get network setting from DHCP server, no problem.
But the music started and stopped after 1-2 s. Nothing helped. It wasn't just Roon but LMS also had hiccup.
Then realized that copying files from the PC to another PC is extremely slow, 20KB/s...and the transfer was the reason.
I changed in advanced settings in the Microsoft Network Adapter Multiplexor Driver (device manager):
Large Send Offload v2 (IPv4) to Disabled
Large Send Offload v2 (IPv6) to Disabled (this one is not necesery, just for sure).
And everything started to work. Music good, transfers about 110-115 MB/s - normal for a gigabit network.
Contrary to this article:
https://www.windowscentral.com/how-set-and-manage-network-bridge-connection-windows-10
I discovered that changing Jumbo Frame from disabled to 9KB on the network card connected to the switch allows you to get DHCP server setting without the need to use static IP, etc. You can even leave Large Send Offload to enabled in Microsoft Network Adapter Multiplexor Driver (I assume that enabling Jumbo Frames disables Large Send Offload by default).
I ended up with Jumbo Frames disabled (standard settings) because all your network devices should support it. And Large Send Offload to disabled.
I set static IP, etc in the network bridge and DS - I have feeling that this makes the devices to appear faster in Roon. The network bridge slows down network a little.
With Network Bridge the internet is somehow slower - but I think it's obvious. Is just virtual, software adapter.

Of course I know it may be my specific hardware/software problem/solution but I hope it'll help someone.

P.S.
Large Send Offload settings is often a problem with virtual adapters like VMware ones or microsoft network bridge in this case:
http://www.peerwisdom.org/2013/04/03/large-send-offload-and-network-performance/

 

Thanks, that's very interesting. I did my bridge so long ago, but I will take a look at these settings...

[Johnseye]

I spent most of the weekend trying every possible hardware and software configuration to determine what was causing the dropouts when using a small buffer. I won't run through all the scenarios,  but I did get 2016 Server running in core mode and learned some new Powershell commands. Let me tell you, Audiophile Optimizer is indispensable with 2016 Core. I don't think I could have gotten things running without it. I even tried WASAPI, hoping it would make a difference from ASIO. There might have been some small improvements toward shrinking the buffer, but nothing got things where I had them before. Keep in mind, a larger buffer shouldn't matter. This is just a personal preference. 

 

I had been using the sMS-200 before,  so no Windows drivers for the DAC.  After exhausting every possible scenario I decided to install ROCK on the X25 drive. It worked flawlessly. I can even set the buffer down to 5ms without a hiccup. This tells me there's an issue with my DACs Windows driver and the server hardware. I emailed Peter Madnick about it. Hopefully there's another driver. Otherwise I'll use Rock until I get a new DAC. Not a big deal, I just can't use HQPlayer or JRiver. 

[acaro]

I had a similar but different problem.  Turned out it was one of my ethernet cables.  

[acaro]

A question to those who have the trifecta and the dlink switch. How are you powering the dlink?  Does the sms-500 have enough power to do the trifecta and the dlink? I have the the sms-200 ultra and the sms-500 (thinking about the txUsb), but don't wsnt to buy yet another power supply.

[BigGuy]

On 5/16/2017 at 2:24 AM, romaz said:

 

So, my Adnaco S3B has come in and it is indeed very good and the combination of Adnaco + tX-USBUltra is just heavenly.  I see great potential with the Adnaco with its clocks replaced.

 

Where SOtM's sound signature is this wonderful detail clarity, it can also sound a bit thin.  If there has been a criticism with their latest Ultra server, this is it and perhaps, this signature is even intentional.  This is why I value AO with its sound signatures and digital filters because it allows me to put a bit of meat on the bones of the SOtM.  I generally value silver over copper DC cabling but I have intentionally gone with copper with my SOtM gear.  

 

The Adnaco has this wonderful quality of gravitas.  Sound has more weight.  Compared against my server's stock USB port, SQ is significantly improved.  It lacks the depth and air and sparkle of the tX-USBUltra but the tX-USBUltra, just like its siblings can sound a touch thin.  The Adnaco + tX = pure bliss because the balance now is perfection but keep in mind, this is only my personal preference.

 

Could the Adnaco with its 3 clocks replaced provide the equivalent SQ of Adnaco + tX?  I'm not sure but that would be wonderful.  Is it better than switch + sMS-200Ultra + dX-USB HD Ultra or switch + sMS-200Ultra + tX-USBUltra?  I don't know yet, I'll find out tomorrow but thus far, I can't stop listening.

 

Here's something else that I was not expecting.  I tried using the tX-USBUltra as a hub for my music drive while I had just the Adnaco connected to my DAC.  I connected a compact flash card filled with music via a USB adapter to the tX and then compared SQ against this same compact flash connected to one of my server's USB port.  There was some improvement (larger soundstage) when the CF was connected to the tX but the improvement was small and I believe the tX is limited here by the poor quality of my server's USB port.  Of course, this could improve once I replace my motherboard clock but that remains to be seen.  I then tried plugging this compact flash setup into the Adnaco and WOW!  A very noticeable improvement in terms of detail clarity and separation.  I am now targeting a 2nd Adnaco for my music drive.

 

Regarding cost estimate of the motherboard, that is still being discussed.  

I too am using the Adnaco S3B <http://www.adnaco.com/products/s3a/>
 

[BigGuy]

On 5/16/2017 at 2:24 AM, romaz said:

 

So, my Adnaco S3B has come in and it is indeed very good and the combination of Adnaco + tX-USBUltra is just heavenly.  I see great potential with the Adnaco with its clocks replaced.

 

Where SOtM's sound signature is this wonderful detail clarity, it can also sound a bit thin.  If there has been a criticism with their latest Ultra server, this is it and perhaps, this signature is even intentional.  This is why I value AO with its sound signatures and digital filters because it allows me to put a bit of meat on the bones of the SOtM.  I generally value silver over copper DC cabling but I have intentionally gone with copper with my SOtM gear.  

 

The Adnaco has this wonderful quality of gravitas.  Sound has more weight.  Compared against my server's stock USB port, SQ is significantly improved.  It lacks the depth and air and sparkle of the tX-USBUltra but the tX-USBUltra, just like its siblings can sound a touch thin.  The Adnaco + tX = pure bliss because the balance now is perfection but keep in mind, this is only my personal preference.

 

Could the Adnaco with its 3 clocks replaced provide the equivalent SQ of Adnaco + tX?  I'm not sure but that would be wonderful.  Is it better than switch + sMS-200Ultra + dX-USB HD Ultra or switch + sMS-200Ultra + tX-USBUltra?  I don't know yet, I'll find out tomorrow but thus far, I can't stop listening.

 

Here's something else that I was not expecting.  I tried using the tX-USBUltra as a hub for my music drive while I had just the Adnaco connected to my DAC.  I connected a compact flash card filled with music via a USB adapter to the tX and then compared SQ against this same compact flash connected to one of my server's USB port.  There was some improvement (larger soundstage) when the CF was connected to the tX but the improvement was small and I believe the tX is limited here by the poor quality of my server's USB port.  Of course, this could improve once I replace my motherboard clock but that remains to be seen.  I then tried plugging this compact flash setup into the Adnaco and WOW!  A very noticeable improvement in terms of detail clarity and separation.  I am now targeting a 2nd Adnaco for my music drive.

 

Regarding cost estimate of the motherboard, that is still being discussed.  

I too am using the Adnaco S3B 

http://www.adnaco.com/products/s3a/
with a 30 ft glass cable between my PC server and DAC.  USB connection is via the Pangea Ag cable treated with the Swenson shield ground.

 

Sounds like the SOTM tX-USBUltra is a great add-on but put off by the $1k buy-in.

 

Any other things you have tried or are planning?  Thoughts on a IsoRegen, etc., vs the SOTM?

 

[zoltan]

14 minutes ago, acaro said:

A question to those who have the trifecta and the dlink switch. How are you powering the dlink?  Does the sms-500 have enough power to do the trifecta and the dlink? I have the the sms-200 ultra and the sms-500 (thinking about the txUsb), but don't wsnt to buy yet another power supply.

My SOtM modded Dlink switch is powered by Uptone JS-2 at 5V, a bit of an overkill but I had it around already. The SMS-200 Ultra is powered by SPS-500 at 12V. 

You cannot power all from the SPS-500 as you can only set it to one voltage output at a time.