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

[Johnseye]

14 minutes ago, Superdad said:

this NUC makes much obvious things like HQ Player SRC filters and dither options.  And now I absolutely can not stand HQP PCM>DSD conversion.  For reference, folks should know I have a heavily modified Singxer SU-1 feeding I2S to a Holo Spring Level 3.

 

I 100% agree about the filters and conversion.

I also have a modified SU-1 but am not sold on it with the NUC yet.  I just started doing some comparison with both the tX-USBultra before it and out all together.  I think I should spend more time with it.

[octaviars]

I measured my NUC7i5BNH it has M.2 SSD for ROCK OS and second SSD for music.

This is with regular 44.1/16 no DSP

19Vdc average 0.57A (10.83W) and peak 1.5A
15Vdc average 0.69A (10.35W) and peak 2.1A
12Vdc average 0.81A (9.72W) and peak 2.8A

Average is during play to Roon endpoint. Peak was during start up.

[asdf1000]

34 minutes ago, Superdad said:

It sounds fantastic! 

 

Fantastic with your ISO REGEN? Less fantastic without?

 

 

Would be greatly interested in your observations/impressions of your microRendu vs LarryNUC without ISO REGEN (whenever you get the chance to warm up the microRendu)..

 

 

 

[lmitche]

12 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

 

Fantastic with your ISO REGEN? Less fantastic without?

 

 

Would be greatly interested in your observations/impressions of your microRendu vs LarryNUC without ISO REGEN (whenever you get the chance to warm up the microRendu)..

 

 

 

I've removed the ISO Regen twice to test SQ without it. Twice it has gone back in.

[Bricki]

1 hour ago, lmitche said:

The quad core sounds a bit more resolving in the mids to me. I enjoyed listening to this machine and felt sad to see it go!

That's not what I wanted to read ?. I was very close to ordering the pentium.

 

Oh well, I am about to go and pick up my celeron NUC from the post office. My akasa case doesn't arrive until mid December though ?

[Dev]

10 minutes ago, lmitche said:

I've removed the ISO Regen twice to test SQ without it. Twice it has gone back in.

 

Did some folks report Sotm tx-ultra was redundant in their setup ? I have neither iso regen nor sotm and yet it sounds fantastic and can't think of it sounding any better. How much difference do you think you gained with iso regen ?

[asdf1000]

18 minutes ago, lmitche said:

I've removed the ISO Regen twice to test SQ without it. Twice it has gone back in.

 

Thanks Larry. I guessed this may be the case.

[lmitche]

7 minutes ago, Dev said:

 

Did some folks report Sotm tx-ultra was redundant in their setup ? I have neither iso regen nor sotm and yet it sounds fantastic and can't think of it sounding any better. How much difference do you think you gained with iso regen ?

The ISO Regen adds clarity. Pianos and guitars are less wooly.

[asdf1000]

3 minutes ago, lmitche said:

The ISO Regen adds clarity. Pianos and guitars are less wooly.

 

Have you ever had an ultraRendu (not micro) in your system?

 

[ElviaCaprice]

Having the ISO Regen adding clarity to this new NUC endpoint doesn't give me any confidence in it's supposed superior SQ abilities considering I found the ISO Regen a detriment to SQ in my jetway single server sCLK-EX NUC system. 

 

Picked up a new 8GB memory styx.  Look forward to trying out AL loaded to memory next month.

[mormogi]

18 minutes ago, lmitche said:

The ISO Regen adds clarity. Pianos and guitars are less wooly.

with x10sbaL do the same??? hahaha

[Superdad]

2 hours ago, octaviars said:

I measured my NUC7i5BNH it has M.2 SSD for ROCK OS and second SSD for music.

This is with regular 44.1/16 no DSP

19Vdc average 0.57A (10.83W) and peak 1.5A
15Vdc average 0.69A (10.35W) and peak 2.1A
12Vdc average 0.81A (9.72W) and peak 2.8A

Average is during play to Roon endpoint. Peak was during start up.

 

Interesting how the efficiency is greater (lower wattage) at 12V than at 19V.  

[austinpop]

SQ Differences between Roon player and Squeezelite on Audiolinux

 

Now that I had squeezelite working at last, I was finally able to address the question of SQ differences between the 2 ecosystems - Roon and LMS. Recall that on the shipped OS, InnuOS, the SQ of the LMS/squeezelite combo is consistently better than Roon.

 

Having brought up Audiolinux on this box, running in ramroot, and having found that Roon in this configuration exceeded the SQ of both Roon and LMS/squeezelite on the original OS, the question then became: what about LMS/squeezelite on Audiolinux? Would it in fact again leapfrog Roon?

 

Short answer: Yes. But only if properly tuned.

 

More Detail

 

Let's first talk about memory. This box has 8GB of physical RAM. Despite my efforts to trim the size of the root partition, here is the output of the free command after inital boot:

 

              total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available

Mem:        8026548     1846292     5461128         556      719128     6074440

Swap:             0           0           0

 

 

Notice that there are approx 1.8GB in use, with 5+GB free.

 

After Roon is started and running for a few minutes, used memory has grown by ~600MB, which confirms Roon is allocating memory as it goes and as needed.
 

              total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available

Mem:        8026548     2242756     4945320         560      838472     5678540

Swap:             0           0           0

 

I first ran squeezelite without setting any value for the -b option. From the help, here's what this option does:

  -b <stream>:<output> Specify internal Stream and Output buffer sizes in Kbytes

 

Next, I tried several values for this parameter on the command line:

1. default, no setting

2. -b 1048576:1048576

3. -b 1572864:1572864

4. -b 2097152:2097152

Here is the output of free in the -b 2097152:2097152 case:

              total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available

Mem:        8026548     6067792      993068         564      965688     1853428

Swap:             0           0           0

 

Notice that the memory used has grown by about 4GB, which confirms that the 2 numbers in the -b option are additive. Also note that free memory has dropped to under 1GB (ulp!), but what the heck - let's live dangerously.

 

Comparing squeezelite case 4 (4GB buffers) with Roon, the SQ difference is quite obvious! squeezelite sounds so much better!

1. Yet another jump in dynamics, but also
2. it feels like the noise floor dropped even more
   • bigger and deeper image
   • better instrument separation

I was stunned. But what about stepping back from the precipice (very little free memory), and reducing the buffer size? With each step from 4GB (option 4) to 3GB (option 3) to 2GB (option 2), there were drops in SQ, although they were small. The final step - going from 2GB buffer (option 2) to default buffer - was the biggest drop in SQ.

 

Here's the kicker - running with the default buffer size (i.e. no -b parameter set), the SQ of Roon and squeezelite were indistinguishable. In other words, the SQ benefit from squeezelite comes from setting (and presumably pinning) large buffers.

 

Key Takeaways

1. Those of you who are running squeezelite with LMS on Audiolinux, please give this a try and report what you hear.
2. But... beware of overcommitting memory! With squeezelite running for a while, run "free" and see what your situation is. Then looking at how much free memory you have, set a safe buffer size budget, and try the -b option. If you're running the squeezelite-R2 that Piero recommends, then this will need to be set in the /etc/conf.d/squeezelite file in the params value.
3. Even those of you who are running squeezelite on other Linux variants might want to give this a try.
4. Finally where does this leave us Roon fans? Frustrated! We need to get the Roon architect(s) to see these results and prototype a suitable form of this in their player. Of course, Roon is a more complex player, and they have to consider all the target OSes it can run on. But I think there is some gain to be had with clever coding.
5. We (Roon users) must advocate for this.

[bibo01]

1 hour ago, austinpop said:

Next, I tried several values for this parameter on the command line:

1. default, no setting

2. -b 1048576:1048576

3. -b 1572864:1572864

4. -b 2097152:2097152

Here is the output of free in the -b 2097152:2097152 case:

              total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available

Mem:        8026548     6067792      993068         564      965688     1853428

Swap:             0           0           0

 

Notice that the memory used has grown by about 4GB, which confirms that the 2 numbers in the -b option are additive. Also note that free memory has dropped to under 1GB (ulp!), but what the heck - let's live dangerously.

 

Comparing squeezelite case 4 (4GB buffers) with Roon, the SQ difference is quite obvious! squeezelite sounds so much better!

1. Yet another jump in dynamics, but also
2. it feels like the noise floor dropped even more
   • bigger and deeper image
   • better instrument separation

I was stunned. But what about stepping back from the precipice (very little free memory), and reducing the buffer size? With each step from 4GB (option 4) to 3GB (option 3) to 2GB (option 2), there were drops in SQ, although they were small. The final step - going from 2GB buffer (option 2) to default buffer - was the biggest drop in SQ.

 

Here's the kicker - running with the default buffer size (i.e. no -b parameter set), the SQ of Roon and squeezelite were indistinguishable. In other words, the SQ benefit from squeezelite comes from setting (and presumably pinning) large buffers.

Just a note on the "b" option in squeezelite...

-b is the input/output buffer, the two values should be equals when using uncompressed PCM, that is when one uses C-3PO plugin. For best results, when using FLAC, the output should be 1/0.75 of the input.

Option 2 above "-b 1048576:1048576" is 2GB, that way the song is almost always in RAM, the network inactive and CPU gets 400/16 fewer interrupts from memory, but be sure you have enough RAM or lower the value.

[hifi25nl]

I have been asked to list the main features of audiolinux. 

I would like to put in evidence that if you would want to configure an archlinux base installation so that is identical to audiolinux, it would take very much time… 

    • AL is using a realtime kernel with very low CPU latency. This custom compiled kernel is based on realtime BFQ kernel with some adjustments and some patches. The last version can be downloaded here: https://www.audio-linux.com/ftp/packages/kernel/last/linux-rt-bfq/ This is the last 4.19.x with more patches for audio. The performance of this type of kernels with a decent processor is impressive: http://www.audio-linux.com/#LATENCY

    • AL tunes the realtime priorities of processes and interrupts using rtirq and rtapp (this last developed by myself) with the possibility of fine-tuning for your system, see http://www.audio-linux.com/html/realtime.html This has nothing to do with the “nice” parameter in linux (in this case is irrelevant) or the priority in non-realtime kernel or priority assignments in Windows. In realtime kernels if an audio application has some priority all other tasks will be executed after. This will decrease the impact on sound of other running applications but also of other equipment connected to your PC (this because of irq priority assignments). Also frequency of rtc0 and hpet is adjusted.  

    • AL implements the ramroot utility to allow RAM-resident OS for best sound quality. If the application allows it you can load also a song to RAM (see buffer parameter in squeezelite, for example). The ramsave script for saving the system in ram mode is original. 

    • AL preinstalls the most important audio services and applications like Roon and HQPlayer (and in lxqt version Logitech Media Server, Squeezelite, MPD, UpnP for MPD) so it works out of the box.  These applications are already partially configured. 

    • In AL you can install easily the application you want and eventually compile it with your parameters. All necessary packages for compilation are already installed. This is an “open” system where you can decide what you want and how to configure it. The update of applications can be made from the inside with a simple command. You can update daily, if you want.

    • In AL you can start (or enable at boot) audio services very easily with custom scripts. In headless version with the configuration menu, in lxqt version with shortcuts in the Desktop. 

    • Think to AL not as an image, but as a service. I have contributed to the fine-tune of many systems and if necessary I have made some special features on request. See for example the new how-to for big Roon database in ram mode: http://www.audio-linux.com/html/roon.html Recently I have also made a custom cover downloader and an HTTP server for accessing covers from mpd client. I am giving support not only to audiolinux but also for hqplayer, mpd, roon etc.

 

[MrUnderhill]

8 hours ago, Middy said:

Just got an interesting result. 

Still have some usb filters in series out the NUC for fun. Iso regen/ lps1. Ipurifier i silencer intona. 

In this chain it improves some detail dampens others. Filter over load..

For fun i took off my i defender off my pc (ground loop killer) put it first in the chain and fed a battery pack into the side port. 

Kills NUC 5V out

Feeds filtering line/ repackaging intona

This feeds 7v lps1 into iso regen =Qutest 

Everything perked back up. Sound stage wider / sharper

 

Not suggesting run out and start shopping, i got some of these as part off cornans experiment thread to test stuff.

Its lying around.

 

Premise of this is feed filters/ reclocking with non NUC PC 5V ie battery input-

Filter +  reclock- filter  for final Iso regen lps1.

Everthing has opened up with clean 5v feeder chain to the iso regen. 

If you still have old bits give it a go to see if it helps your chain. 

In my case a lot of redundant kit to give the iso the best chance possible. 

If you have old lipo packs intona ifi or what ever you spend your hard cash on.

 

Something to play with until Austinpop gets his NUC. 

All covered before but new to me in this configuration. I know little...just trying things..

Dave

 

Ie

 

https://ifi-audio.com/ 

Phone battery pack

https://www.audiostream.com/content/intona-technology-usb-20-high-speed-isolator

 

+  the ubiquitous  

https://uptoneaudio.com/products/iso-regen

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Dave,

 

Like you I have been playing with my USB widget chain. I noticed that Rob (Tubelover) had massively simplified his jigsaw of widgets when using his PoE discoveries and having traveled a short way down that path myself I tried removing my IFI iPurifier. I didn't like what i heard and so quickly replaced it.

 

Yesterday I went the whole hog moving from this:

Chain = AL NUC [R-Core 19V 5A LPSU >  Matrix USB cable > Iso Regen [R-Core DC30W 2A LPSU >> 7V2 1A LT3045 >>5V 0.5A LT3045 >> PoE] > IFI Idefender [No power] > VBus2 > IFI Mercury 3.0 > Adapter > USB B power injector [R-Core 8V 6A LPSU >> DC 3.1 PoE >> 7V2 1A LT3045 >> 5V 0.5A LT3045] > IFI iPurifier 2 > SingXer F1

 

To this:

Chain = AL NUC [R-Core 19V 5A LPSU > VBus2 > IFI Mercury 3.0 > Adapter > USB B power injector [R-Core 8V 6A LPSU >> DC 3.1 PoE >> 7V2 1A LT3045 >> 5V 0.5A LT3045] > SingXer F1

 

A bit of a simplification.

 

Result?

The new chain has a slightly bigger sound field. There is an increase in dynamics and detail.

 

All positive?

With well recorded material yes. With some tracks then a sibilant edge is more apparent.

 

There are certain 'problem' tracks I have used for testing over the years. I have used these to track and reduce the bit of edge, perhaps at a reduction in some positive elements. Some of these are still OK, some have moved slightly in a negative direction.

 

I have left the system running overnight. Later I will redo my listening tests and post my thoughts.

 

M

[MrUnderhill]

7 hours ago, greenleo said:

My NUC is coming and I have an LPS-1.2 and I need a DC cable between them.

 

Anybody may advise me the dimension of the DC plugs needed for the  LPS and the NUC7CJYH?

5.5/2.5

 

You can buy adapters if you have 5.5/2.1.

[MrUnderhill]

2 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

1. default, no setting

2. -b 1048576:1048576

3. -b 1572864:1572864

4. -b 2097152:2097152

 

 

 

Thx R,

 

Edited and running - option 4.

 

Tracking memory.

 

Will report back.

 

M

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, MrUnderhill said:

To this:

Chain = AL NUC [R-Core 19V 5A LPSU > VBus2 > IFI Mercury 3.0 > Adapter > USB B power injector [R-Core 8V 6A LPSU >> DC 3.1 PoE >> 7V2 1A LT3045 >> 5V 0.5A LT3045] > SingXer F1

 

A bit of a simplification.

 

Result?

The new chain has a slightly bigger sound field. There is an increase in dynamics and detail.

 

All positive?

With well recorded material yes. With some tracks then a sibilant edge is more apparent.

 

 You need a larger value normal type electrolytic capacitor in parallel with the input of the 5V  LT3045 (try 100uF 16V for example) to obtain a more tonally balanced presentation. You have in effect a small increase in  upper HF detail at present. which results in a bigger soundstage, but often results in increased sibilance as you have noticed.

[Jigafur]

14 hours ago, auricgoldfinger said:

For my listening comparison, I simply substituted the NUC for the sMS, keeping the LPS-1.2 as the power supply for both.

 

How did you do it?

UltraCap™ LPS-1.2 (can output only 1.1A)

NUC need about 2,5a with 12v

[lmitche]

6 hours ago, lmitche said:

The ISO Regen adds clarity. Pianos and guitars are less wooly.

Hi all,

 

I see my words being parsed to death here. To stop that, here is a quick summary from the perspective of my experience with NUC/AL SQ.

 

The big step function SQ gain is from the combination of the NUC and AL together. I haven't tried the NUC alone, or AL alone, so can't comment.

 

A NUC running from a stock power supply brings the essential NUC goodness experienced here.

 

Raising the quality of the power source for the NUC above the stock supply is the factor that has the most impact on SQ.

 

The SQ differences between models are relatively minor. More expensive models have a slight edge, but cannot use easily available, relatively low cost, high quality, moderate current supplies like the lps1.2. 

 

A Celeron or Pentium NUC powered by an LPS1.2 sounds absolutely beautiful.

 

Placing the NUC board in a fanless case brings an increase in SQ that is very worthwhile.

 

The size of the SQ benefits from add-on devices are no more or less than experienced in any other system. The ISO Regen powered by a second lps1.2 adds benefit here. One of the SOTM devices seems to be the exception to this rule, but this is reported by others and I can't comment.

 

Tweaking the OS and adding vibration control can significantly enhance the NUC SQ experience.

 

That's all for now. Enjoy!

 

 

[seeteeyou]

9 hours ago, lmitche said:

The quad core sounds a bit more resolving in the mids to me. I enjoyed listening to this machine and felt sad to see it go!

 

Fantastic, it's only $122.5 (850 RMB) from Shanghai so that's gonna be "early Black Friday" for those of us who are living in Asia

 

https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?id=581966896174

[auricgoldfinger]

1 hour ago, Jigafur said:

 

How did you do it?

UltraCap™ LPS-1.2 (can output only 1.1A)

NUC need about 2,5a with 12v

 

I didn't do anything.  It works the way I described plug and play.

[lmitche]

1 hour ago, Jigafur said:

 

How did you do it?

UltraCap™ LPS-1.2 (can output only 1.1A)

NUC need about 2,5a with 12v

You are misinformed. The Pentium NUC needs 10 watts, not 30. The LPS1.2 delivers 13.2 watts.

[rickca]

3 hours ago, hifi25nl said:

AL preinstalls the most important audio services and applications like Roon and HQPlayer (and in lxqt version Logitech Media Server, Squeezelite, MPD, UpnP for MPD) so it works out of the box.  These applications are already partially configured. 

I thought I'd seen options for things like LMS/Squeezelite in AL headless 0.5, not just lxqt.  Am I wrong?