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

[lmitche]

28 minutes ago, austinpop said:

 

Let's see what the findings are. I am not sure I buy the premise that a split cable helps, if the power source is simply another USB port on the source component.

 

OTOH - using the power split directly from an LPS - that I can see! 

Over here, as you say, for powering the microidsd the power side of the cable goes directly to a LPS-1.

 

However, with the 8 to 10 DAC models I've had here in the past 3 years, whether the dac needs vbus power or not, the split cable, or vbus elimination seems to reduce intermodulation distortion of the signal on every DAC.

[mozes]

28 minutes ago, austinpop said:

 

As @romaz said - you may be able to use the LPS-1 to power the tX-USBultra, depending on the current draw. Does you Brooklyn need VBUS at all? If not, then you may well be OK with using the LPS-1. No need to even bring in the JS-2.

The Brooklyn needs the VBUS and I have the VR MINI 12v so I will go for the 12v option to try it with the VR. This puts the LPS-1 out as it has a max voltage of 7v

[beautiful music]

44 minutes ago, moussaobeid said:

The Brooklyn needs the VBUS and I have the VR MINI 12v so I will go for the 12v option to try it with the VR. This puts the LPS-1 out as it has a max voltage of 7v

What about either Chord Dave or Hugo2 or Mojo, does it need vbus Or not?

[romaz]

4 hours ago, sadekkhalifa said:

What about either Chord Dave or Hugo2 or Mojo, does it need vbus Or not?

 

Chord DAVE needs the 5V VBUS for its galvanic isolation to work.  Mojo only needs to see that the 5V VBUS is active so it knows to switch to the USB input, otherwise, it defaults to optical SPDIF.  I'm guessing the upcoming Hugo 2 will also need VBUS for the same reason.

[romaz]

9 hours ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Using an adapter makes the need for any dual headed USB chord or separate Vbus mute.   As long as one uses clean power, like the LPS-1 for powering the preceding upstream component.

If one would like to remain with an LPS-1 for powering all the new sotm components,  I suppose one could get the new clocking board separate and power the clocking board and each sotm component with their own LPS-1.

What I don't like is Sotm's pricing without the clock.  Really they should offer these components for less than the previous non ultra ones.

Thus in my opinion these new ultra components are far too expensive and I don't think they will sell very many. 

 

 

To put things into perspective, the standard sMS-200 at $450 is nearly $200 less expensive than the microRendu and so it's hard to complain about the price of this unit, especially given how well it performs.

 

Their standard dX-USB HD at $450 is $50 more than a Singxer SU-1, half the price of an Audiophilleo 1 and less than 1/3 the price of a Berkeley Alpha USB.  Considering its performance and given that it has SPDIF RCA, optical and AES outputs (which none of the other converters have), this seems like a fair price.

 

Their standard tX-USB Hub Ex (which I have no experience with) is pretty expensive at $370 compared to the USB Regen or W4S Recovery.  I suspect that not too many people own this unit because of its much higher price relative to its competition.

 

The extra $700 for the Ultra version is expensive but given that this super clock elevates these units into very rare air and brings their performance level beyond servers I have heard that sell for well over $10k, my guess is that people who are in the market for some of these high end servers will consider these Ultras to be considerable bargains.  Even those who are in the market for a more modest Auralic Aries with Femto clock ($1,599) would be hard pressed not to consider the sMS-200 Ultra a bargain at $1,300.

 

[ElviaCaprice]

6 hours ago, romaz said:

 

To put things into perspective, the standard sMS-200 at $450 is nearly $200 less expensive than the microRendu and so it's hard to complain about the price of this unit, especially given how well it performs.

 

Their standard dX-USB HD at $450 is $50 more than a Singxer SU-1, half the price of an Audiophilleo 1 and less than 1/3 the price of a Berkeley Alpha USB.  Considering its performance and given that it has SPDIF RCA, optical and AES outputs (which none of the other converters have), this seems like a fair price.

 

Their standard tX-USB Hub Ex (which I have no experience with) is pretty expensive at $370 compared to the USB Regen or W4S Recovery.  I suspect that not too many people own this unit because of its much higher price relative to its competition.

 

The extra $700 for the Ultra version is expensive but given that this super clock elevates these units into very rare air and brings their performance level beyond servers I have heard that sell for well over $10k, my guess is that people who are in the market for some of these high end servers will consider these Ultras to be considerable bargains.  Even those who are in the market for a more modest Auralic Aries with Femto clock ($1,599) would be hard pressed not to consider the sMS-200 Ultra a bargain at $1,300.

 

No argument about non ultra SoTM components.  The problem is the ultra components.  If we purchase an ultra component with a clock, one will need a more expensive power supply than an LPS-1.  Thus a $1,300 Ultra sMS-200 now becomes $2,300 with a proper power supply.   An Ultra sMS-200 without the the clock is $1,000.  Why so much for a non clocked ultra component?  Should be around $450 or less, then we can clock externally and use separate LPS-1's to power all.  Use the new clocking board to clock other non clocked ultra components or other devices.   Being able to incorporate the LPS-1 in as the de facto power supply is key to making these ultra components competitive in pricing.  Without the LPS-1 or reasonable non clocked ultra versions, these new SoTM Ultra components escalate into a new over priced non starter in my book.  I'm sure a few folks will buy into it, but the majority of audiophiles will look elsewhere.

[romaz]

3 hours ago, ElviaCaprice said:

 An Ultra sMS-200 without the the clock is $1,000.  

 

I'm not sure what you mean by this.  All Ultras by definition have the better clock.

 

I understand your point, however.  To not be able to use the LPS-1 makes it difficult although their soon-to-be-released sPS-500 hybrid PSU at $500 could turn out to be a good option.  I'm not convinced, however, that you can't use an LPS-1 with the sMS-200 Ultra.  SOtM claims you need up to 1.5A but that's because it has 2 USB 2.0 ports in the back that some people will use for storage drives.  If you don't use these ports for anything and your DAC doesn't draw much from the 5V VBUS, who knows what's possible.

[SwissBear]

Hi Roy,

Did you have any chance to compare the sMS-200 + tx-USBUltra to the sMS-200Ultra ?

Do you have any information regarding the once contemplated upgrade process for existing sMS-200 to sMS-200Ultra ?

[romaz]

2 hours ago, SwissBear said:

Hi Roy,

Did you have any chance to compare the sMS-200 + tx-USBUltra to the sMS-200Ultra ?

Do you have any information regarding the once contemplated upgrade process for existing sMS-200 to sMS-200Ultra ?

 

 

I have no experience with either the standard tX-USB or with the tX-USB Ultra.

 

When I was first looking into all of this, I simply wanted to try the clock and preferably in the sMS-200.  It was May at SOtM that suggested that I consider the tX-USB Ultra.  They had yet to try their new clock in the sMS-200 and so they didn't really know how it would sound but having just built a prototype tX-USB Ultra, they were quite surprised by how good it was sounding (better than they were expecting).  Because my Chord DAVE sounds best via USB, of course, I agreed to give it a try and they were going to build me another prototype (they only had two at the time but they needed them for their own testing).  This ended up taking much longer than anticipated, however, because of difficulties procuring the larger chassis that was necessary to house the larger clock board.  After some time, I inquired about whether this clock board could be squeezed into the dX-USB HD chassis and upon further investigation, it appeared they could do it and so that is how this evolved.  Of course, my target was always the sMS-200 and once I understood that the sCLK-EX board housed 4 clocks and that I would have 3 free clocks, it made sense to me to do what I did.

 

In hindsight, while I have this complicated mess of 3 components (dX-USB HD Ultra, sMS-200 Ultra, reclocking Ethernet switch) joined together by a web of chords, it proved to be very educational because it allowed me to experience first-hand the benefits of multiple reclocking, something I never predicted would happen to this degree.  The value of using one clock board to reclock these 3 components is also considerably higher than just having the clock board reclock one component.  Easily, the best value investment was to throw in my cheap $20 Ethernet switch.  This switch by itself nearly doubles what I am getting from the sMS-200 Ultra.  If I were to do it all again, one thought that came to mind would be to buy a sMS-200 Ultra and have them reclock 2 cheap Ethernet switches.  The cost would be considerably less but also these switches would be very easy to power.  One thing I will say is that if you end up buying an Ultra of some sort, it would be a shame to have those extra clocks go to waste.  Those clocks are like audio gold.

[mozes]

I placed an order for the tX-USB ultra to use between my Nimitra music server and Brooklyn DAC.

When I get it I will report how it performs vs Intona+RUR

[austinpop]

I'm pursuing a similar project as Roy. Once I receive the equipment I will post impressions. It won't be for a few weeks.

[greenleo]

On 2017/4/6 at 0:35 AM, romaz said:

 

You'll need to get your soldering gun out.

 

You can use any typical SATA power cable.  Here is a photo:

 

 

Ignore the orange (3.3V) and yellow (12V) wires.  Using the red (5V) wire and the two black wires (ground), solder them onto a 2.1mm x 5.5mm female connector similar to the following:

 

 

Not hard at all but if you want a better quality SATA power cable, you can have Pachanko Cables make one for you.  Presently, I am using the above cheapo cable.

Thank you, Roy.

 

Have you ever considered the Intel X25M SSD?  This is MLC but the active power is 0.15W.  The idle power is the same as the X25E.

[seeteeyou]

FYI - no need to bother with any MLC or even TLC SSDs since they couldn't even hold a candle to SLC ones according to many audiophiles in Taiwan, they also recommended SuperSSpeed S301 in addition to Intel X25E

 

http://www.myav.com.tw/bbs/showthread.php?threadid=349951&pagenumber=483

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4790/supersspeed_s301_hyper_slc_120gb_solid_state_drive_review/index.html

 

They're very affordable (< $50 for 60GB and < $75 for 120GB) but importing them from China might cost quite a bit of international shipping

 

http://www.supersspeed.com/productAll.asp?sid=93
https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?id=39329474666
https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?id=39360536141
https://www.facebook.com/SuperSSpeedUS/

[Johnseye]

4 hours ago, seeteeyou said:

FYI - no need to bother with any MLC or even TLC SSDs since they couldn't even hold a candle to SLC ones according to many audiophiles in Taiwan, they also recommended SuperSSpeed S301 in addition to Intel X25E

 

http://www.myav.com.tw/bbs/showthread.php?threadid=349951&pagenumber=483

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4790/supersspeed_s301_hyper_slc_120gb_solid_state_drive_review/index.html

 

They're very affordable (< $50 for 60GB and < $75 for 120GB) but importing them from China might cost quite a bit of international shipping

 

http://www.supersspeed.com/productAll.asp?sid=93
https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?id=39329474666
https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?id=39360536141
https://www.facebook.com/SuperSSpeedUS/

 

Why would anyone use a legacy drive over an M.2 unless the board wasn't M.2 capable?

 

[Johnseye]

On 4/3/2017 at 1:55 AM, romaz said:

 

The Pachanko SATA Reference cable results in a smoother and yet more textured presentation and very noticeably attenuates the slight glare present with even the X25-E when connected to the inexpensive SATA cable.  It makes the much brighter glare from the Samsung SSD more tolerable and when I briefly went back to my Mac Mini with the OS on a PCIe NVMe SSD, the contrast between the two is even more stark.  I would say avoid NVMe if at all possible.

 

While the Toshiba hard drive when connected to the Pachanko SATA cable and powered by the LPS-1 also sounded very good, I have completely ruled it out due to vibrations.  It would reside on an aluminum tray right next to where my clock board will be placed and even at idle, this drive will likely be spinning and so I can imagine how that could negatively impact the clock board.  Furthermore, as the drive spins, it is audible which is a no go for me.

 

Are you recommending to avoid NVMe because of one test with a Mac Mini using an NVMe drive?

When I hear descriptors such as smoother and textured vs stark I begin to think of comparisons between tube and SS amps where they are described very similarly.  What if someone prefers a stark sound that may be equated to clear and transparent?  Not trying to ruffle any feathers and all this testing you're doing is great, but it's very subjective.  Sometimes there's no other option but to be subjective and take someone's opinion, but as you make recommendations for others to not use a drive type because it doesn't mesh with your preferred sound signature you assume others want that same sound.

[Johnseye]

On 3/25/2017 at 9:15 PM, romaz said:

 

Based on what I could find, the Intel X25-E SSD, in particular, caught my attention.  These drives are no longer in production but they are still readily available and I was able to secure a brand new 64GB drive for only $80 (originally $800 when they were first released).  Because they are based on SLC NAND, they have 10x the number of write/erase cycles as the cheaper MLC or TLC NAND based SSDs and so they should last a very long time.  Some have suggested that SLC also sounds better than MLC or TLC and this may be due to better controllers since SLC SSDs are generally "cost no object" drives designed for data critical servers.

 

If you believe this is the case have you tried new Professional or Data Center series drives that come in both 2.5 and M.2 flavors?  One would expect even better controllers from current generation drives designed for "cost no object" data critical servers.

 

[Johnseye]

On 3/29/2017 at 10:10 PM, romaz said:

 

Clean power is always important but line resistance is maybe even more important only because the PSRR of well-built components is so high these days.

 

To be oblivious to what good power cables can provide with respect to line resistance is to be oblivious to a whole other world of dynamics hidden within your electronic gear trapped by poor cables.

 

This exact argument has been the center of the speaker cable debate.  I agree that it directly translates to all components.  The highest quality materials for a device will eliminate any question as to whether a lesser quality material diminishes performance.  Most companies, especially those which mass produce for large markets, will select materials that meet specification requirements.  Beyond that only introduces higher cost and lower margins for little benefit.  For us consumers, especially those of us who want to get the maximum performance with cost being no object, mass market products aren't good enough.  The question for us becomes, what is the point of diminishing to no return.  I think we can all agree that these tweaks offer small degrees of improvement over macro changes such as speakers/headphones, preamp, amp.  It's been somewhat taboo to manipulate the materials of these devices, whether that's due to warranty or not wanting to experiment on such high cost devices.  What if you were able to dramatically improve the performance of your speakers, preamp or amp by introducing higher quality materials?

 

On another note...

Here's a device I came across that you may have already seen.  I don't know much about it, but it looks interesting as a power measurement tool.

 

http://www.quarch.com/products/hd-programmable-power-module

 

This HD Power Module is a flexible power margining and measurement tool and a significant upgrade on the XLC module. This version has 12V and 5V (switchable to 3V3) outputs and is ideal for SAS, SATA and PCIe based devices. The outputs can be set automatically when used with advanced Quarch fixtures.

Each rail can be programmed from 0 to 120% of its nominal voltage. The voltage and current of each output can be simultaneously recorded to provide accurate power consumption measurement.

The module allows programming of arbitrary voltage output waveforms which can be used to simulate power-up ramps, power failures, noisy power sources and much more. Patterns can be created over a range of microseconds to minutes, allowing a wide range of testing options.

A high-speed record feature provides an oscilloscope-like function to record the output voltage, current and power consumption of the attached device.

[seeteeyou]

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

 

Why would anyone use a legacy drive over an M.2 unless the board wasn't M.2 capable?

 

 

Why wouldn't? If you don't like my peaches, don't shake my trees.

 

Anyone could feel free to compare any drives at one's own expenses, please go ahead to test them out and report back

 

http://www.addonics.com/products/indm2.php

 

Until then, does it make sense to stick with something relatively affordable that's tried and true to boot? It's easier to assume that new ones are superior to legacy drives but someone will have to pay for the hardware.

 

I was simply linking to previous experiences from fellow audiophiles while anyone could share field-tested experiences on the Internet these days. With that said, I would be more than interested in a comparison between SATA and M.2 drives.

[Johnseye]

1 minute ago, seeteeyou said:

 

Why wouldn't? If you don't like my peaches, don't shake my trees.

 

Anyone could feel free to compare any drives at one's own expenses, please go ahead to test them out and report back

 

http://www.addonics.com/products/indm2.php

 

Until then, does it make sense to stick with something relatively affordable that's tried and true to boot? It's easier to assume that new ones are superior to legacy drives but someone will have to pay for the hardware.

 

I was simply linking to previous experiences from fellow audiophiles while anyone could share field-tested experiences on the Internet these days. With that said, I would be more than interested in a comparison between SATA and M.2 drives.

 

I was under the impression that this was a search for the best quality sound components, at least all these A to B comparisons seem to be focused on what sounds better.  I'm looking at building a new media server and before I do want to ensure I build it with quality components.

 

It's not that I don't like your peaches, but you made a point not to even bother with MLC or TLC based on some people's opinions of I'm not sure what, noise? performance?  So I thought I'd ask why mess with any 2.5 drive when M.2 can run at lower power.  Maybe someone has done the comparisons with some validation, or has taken measurements with something like the Quarch device I linked.  I haven't but would like to know.

 

I don't think SSD read speed performance is an issue for playing music so it really comes down to noise and that's related to power unless I'm missing something.  Even when you look at consumer, pro and data center SSD's, when you remove performance as a variable you get down to features such as encryption and temperature.  The only relevant variable I can see is power consumption.  Power consumption will only impact the performance of the device processing the data.

[romaz]

4 hours ago, Johnseye said:

 

Are you recommending to avoid NVMe because of one test with a Mac Mini using an NVMe drive?

When I hear descriptors such as smoother and textured vs stark I begin to think of comparisons between tube and SS amps where they are described very similarly.  What if someone prefers a stark sound that may be equated to clear and transparent?  Not trying to ruffle any feathers and all this testing you're doing is great, but it's very subjective.  Sometimes there's no other option but to be subjective and take someone's opinion, but as you make recommendations for others to not use a drive type because it doesn't mesh with your preferred sound signature you assume others want that same sound.

 

Last I checked, this is an opinion forum meaning statements made by posters are subjective.  All of my comments are indeed subjective and unless I've specifically indicated that I've brought out measuring equipment, my descriptors are based on what my ears tell me.  There are very few absolutes in high-end audio, only personal preference and to take my comments as anything but an opinion would be ridiculous.  It seems I've somehow ruffled your feathers because our preferences differ.  Let's just agree to disagree.  I'm totally cool with that.

 

Regarding M.2, this is only a connection spec and doesn't really say much.  With M.2 storage devices, you have to specify SATA vs NVMe because they operate on different buses.  Check the block diagram of your motherboard and you will find that M.2 SATA drives will likely go down a SATA III bus whereas NVMe goes down a PCIe 3.0 x4 bus.  NVMe drives are much lower latency which is a good thing but you are misguided if you believe NVMe drives are low power.  The goal of anyone looking for an NVMe drive is generally throughput but this comes at the expense of power and noise.  Look at the specs of any NVMe drive and you will find that they generally consume anywhere from 4-6 watts.  As 3.3V devices, that's approaching 2A of current draw.  The legacy Intel X25-E SSD that you seem to have a low opinion of has a typical draw of only 200mA.  That's nearly 10x more current draw.  That's quite a difference.  

 

The other disadvantage of M.2 is that these devices are bus powered.  The PCIe 3.0 bus operates at either 12V or 3.3V but NVMe drives generally utilize only 3.3V.  The 3.3V rail on any motherboard is the noisiest rail there is.  Just check the performance specs of any ATX PSU and you will see how much more ripple there is on the 3.3V rail.  More than that, just check the transient response of even the very best ATX PSUs when under load and see how they struggle to maintain their voltage at 3.3V.  Even the EVGA 1.6kW Titanium ATX PSU that is highly regarded by respectable audiophiles here on CA struggles at 3.3V.  This is the voltage rail that generally brings many PSUs to its knees.  

 

While SATA has it's issues, my SATA situation with my build is unique.  I am using a SATA to PCIe adapter card meaning my SATA connection directly connects to my CPU on a very uncrowded and low latency PCIe 3.0 X 8 bus and so my latency is much lower than a typical SATA drive.  While this PCIe card operates on this noisy 3.3V bus, there is at least some noise isolation brought about by the installation of an ultra low noise linear voltage regulator and high-quality capacitors.  Furthermore, this adapter card's clock is being replaced by a very high end clock that, at least in theory, should help minimize transmission errors and reduce the need for resends.  Lastly, because I am using this "legacy" SSD, I can externally power it with my LPS-1.

 

Having taken the time to have compared and listened, I feel comfortable with the path I am taking.  If you prefer the high frequency energy brought about by NVMe, I'm happy for you that you know what you like.  

[Ralf11]

A thread on building an ultimate or near ultimate media server would be worthwhile (even If I personally just keep my mac mini...).

 

I want to partly disagree with another stmt above by modifying it: for "those of us who want to get the maximum performance with cost being no object, mass market products [often] aren't good enough."

 

I agree about the diminishing returns observation you made after that, but there is another issue - that a mass-market component might be quite good enough if, say, circuit topology is all-important and some quality of the component is unimportant.  I'm sure there are other examples.

[jabbr]

My custom build NAA is really cheap -- doesn't even have a disk drive of any type -- just an Intel x520 NIC that it network boots from... Powered by an "ultra el-cheapo" LPS to a picoPSU

[romaz]

4 hours ago, Johnseye said:

 

If you believe this is the case have you tried new Professional or Data Center series drives that come in both 2.5 and M.2 flavors?  One would expect even better controllers from current generation drives designed for "cost no object" data critical servers.

 

 

I often do seek out enterprise-grade gear as I do believe they are often more robustly engineered and built to a finer tolerance.  My main problem with the latest generation stuff is that they prioritize speed meaning low current draw and, therefore, low noise is much less of a priority.  Sometimes the improvements are so good that its worth the extra draw but I have to be convinced of it since my experience, in many cases, has been that they are not.  

 

It's clear the path I'm taking is counterintuitive to how many view a music server should be built and so reader beware.  While many are looking for the fastest there is, I'm looking for the slowest that I can get away with.  While there are those that look to Data Centers for the next best thing, I am hunting through E-Bay in search of NOS SSDs and lowly compact flash cards.

[Johnseye]

30 minutes ago, romaz said:

 

Last I checked, this is an opinion forum meaning statements made by posters are subjective.  All of my comments are indeed subjective and unless I've specifically indicated that I've brought out measuring equipment, my descriptors are based on what my ears tell me.  There are very few absolutes in high-end audio, only personal preference and to take my comments as anything but an opinion would be ridiculous.  It seems I've somehow ruffled your feathers because our preferences differ.  Let's just agree to disagree.  I'm totally cool with that.

 

Regarding M.2, this is only a connection spec and doesn't really say much.  With M.2 storage devices, you have to specify SATA vs NVMe because they operate on different buses.  Check the block diagram of your motherboard and you will find that M.2 SATA drives will likely go down a SATA III bus whereas NVMe goes down a PCIe 3.0 x4 bus.  NVMe drives are much lower latency which is a good thing but you are misguided if you believe NVMe drives are low power.  The goal of anyone looking for an NVMe drive is generally throughput but this comes at the expense of power and noise.  Look at the specs of any NVMe drive and you will find that they generally consume anywhere from 4-6 watts.  As 3.3V devices, that's approaching 2A of current draw.  The legacy Intel X25-E SSD that you seem to have a low opinion of has a typical draw of only 200mA.  That's nearly 10x more current draw.  That's quite a difference.  

 

The other disadvantage of M.2 is that these devices are bus powered.  The PCIe 3.0 bus operates at either 12V or 3.3V but NVMe drives generally utilize only 3.3V.  The 3.3V rail on any motherboard is the noisiest rail there is.  Just check the performance specs of any ATX PSU and you will see how much more ripple there is on the 3.3V rail.  More than that, just check the transient response of even the very best ATX PSUs when under load and see how they struggle to maintain their voltage at 3.3V.  Even the EVGA 1.6kW Titanium ATX PSU that is highly regarded by respectable audiophiles here on CA struggles at 3.3V.  This is the voltage rail that generally brings many PSUs to its knees.  

 

While SATA has it's issues, my SATA situation with my build is unique.  I am using a SATA to PCIe adapter card meaning my SATA connection directly connects to my CPU on a very uncrowded and low latency PCIe 3.0 X 8 bus and so my latency is much lower than a typical SATA drive.  While this PCIe card operates on this noisy 3.3V bus, there is at least some noise isolation brought about by the installation of an ultra low noise linear voltage regulator and high-quality capacitors.  Furthermore, this adapter card's clock is being replaced by a very high end clock that, at least in theory, should help minimize transmission errors and reduce the need for resends.  Lastly, because I am using this "legacy" SSD, I can externally power it with my LPS-1.

 

Having taken the time to have compared and listened, I feel comfortable with the path I am taking.  If you prefer the high frequency energy brought about by NVMe, I'm happy for you that you know what you like.  

 

I intended to play devil's advocate because opinions sometimes become gospel without proper validation.  I meant no offense to you or your methods, and appreciate your input.  Please don't take offense.  The point I made about NVMe was only because you had done one test, came to a conclusion and as a result people may begin to discredit NVMe as an option. I think we should be careful when making broad statements after conducting one test, that's all.  As I mentioned, I'm not concerned about SSD performance for music playback.

 

I should have specified, but the M.2 drives I was referring to are SATA.  Yes they use the 3.3v rail but the drives run at around 80-100 mW as opposed to the 2.6W of the X25-E when active.

 

I'm in search of building a better server, so I'm trying to separate opinion from fact when doing this.  I'm also trying to look for the qualities I believe are important as you are.  I was drawn to your post because like you I have an sms-200 and microRendu.  I would describe one as brighter and the other as smoother.  Very subjective statements but the best a non-scientist can offer.  Same as how you described an NVMe drive.  Do you like bright or smooth?  Forward or laid back? Apples or oranges?  It's up to the listener right?

 

We can really get into the weeds when evaluating this equipment to determine if there's a difference in sound, especially considering how subtle the changes are.  I'm on this journey to learn and improve my system so it sounds the best to my ears.  My feather's aren't ruffled, I'm just trying to keep the playing field level as I read and learn.

[Johnseye]

39 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

A thread on building an ultimate or near ultimate media server would be worthwhile (even If I personally just keep my mac mini...).

 

I want to partly disagree with another stmt above by modifying it: for "those of us who want to get the maximum performance with cost being no object, mass market products [often] aren't good enough."

 

I agree about the diminishing returns observation you made after that, but there is another issue - that a mass-market component might be quite good enough if, say, circuit topology is all-important and some quality of the component is unimportant.  I'm sure there are other examples.

 

Agreed, mass market products can make a product good enough and some can do it at even a lower cost than one would expect.  I guess my point was that we go through all this effort of tweaking the smallest impacting things like a SATA cable with higher gauge, when we could be missing something a lot bigger.  I never see anyone posting about how they opened up their McIntosh amp and changed out their cabling.  Now I did see Jeff (Jeff's Place) swap out all his Dueland cables with the Western Electric stuff.  He also has a Listening Bias page as a disclaimer which I appreciate.