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

[ElviaCaprice]

9 minutes ago, amir57bs said:

Thank you Roy

do you recommend removing regulator on external input of Sotm USBexp card?

JCAT Usb card external input voltage is 5v  , it seems JCAT use linear regulator and sotm use one switching regulator.

Good point, Amir,

Yes there are two different inputs on powering the USBexp card.  Internally for 12V ide 4 pin connector, externally for 6.5 -9V.  I would imagine that SOTM/Lee was speaking of the external input, 6.5-9V.

[romaz]

1 minute ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Good point, Amir,

Yes there are two different inputs on powering the USBexp card.  Internally for 12V ide 4 pin connector, externally for 6.5 -9V.  I would imagine that SOTM/Lee was speaking of the external input, 6.5-9V.

 

Yes, Lee was speaking about the external input.  He believes this sounds "much better" than the internal 12V input.  He also believes this card with the sCLK-EX may be his very best audiophile component, better than the sMS-200ultra and tX-USBultra.  This has given me pause to consider this card and pair it with the tX Ultra.  

[amir57bs]

5 minutes ago, romaz said:

 

Adnaco makes the JCAT USB card and I have looked at it.  I believe not all regulators on this card are linear.  The SOtM card uses one switching regulator out of necessity while the rest are linear but Lee did his best to filter out its negative impact.  If you are using a high quality PSU like the LPS-1 or if all you have is the LPS-1, then I would probably ask Lee to remove the first stage regulator so that you can power it directly with 5V instead of 9V but then take care to use a well insulated (and as short as possible) DC cable.

 

Thank you

i have both JCAT and Sotm Card but i am waiting to get my motherboard.

I will order Paul an SR7 . i will send an email to Sotm to remove that regulator.

[romaz]

This will effectively be my last post, at least for the foreseeable future.  As I stated previously, after Munich, I am committed to signing off for a while from public forums and I need to honor this commitment and so forgive me if I don't respond to public or private queries for a period of time.  Once my system is complete, I will attempt to resurface to share my findings for those that are interested but that may not happen soon.  I've enjoyed this thread very much.  I hope it continues.  Thank you all for your friendship.

[amir57bs]

 

1 minute ago, romaz said:

This will effectively be my last post, at least for the foreseeable future.  As I stated previously, after Munich, I am committed to signing off for a while from public forums and I need to honor this commitment and so forgive me if I don't respond to public or private queries for a period of time.  Once my system is complete, I will attempt to resurface to share my findings for those that are interested but that may not happen soon.  I've enjoyed this thread very much.  I hope it continues.  Thank you all for your friendship.

Thank you Very much for all useful information , you are great

[rickca]

17 minutes ago, romaz said:

 I am anticipating that the Mutec REF 10 will cost U.S. buyers about $2.7k.

It's 3598.00 € including 19% German VAT.  Take out the VAT and convert to $US you get around $3385.  Judging from US prices of things like T+A DAC8 DSD, it will probably be substantially more than $3385.  But we'll have definitive US pricing soon.

[ElviaCaprice]

13 minutes ago, romaz said:

 

Yes, Lee was speaking about the external input.  He believes this sounds "much better" than the internal 12V input.  He also believes this card with the sCLK-EX may be his very best audiophile component, better than the sMS-200ultra and tX-USBultra.  This has given me pause to consider this card and pair it with the tX Ultra.  

Yeah, I just recently picked up a used one for $150 thinking I would try it out and modify.  Good to hear that Lee thinks so highly of it.  Still am considering the tX-USBultra and have my new mobo/tXBexp card sent into SOTM.

EDIT - changed my mind, I will leave the regulators be.

[pam1975]

Thank you Roy for everything. Have fun with the rest of your experiments.

[austinpop]

3 hours ago, pam1975 said:

@austinpop which version of the Zyxel router are you using?

 

 

GS108b v3. Switch, not router.

[motberg]

Thanks Roy, wish you the best in your next endeavor..

[pam1975]

thanks @austinpop  (of course, switch)

[austinpop]

40 minutes ago, romaz said:

This will effectively be my last post, at least for the foreseeable future.  As I stated previously, after Munich, I am committed to signing off for a while from public forums and I need to honor this commitment and so forgive me if I don't respond to public or private queries for a period of time.  Once my system is complete, I will attempt to resurface to share my findings for those that are interested but that may not happen soon.  I've enjoyed this thread very much.  I hope it continues.  Thank you all for your friendship.

 

I've been busy this weekend with the graduation of my lovely daughter from college, so still have to catch up with a bunch of recent posts. But this caught my eye.

 

Roy, whatever your reasons for this decision, I respect it. When the time is right, please do come back and join us!

 

 

[rickca]

45 minutes ago, romaz said:

I've enjoyed this thread very much.  I hope it continues.  Thank you all for your friendship.

It's been a fun ride and I learned a lot.  Happy trails, Roy!

[limniscate]

So the TL;DR is get the master clock option on tX/dX and sMS-200, remove regulators, tXUSB Exp may be the best option with external regulator removed?

[greenleo]

3 hours ago, romaz said:

 

Hi Larry,

 

I agree with what you are saying.  To be fair to Lee, he has stated he hasn't heard the Adnaco and that if I like the way it sounds, then to go with it.  I agree with the qualities of the Adnaco and I am very much in favor with what it adds.  My ONLY issue is that if I will be changing numerous clocks upstream of the Adnaco, I don't want the jitter caused by the Adnaco to negatively impact the benefits of all of my upstream clocks.  With that said, because I have the free clocks to use, I have decided to go ahead with replacing all clocks on the Adnaco and will decide what sounds best.  I am also still dumbfounded by how SQ improved by using the Adnaco as a hub for a storage drive.  I have decided to load Windows Server 2016 + AO back on my noisy 2TB Samsung SSD and using a single SSD for both OS and storage and with the asstance of WinToUSB, I will try and see if I like what I get using the Adnaco as a "noise blocker" for this drive.  This could be another real breakthrough.

 

Regarding SQ, I was impressed by my SQ long ago but as my reference is the "real thing", then any sound system can never be good enough and as long as I am seeing notable improvements, I see no reason to stop.  

Why are you abandoning the X25E?

[mozes]

3 hours ago, romaz said:

This will effectively be my last post, at least for the foreseeable future.  As I stated previously, after Munich, I am committed to signing off for a while from public forums and I need to honor this commitment and so forgive me if I don't respond to public or private queries for a period of time.  Once my system is complete, I will attempt to resurface to share my findings for those that are interested but that may not happen soon.  I've enjoyed this thread very much.  I hope it continues.  Thank you all for your friendship.

All the best Roy, thanks for your great contributions, you will be missed for sure!

[Confused]

1 hour ago, mozes said:

All the best Roy, thanks for your great contributions, you will be missed for sure!

It's a +1 from me too!  The many posts from romaz (and others!) have proved an absolute gold mine for ideas, information and have given me much clarity of thought for my own moves going forward.

[kennyb123]

11 minutes ago, Confused said:

It's a +1 from me too!  The many posts from romaz (and others!) have proved an absolute gold mine for ideas, information and have given me much clarity of thought for my own moves going forward.

 

+1,000,000

[lmitche]

2 hours ago, greenleo said:

Why are you abandoning the X25E?

I can't be sure but suspect Roy is going to test the benefit of the Adnaco by throwing a noisy Samsung SSD into the mix and testing what happens to SQ in this situation.  Anyway that's how I read his response.

[Johnseye]

7 hours ago, romaz said:

 

If power consumption is the same, then higher voltage means less current draw.  This is based on P = V x I.  If the power draw of a component is known to be 12 watts, an input voltage of 1V means that component will draw 12A which is not good with respect to audio.  An input voltage of 12V would mean that component would only draw 1A which would be more ideal.  If a wide range voltage regulator has an input voltage of 6-12V, as an example, it is generally believed that feeding it 12V (because it would draw less current) would sound better than feeding it 6V but that doesn't mean you are undervolting the device.  You would be undervolting the device if you decide to feed it 5V because that begins to go beyond the capability of the regulator.

 

Looks like the missing piece was it having a wide range regulator, able to handle 6-12v.  All makes sense then.

 

7 hours ago, romaz said:

It would be more correct to say that the chassis that the tX uses was intended as the chassis for all their Ultra devices.  The sCLK-EX then connects to whatever component it is intended to connect with using U.FL connectors and so they are not soldered.  I don't know what you mean when you say that they "haven't just used the same clocks from the sCLK-EX directly on the sMS-200 board?"  What they are doing with the sMS-200ultra is no different than what they are doing with the tX-USBultra.

 

To clarify, why don't they just replace the clocks used in the standard sMS-200 with those used on the sCLK-EX?  Why the need to add an sCLK-EX with every device to make it an ultra?  Build the required components directly onto the board of the devices instead of using U.FL connectors to the sCLK-EX.  The only benefit I can see of using the sCLK-EX itself is to chain them together in a master slave scenario.  If someone ends up buying the tx ultra and the sMS-200 ultra, then what they have is 2 sCLK-EX boards with a lot of clocks going unused, especially when one sCLK-EX could be used for both, the only difference being longer cables used for connectivity and possibly a different interface with the SMB.

 

You said earlier that each of the 4 clocks on the sCLK-EX could be used for even more than one device each.  We still don't know how many devices per clock could be mastered.  A lot of unknowns about these devices, a lot of potential in them and some of that is getting realized now with direct questions to Lee.

 

7 hours ago, romaz said:

 

Yes, Lee likes to measure things and I have been impressed by his penchant for measuring things.

 

I have no problems with changing course if I believe it is for the better.  I think we are all on the same journey to improve our systems and sometimes this means pushing the reset button but that doesn't mean what is best for me is best for all.

 

I believe in measuring things too.  Saves a lot of time, money and effort.  It's fun buying stuff and experimenting but when you look back and a single conversation changes the direction with a jitter meter you realize how easy it is to chase a dragon.  Trust the engineers with their tools.

 

A couple others have said that even though they know fiber can introduce jitter, they still like the sound from their system better with the fiber.  Since the major things we are addressing are jitter and power related noise or distortion, I'm guessing those people have a bigger problem with the upstream noise and distortion than they do with jitter.  So it becomes the lesser of two evils.  In the end if it sounds better to you it doesn't matter what the meter says.  But if you end up fixing your power issue, go back and see if it sounds better without the fiber.

[lmitche]

8 hours ago, romaz said:

 

Hi Larry,

 

I agree with what you are saying.  To be fair to Lee, he has stated he hasn't heard the Adnaco and that if I like the way it sounds, then to go with it.  I agree with the qualities of the Adnaco and I am very much in favor with what it adds.  My ONLY issue is that if I will be changing numerous clocks upstream of the Adnaco, I don't want the jitter caused by the Adnaco to negatively impact the benefits of all of my upstream clocks.  With that said, because I have the free clocks to use, I have decided to go ahead with replacing all clocks on the Adnaco and will decide what sounds best.  I am also still dumbfounded by how SQ improved by using the Adnaco as a hub for a storage drive.  I have decided to load Windows Server 2016 + AO back on my noisy 2TB Samsung SSD and using a single SSD for both OS and storage and with the asstance of WinToUSB, I will try and see if I like what I get using the Adnaco as a "noise blocker" for this drive.  This could be another real breakthrough.

 

Regarding SQ, I was impressed by my SQ long ago but as my reference is the "real thing", then any sound system can never be good enough and as long as I am seeing notable improvements, I see no reason to stop.  

Hi Roy,

 

Well I'm happy to hear you are going forward with the Adnaco clockectomy(sp?)  This is very promising, and I will be surprised if the results are not outstanding.

 

I'm pleased to know that my suspicions about the SOTM clocks being driven by a single master have proved true.  It's not clear how they derive a clock signal from a non integral frequency of the master, so if any knows how this is done, I'd be grateful to learn more.

 

Funny, my SATA cable saga tells me there are more gains to be had in this area of the system. A second Adnaco pcie adapter board to a remote Adnaco pcie motherboard and SATA controller may be the ultimate solution here. Ugh! It never ends!

 

I did a demo for a non-Audiophile friend recently using the "It Don't Mean a Thing

Song" by Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong. Within seconds my buddy became slack jawed and said "Louis Armstrong is standing in front of me playing the trumpet". This guy is a tough son of a bitch, so I was very pleased!

 

Roy, thanks again for all the observations you have shared here.  This is one of my favorite threads on CA.

 

Larry

[TopQuark]

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

To clarify, why don't they just replace the clocks used in the standard sMS-200 with those used on the sCLK-EX?  Why the need to add an sCLK-EX with every device to make it an ultra?  Build the required components directly onto the board of the devices instead of using U.FL connectors to the sCLK-EX.  The only benefit I can see of using the sCLK-EX itself is to chain them together in a master slave scenario.  If someone ends up buying the tx ultra and the sMS-200 ultra, then what they have is 2 sCLK-EX boards with a lot of clocks going unused, especially when one sCLK-EX could be used for both, the only difference being longer cables used for connectivity and possibly a different interface with the SMB.

 

+1 Thanks to Roy.  Great thread.

 

I have the same questions.  If you read the description of the sMS-200Ultra, it comes with sCLK-EX board but with only 2 clocks available all used up by the sMS-200Ultra.  I am verifying this with SOtM so we'll see.

 

SOtM now offers a new configuration that includes the sMS-200Ultra and the switch mod.  The switch will be sourced by SOtM.  If this is the case, the sMS-200Ultra will include 3 clocks.  This is now available for order at their website.

 

Still, the question remains whether the sMS-200Ultra board contains 4 clocks or just 3 clocks with the switch mod.  I'll keep everyone posted as I get more info.

[austinpop]

8 hours ago, limniscate said:

So the TL;DR is get the master clock option on tX/dX and sMS-200, remove regulators, tXUSB Exp may be the best option with external regulator removed?

 

Eric, 

 

This is speculative, but here is what I take away from Roy's remarks on the Mutec and upcoming SOtM master clocks.

 

If, for example, you get a dX Ultra, with the Master Clock input option, AND the mods to clock the swtich and sMS-200 with SMB connectors, then...

1. you would immediately benefit from the trifecta, AND
2. This is the speculative part. Once an even better master clock than the sCLK-EX from Mutec or SOtM is available, you could use this master clock to drive the dX Ultra, and presumably, the benefits of this master clock would flow to the switch and the sMS.

You should confirm this with SOtM.

 

Assuming my understanding is correct, then the extra $200ish for the master clock option may be a worthwhile investment. Of course, it will be a long time before I will be able to justify a $3000+ master clock in my system, but it may make sense to future proof your setup.

 

Until I heard the trifecta in my system, I had never really appreciated the value of excellent clocks.

[AmusedToD]

31 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

+1 Thanks to Roy.  Great thread.

 

I have the same questions.  If you read the description of the sMS-200Ultra, it comes with sCLK-EX board but with only 2 clocks available all used up by the sMS-200Ultra.  I am verifying this with SOtM so we'll see.

 

SOtM now offers a new configuration that includes the sMS-200Ultra and the switch mod.  The switch will be sourced by SOtM.  If this is the case, the sMS-200Ultra will include 3 clocks.  This is now available for order at their website.

 

Still, the question remains whether the sMS-200Ultra board contains 4 clocks or just 3 clocks with the switch mod.  I'll keep everyone posted as I get more info.

 

Could you please post a link to the switch mod on their website?

 

If I understood May correctly, the sms200Ultra comes with the sCLK-EX board with 4 clocks, whereas 2 clocks  are used by the sMS-200Ultra itself, and 2 clocks are available for external devices with appropriate modifications. What Sotm can do is modify the sms200Ultra by installing 1 or 2 SMB connectors on the case in order to connect up to 2 external devices (a router and a switch for example, which would also need to be modified by SOTM in a similar fashion by adding the SMB connectors).

[austinpop]

34 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

I have the same questions.  If you read the description of the sMS-200Ultra, it comes with sCLK-EX board but with only 2 clocks available all used up by the sMS-200Ultra.  I am verifying this with SOtM so we'll see.

 

I think it's been confirmed that the sMS-200Ultra, like the tX and dX, just includes the sCLK-EX board, which has 4 taps. 2 of these are used internally, and the remaining 2 are available to clock other things.

 

34 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

SOtM now offers a new configuration that includes the sMS-200Ultra and the switch mod.  The switch will be sourced by SOtM.  If this is the case, the sMS-200Ultra will include 3 clocks.  This is now available for order at their website.

 

Oh cool. But hmm, I don't see it. Which website? Can you post a link?

 

34 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

Still, the question remains whether the sMS-200Ultra board contains 4 clocks or just 3 clocks with the switch mod.  I'll keep everyone posted as I get more info.

 

It's always good to confirm.