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

[romaz]

13 hours ago, greenleo said:

But Toslink is limited to 192kHz, is it?

 

Yes, but unless you have a large DXD collection, for some people, this may be an acceptable limitation.

[romaz]

5 hours ago, lmitche said:

Happy to confirm that the m2 ngff route for the hard disk Sata port sounds best.  I moved the Adnaco fiber card to PCIE slot 1 and the network card to PCIE slot 2, so everything has an unshared connection to the CPU.

 

The SQ is beautiful.

 

 

Good to know, Larry.  Thanks.

[romaz]

15 hours ago, Cooler said:

As i understood from EVGA review, one of it benefits of it are cables (motherboard and AC). I think would be great to buy cables with the same quality for motherboard + good AC cable:

 

 

With AC cable its easier, there are a lot of them on the market, but motherboard cable, can you guys suggest some audiophile one or just with great quality?!

 

 

Chan (owner of Pachanko Cables) can make you audiophile grade motherboard cables upon request.  He's well regarded here on CA and has a strong following:

 

https://www.pachankostudio.com/

SOtM can make you motherboard cables as well upon request using UP-OCC grade copper or silver (solid core or stranded).

 

Audiophile-grade AC cables are more easily found.  For an ATX PSU, the low gauge chords are probably best because they have the least amount of line resistance.  I'm guessing the thick 20A chord used by the EVGA 1.6KW PSU is one of the reasons this PSU might sound especially dynamic.  This is where a dedicated 20A line really comes in handy, not for noise isolation but for lower line resistance.

[romaz]

1 hour ago, lmitche said:

Hi All,

 

The  SATA SAGA continues!  

 

Thanks to Alex Crespi, I learned of a thread in usaudiomart where others have tested a large number of very cheap <$2 SATA cables and claim increased SQ with several brands.  I have ordered what appears to be the top three models, and they will dripple in over the next few weeks.Given the terrific results of the earlier SATA experiments I would not be surprised that there is more SQ to be gained here.

 

If you are interested I can post test results here.  

 

Larry

 

 

Yes, Larry.  Please do!

 

I am very happy with the Pachanko SATA cables I have but one thing I am interested in is whether an inexpensive SATA cable with 4 ground wires sounds better than 3 ground wires.  The SATA data connector spec calls for 3 ground wires (pins 1, 4, and 7) and yet some SATA data cables contain 4.  I happened to take apart one of the SATA cables that came with my motherboard and noticed it contains 4 ground wires and so I plan to use this certain cable as a grounding cable but I wonder if this might be a reason why certain cables sound better.  The biggest difference maker, I believe, however, will be how good the shielding and the connectors are.  Anyway, this might interest you:

 

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/SATA-cables-Is-there-a-difference-97/

[romaz]

1 minute ago, ElviaCaprice said:

I predict, like USB, the cleaner your power, the less likely the cables make any bit of difference, other than proper impedance and as short as possible.  Otherwise all your doing is coloring electrical noise with various cable constructs.

1

 

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.  I pride myself in having clean power (dedicated 20A line, Shunyata Denali line conditioner, High Fidelity Cables power distributor, SR grounding block) and yet cables still make a HUGE difference in my system, not from the standpoint of lowering noise but minimizing line resistance.  Absolutely, the shorter the cable the better because shorter cables have less line resistance but there is much more to it than just cable length.  Here is an excerpt from one of my posts on Head-Fi a few months ago that discusses some of the things I consider when evaluating a cable:

 

1)  Conductor:  This can range from tin to iron, brass, gold, copper, silver and graphene (the fastest electrical conductor known to man).  Here are the relative conductivity of various conductors:

 

Material IACS (International Annealed Copper Standard)
Ranking	Metal	% Conductivity*
1	Silver (Pure)	105%
2	Copper	100%
3	Gold (Pure)	70%
4	Aluminum	61%
5	Brass	28%
6	Zinc	27%
7	Nickel	22%
8	Iron (Pure)	17%
9	Tin	15%
10	Phosphor Bronze	15%
11	Steel (Stainless included)	3-15%
12	Lead (Pure)	7%
13	Nickel Aluminum Bronze	7%

 

Graphene isn't listed but it is claimed to have a conductivity 100x of copper.  Note that silver is 5% more conductive than copper and that purity matters.  UP-OCC grade purity is the purest form of silver or copper that is commercially available (guaranteed to be 99.99997% pure).  Unfortunately, silver is much more expensive than copper and UP-OCC grade is much more expensive than standard OFC (oxygen-free copper).  What does increased conductivity get you?  Decreased line resistance.

 

2)  Conductor gauge:  Most basic computers come with 18g power chords.  Audiophile power chords for low power digital components seem to range from 12-16 gauge while chords designed for high current devices like amplifiers and power distributors are as large as 6 gauge.  What happens as wire gauge gets bigger?  Once again, line resistance goes down and large conductor gauge is especially important for the conduction of lower frequencies.  

 

3)  Dielectric:  This is an area of controversy and there isn't consensus on what is real and what is hype.  In short, dielectrics are designed to function as insulators against other conductors within a cable but also against its outer environment.  One premise held is that the only perfect dielectric is a vacuum (negative air pressure) and that any other material used as a dielectric will have some negative impact on SQ due to skin effect.  With alternating currents running through a conductor, it has been said that lower frequencies (bass) travel at the inner most core of a conductor while also occupying the largest cross section of a conductor as it travels down that conductor.  This is the premise on why large conductors are so important for bass transmission.  The higher frequencies (midrange and treble) travel toward the outer edges of the conductor.  With the perfect cable where you have a conductor that is highly conductive and a dielectric that has zero impact, then the high and low frequencies arrive at their destination at exactly the same time (meaning perfect timing).  Because it is the highest frequencies that travel at the outer edges of a conductor, the dielectric used will have impact on these higher frequencies potentially resulting in treble and even midrange smearing but also timing issues.  This is often where cable companies get creative and why some cables can cost so much.

 

Here are examples of the dielectric constants of various materials:

 

Air (vacuum) 1.0

Cotton 1.3

Wood 1.4

Teflon (PTFE) 2.1

Polypropylene 2.2

Kevlar 3.5

Neoprene 4.0

Distilled water 34

 

Teflon and polypropylene are the most commonly used dielectrics because of their durability and heat resistance.  Certain manufacturers have gone to cotton as a primary dielectric (i.e. DHC, Zenwave) and I believe their results speak for themselves.  Once again, what is the impact of the dielectric on the conductor that supposedly leads to this purported smearing?  It has to do with the build-up of an opposing electrical charge but ultimately, this is once again a form of line resistance.

 

There are other factors like cable geometry, solid-core vs stranded wire and litz configuration which I won't get into here but the strategy for their use is to reduce line resistance.

 

Finally, there is shielding.  All cables are shielded but some shields are especially designed to repel or mitigate EMI and this is the concept behind cables designed for "digital" gear with the idea that it is our digital gear that is most sensitive to EMI.  While important for certain components, it has been my observation that well-made components with high PSRR have less need for exotic shielding.

 

My Chord DAVE has very high PSRR to the extent that when I take it with me to audio shows for comparison purposes, with any cheap power chord plugged straight into the wall, line noise is hardly ever an issue but adequacy of current is since it can result in a choke hold which can impact dynamics.  As I have done extensive comparisons of mains cables, in my system, the ones that make the largest difference are the chords designed for high current amps and not the ones designed for noise reduction.  For example, even though my DAVE consumes less than 20 watts, it benefits greatly from Shunyata's Alpha HC (High Current) chord (7g) which is designed for analog gear and is choked, in comparison, by Shunyata's Alpha Digital chord (10g) even though the Digital chord excels in noise reduction.

 

People seem obsessed with dedicated lines because they believe it is the noise isolation that is important when, in my opinion, the most important reason for a dedicated line is to lower line resistance and this applies equally for low power digital equipment as it does for gigantic amplifiers  Here is what Vince Galbo of MSB has to say about it and I couldn't agree more:

 

"People often tell me “I have 20 amp dedicated lines”. By US electrical code definitions, a 20 amp dedicated line will have 12 gauge wire in the wall. So while you may have a “dedicated line”, 12 gauge wire is absolutely insufficient for high end audio systems. We are recommending ten gauge or thicker wire here. It is the subject and goal of this paper. The gauge of the wire is FAR MORE IMPORTANT than the fact that the line is “dedicated”. The subject of this paper works on the theory that the varying musical demands of your amplifier are actually modulating the incoming power line, divorced from the utility (power company) by some resistance (12 or 14 gauge wall wiring at some length from the breaker panel has too much resistance for audio purposes). The noise coming from your utility is probably much lower than you suspect and the gauge of the wire is far more important. The amp demands current up and down with the music at audio frequencies that are of course above and below the 60 cycles from the power company. These demands are impressed on the line wavering the incoming voltage and so the amp is re-ingesting its own noise and also making the line dirty for itself AND the audio front end. This is possible because the wall wiring back to the breaker panel has some degree of resistance depending on the length of the run and the wire gauge (12 gauge or sometimes even 14 gauge). Power conditioners and certain power cord designs help because they make an effort to “shunt” this noise (short it out and kill it) and consume the unwanted frequencies. A better answer is to reduce the resistance back to the breaker panel making it difficult for the amp to modulate the power at all and also at the same time getting maximum power for the amplifier power supply. And so there are two benefits to reducing the resistance back to the breaker panel."

 

http://www.msbtechnology.com/faq/how-to-wire-your-house-for-good-power/

 

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.

[romaz]

20 minutes ago, greenleo said:

Hi Roy,

 

I guess your SATA cables are connected to both of the OS and the file disks, right?

 

Have you ever try to use RAM disk as the file disk and an ordinary/Pachanko SATA cable to the original file disk for comparison?  I suspect that the SQ would be same.

 

 

Yes, I have 2 Pachanko SATA cables and I use them for both OS and file disks.

 

I have used RAM disks in the past but I have never directly compared them against my Pachanko SATA cables.  At this point, I have no plans to go back to a RAM disk.  Here is my response to your question from just a few days ago:

 

 

[romaz]

2 hours ago, greenleo said:

If the file disk is working, then these two effects are working together and it is hard to estimate how large the individual effects is.  Using a RAM disk to play back, the file disk should be idle.  Then function of providing better signal is gone.  By using an ordinary SATA cable connected to the file disk as a control, and compare it with using a Pachanko SATA cable, the rejection of EMI back to the system by the Pachanko cable may be estimated.  Then how to build a better CAS may be formulated.

 

Thanks again for your reply.

3

 

I think you might have missed my point with that post but my opinion on the matter is all there and I don't know how else to explain it.  Without realizing it, we are all using RAM disks even now but generally, we call them buffers.  Our Ethernet switches use buffers.  Our DAC uses a buffer.  Roon buffers 1-2 tracks into memory and so playback is from RAM and not directly from an SSD or hard drive.  Try streaming a track from Tidal and disconnect the Ethernet cable and you'll notice that playback will continue.  You could do the same with a USB memory stick or SATA hard drive and yet, the characteristics of the drive and the cable still shines through.  If we all accept that an SSD sounds different from a hard drive or a compact flash card, why shouldn't a SATA cable have an impact?  Read the last part of that post again.  It's the best way I know how to describe what is happening.

[romaz]

2 hours ago, amgradmd said:

So I finally got the direct connection to work with my PS Audio Directstream DAC! It was not without it's difficulties, mostly self-inflicted since I'm not a networking guru. It turns out the problem I had when trying to connect with my Mac Mini was that I wasn't selecting both Ethernet and Thunderbolt Ethernet when bridging the Thunderbolt ethernet connection. Ugh. Of course! The point is that the sound is fantastic! Noticeably better than through the switch. I didn't get a chance to listen for long last night since I got it working pretty late, but it's pretty clear that the music has more dynamics, better instrument separation, just more pop, in general. Thanks to Romaz for pointing me in the right direction! 

 

 

Thanks for sharing your experience.  Are you saying you have succeeded in directly connecting your server to Bridge II?

[romaz]

4 minutes ago, amgradmd said:

If by server you mean my Mac Mini, then I have! I don't have a NAS, just to be clear. Like I said, it wasn't without it's frustrations, but it was worth it. Plus I learned a lot about my network and router, so there's that. I forgot to mention that my previous setup had optical fiber isolation to the Mac and in between the DAC and switch, and this setup easily beats that, FWIW. I hadn't noticed a significant improvement with optical isolation, honestly, but kept it since it worked. 

 

 

Thanks for explaining.  Yes, server = Mac Mini.  My experience with optical isolation is similar to yours.

[romaz]

13 minutes ago, bit01 said:

re-cap

 

I appreciate all the reports on Ethernet cables.  I have personally found that anything within the "direct path," especially cabling, seems to make a much larger impact than before and so it's great to hear from others what sounds great, especially when we're talking about inexpensive options.  Others have PM'd me about Ethernet cable shootouts they are currently conducting and I hope they publicly post their results here.  One person, for example, has found the Supra CAT7 to sound very good and that 2m length sounds better than 1m.  SOtM has their own CAT7 that incorporates a filter box and they have indicated that this cable must be a minimum of 1.5m in length for its filtering effect to work optimally.  This seems to be a case where shorter isn't necessarily better.  Furthermore, some are suggesting that stranded Ethernet cabling sounds better (more textured) than solid core wire, which is also very interesting.  Since most of us also have experience with the BJC CAT6A, it helps to use this as a reference to provide perspective that many of us can relate to.

[romaz]

My motherboard and various PCIe cards are now en route to SOtM to have their clocks replaced with the sCLK-EX.  A total of 4 clocks will be replaced including my motherboard's main system clock, the clock on an Intel dual-port gigabit LAN PCIe card, the clock on a PCIe SATA card, and finally the clock on a PCIe USB 2.0 card.  SOtM has told me they should be able to replace all the switching regulators on these PCIe add-on cards with their ultra low noise linear regulators and also add high quality capacitors.  I also sent SOtM my newly purchased HD Plex 300W-Hi Fi-DC to ATX converter as they have suggested that they can improve this converter by replacing the polymer condenser with a better one.  They will also be constructing my ATX cabling for me using their UP-OCC grade wiring.

 

I didn't have time to do any lengthy critical comparisons but before I shipped it all out, I put everything together to make sure everything worked.  I purchased an EVGA 850W Titanium ATX PSU to compare against the HD Plex 300W DC-ATX converter which was powered by my 19V HD Plex LPSU (my 19v Paul Hynes SR7 hasn't arrived yet).  The EVGA ATX PSU has ripple noise numbers between 3-5mV at 10% load which isn't spectacular when compared against the elite lower power LPSUs but it's better than the ripple numbers posted by the HDPLex DC-ATX converter. Since my CPU will consume 11w max and the motherboard will only be powering 4GB of RAM and the 3 PCIe add-on cards I listed above, at idle, this machine is consuming about 5w and with the CPU's turbocharging and hyperthreading disabled and the CPU running at 1.1GHz, during routine playback, power consumption was generally less than 15w and so I am well below 10% load for this EVGA ATX PSU.  Based on preliminary listening, both PSUs sounded very good.  It was difficult to say that one sounded better than the other.

 

While I didn't have time to try it, I expect to dethrottle both my CPU and RAM down to 800Mhz each for even less draw.  While this practice is counter-intuitive for those who oversample with HQPlayer, with my CAD CAT, this led to a nice bump in SQ and I am hoping for similar results provided that everything runs stable.

 

I did install Windows Server 2012R2 (but not AO) onto my 2TB Samsung EVO SSD, a Toshiba 1TB 5400 SATA II 2.5 inch hard drive and my recently purchased Intel X25-E SLC SATA II SSD. For some reason, I could not successfully install Windows Server 2012R2 onto my 32GB compact flash (even with the BIOS set to IDE mode) and so I wasn't able to experience how this sounded but I know of a few things I can try and so I haven't given up.  What I will say is that when connected to a standard SATA cable, my 2TB Samsung EVO SSD sounded the worst of the lot while the Intel X25-E sounded best with the Toshiba hard drive somewhere in the middle but closer to the Intel X25-E than the Samsung SSD.  With the Pachanko SATA Reference cable, the differences diminished considerably although the X25-E was still noticeably more to my preference (just a calmer presentation with a smoother edge).  During this testing, these drives were powered by an LPS-1.  

 

I also tested how the X25-E sounded when connected to the SYBA PCIe SATA adapter vs the motherboard's native SATA3 and SATA2 ports.  The difference wasn't as large as I imagined it would be and once again, the Pachanko SATA cable and LPS-1 may have something to do with it.  Also, since this is a SATA II SSD, regardless of whether it is placed on fast or slow bus, its throughput will always be slower than a SATA III drive.  Despite the smaller differences, I did find a preference for when the X25-E was attached to the SYBA PCIe SATA adapter. The good news is I heard none of the issues that @lmitche heard with his adapter from the standpoint of a thinner sound and female sibilance.  Tonality was quite rich and full bodied and there was a greater immediacy to the sound when compared to the motherboard's native SATA ports.  Whether this will lead to fatigue with long-term listening, I'm not sure but I'm hoping that things will only improve once the clock on this PCIe card has been upgraded and its switching regulators have been replaced.

 

One other area I got to test was 2GB vs 4GB of RAM.  While the difference wasn't huge, 2GB for sure sounds better and I will see if I can get 2GB to work out.

[romaz]

39 minutes ago, greenleo said:

Could it be the refection problem when the length of the LAN cable is too short?  Hence the requirement of minimum length?

1

 

With respect to the SOtM CAT7, according to SOtM, the length is needed purely from the standpoint of the filter.  I can't speak for the Supra CAT8 (sorry, I mistakenly referred to it as a CAT7 cable) but my guess is that the reason is the same.  TotalDac also makes a filtered Ethernet cable and this cable comes only as a 2m length cable for the same reason.   As for reflections, as far as I am aware, Ethernet cables are not subject to reflections in the same way as digital SPDIF cables are due to the lower frequencies that they operate under.  For example, I have BJC CAT6A Ethernet cables in various lengths from 1 foot to 15 feet and as far as I can tell, they all sound the same.  

[romaz]

41 minutes ago, greenleo said:

Thank you Roy.

 

It is clear that SQ wise Intel X25E >HD>Samsung SSD with normal SATA cable.  Would you minbd tell us the comparison between  Samsung SSD with Pachanko cable and Intel X25E with normal cable?.

 

 

 

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.

[romaz]

11 hours ago, Theobetley said:

 

So Romaz I know you recommended a pcie adapter for cf cards somewhere in this thread but I cant find it. Can you direct me to the post or simply reiterate the adapter you tried?

 

 

Sure.  You can use something like the following:

 

https://www.amazon.com/StarTech-com-Express-Controller-Adapter-PEX2IDE/dp/B000YAX13Y/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1491347818&sr=1-1&keywords=pcie+to+ide

 

I chose to use a combination of these two pieces.

 

Here's the first piece:

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00AZ9T41M/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

Here's the second piece:

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0036DDXUW/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o09_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

[romaz]

13 minutes ago, lmitche said:

Today, the two Terra Grande cables arrived.  I should have ordered three.  In replacing the existing cables it appears I had two 12 inch bjc cat 6a cables and a third bjc cat 6a three foot cable held together with two EN70HD isolation transformers.  One end runs to the nic, the other to the Asus EAN66 wifi adapter.

 

Without thinking too much, I replaced the bjc chain with the two TG cables and one EN70HD.  Listening to this SQ took a big nose dive. I went back to the bjc chain immediately.

 

I'm thinking two EN70HDs are better then one.  UGH!!!!  More to come.

 

 

Thanks, Larry.  So are you suggesting that you prefer the Terra Grande to the BJC 6A but that you need 3 of them to sound better than what you have now?

[romaz]

4 hours ago, greenleo said:

Thank you for your reply, Roy.  Where do you get an cable to power a SSD by LPS-1?

 

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.

[romaz]

17 minutes ago, austinpop said:

Hi @romaz

 

Now that the tX-USBultra is released, the question will quickly turn to appropriate power supplies. May has already said that the power draw will exceed the capacity of the LPS-1, and will likely be around 1.5 amps.

 

Since yours is one of the only sCLK enabled "Ultra" chains in the wild  - do you have the means to measure current draw? I was just wondering what the current draw is for:

• your modded dX-USB HD "Ultra", and
• your modded sMS-200?

I suspect this is hard without some instrumentation.

 

I will measure it this evening and will report back buy I suspect my dX-USB HD Ultra just barely draws more than 1.1A (less than 1.5A for sure).  Since the clock on my modded sMS-200 Ultra is powered by the dX-USB HD Ultra, my sMS-200 actually draws less current than a stock sMS-200 and is easily powered by an LPS-1.

 

The current draw of the tX-USB Ultra will depend on how many devices you connect to it.  As a USB 2.0 hub, it is supposed to offer up to 500mA per USB port based on the USB 2.0 specification and as this hub has 2 ports, it needs to offer at least 1A but that doesn't mean that will be the draw.  If you connect only 1 component (such as your DAC) and it doesn't draw from the 5V VBUS, the draw could be well below 1A and could potentially be powered by an LPS-1 (at least this is my hunch).  I think SOtM is just covering their bases.

[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.

 

[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.

[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.

[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.  

[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.

[romaz]

3 hours ago, lmitche said:

SATA Saga update.  The winning SATA cable is the flat Coboc 6 inch silver cable from Newegg.  I have it running between the m.2 Sata adapter and WD HDD.  It is just enough to work.

 

SQ is the best I've heard here.  Depth and ambience has hit a new level.  This is against the 18 inch Coboc flat cable, various Asus cables, an Akasa silver and the 12 inch Bitfenix cable.  My guess is that the cable length has everything to do with sound quality on a SATA connection.  This makes me wonder if it isn't time to research a SAS drive.

 

I learned that SATA, like USB, is a half duplex connection.  SAS is full duplex and may take the sensitivity to cable length away.  Maybe someone has an opinion about that.

 

It is tempting to order a second Adnaco with the pcie bus option.  That would allow one to move the SATA or SAS controller to the other side of a fiber cable.  Hmmmm.....

 

All for now.

 

Thanks for reporting your findings, Larry. Your comparisons are always of great interest.  

 

Obviously, they support that SATA cables do matter even though the data these cables transmit are buffered into RAM.  As I have previously posted, with cables, I believe the lower the line resistance, the better, and this is what shorter cables offer.  Because cables also act as antennas for noise, it would make sense that shorter cables are also less noisy.

 

As for SATA vs SAS and half-duplex vs full-duplex, this is a good question to ponder and I have pondered it myself.  While full-duplex transmission where you have the capability of simultaneous send and receive is an attractive thought, it also results in much more current draw.  Even the non-RAID host bus adapters I have looked at from LSI, Intel, Adaptec, etc., often consume north of 8 watts (although at 12V, that isn't horrible).  Even worse, the SAS HBAs I have here (which are not in my audio PCs) run extremely hot and require an actively cooled machine.  The bigger problem is that SAS hard drives and SSDs are definitely all about speed and even though they are all 12V devices, they seem to all be power mongers.

 

Even though adding another Adnaco provides you protection from RF in the ground plane, it can't prevent this noise from permanently impacting the signal itself, at least that's my opinion.  If galvanic isolation was the solution for all noise issues, with my DAVE's galvanic isolation, none of these noise-prevention measures I'm taking should make a difference and yet they do.  As a further example, I currently have my 12-core Mac Pro with 64GB of RAM and 1TB PCIe NVMe SSD also connected to my DAVE via its optical input and compared against my audio PC, the SQ differences are quite notable.

[romaz]

7 hours ago, Johnseye said:

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 suspect your SATA SSD might consume 80-100mW while idle but not during writes or reads.  That would be unprecedented if it did and if indeed it's true, then please share which drive you use so I can purchase it immediately.

 

Intel claims that the X25-E consumes 60mW while idle and 2.4W during sequential writes.  While 2.4W doesn't sound impressive, what caught my attention was how it performed in this benchmark:

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-x25-e-ssd,2158-7.html

 

This benchmark suggests during workstation level disk I/O, the X25-E consumes only 1.1W.  Green Leo previously wondered how the X25-M compared which is based on MLC NAND and it did well but not as good as the X25-E.  It has been stated numerous times by others that SLC consumes less power than MLC and this supports that claim.  What is important with respect to noise, however, isn't power consumption but current draw.  1.1W at 5V equates to less current draw and, therefore, less ground plane noise than the same 1.1W at 3.3V which is the voltage that M.2 devices operate at.  

 

Assuming your M.2 SATA SSD consumes 80-100mW at idle, at 3.3V, that equates to 24-30mA of current draw.  With the X25-E, which is a 5V device, 60mW of consumption equates to only 12mA of current draw.  Based on the benchmark performance of 1.1W of power consumption, that equates to about 200mA.  That's a pretty good number.

 

At the end of the day, it's about how it sounds that matters and not how much current it draws nor am I convinced that the X25-E is the best there is.  I will wait to compare against compact flash before making a final decision but thus far, to my ears and with this particular build, the X25-E is what has sounded the best.