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

[Johnseye]

2 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

Actually, I got if from Fox News.....

 

2 minutes ago, charlesphoto said:

 

No, he got it from the plague of trolls that’s descended over half of this country, all the way to the highest office. A rude insultin this time and age. 

 

Why can’t we just have our hobby with anecdotal impressions? What is Speedskater and his ilk trying to save us from anyway? It’s just stuff and money. I have no money, time or intention to delve into word clocks but enjoy reading about members experiences with them,  and so on. What  one shouldn’t do is go into every thread and crap on it just because one has an opposite agenda. Now that’s a stupid waste of time! 

 

Arrogance. Plain and simple minded. Time to move on. 

[Johnseye]

5 hours ago, Alan_J said:

 

I'm not sure if tX-USBhubIN and tX-USBexp can be chained that way. tX-USBexp is designed to receive data through PCI bus, whereas tX-USBhubIn gets data through internal usb connector. Even if it is possible, input and output routes must be separate to avoid SQ degradation as I understand it. You might check with SOtM about it.

 

I may be missing something in how this is connected.  Are you using a cable to come out the tX-USBexp then into the tX-USBhubIN then out of the tX-USBhubIN to your DAC?  That is how I would envision these devices working.  Merely having the tX-USBexp plugged into the PCI slot and connected to the sCLK-EX doesn't do anything.  Coming off the motherboard direct to the tX-USBhubIN bypasses the tX-USBexp.

[Johnseye]

2 minutes ago, rickca said:

Is this really equivalent to having an external tX-USBultra?  I thought there were differences between the tX-USBhubIN and the tX-USBultra with respect to filtering.

 

Could this chaining be done with two tX-USBexp cards, or can that card not accept a chained internal input?

 

I thought @romaz was using tX-USBhubIN for input and tX-USBexp for output to his DAC.  So you are using the tX-USBexp exclusively for reclocking/filtering, right?  Where are your music files?

 

What you're doing seems clever, but I'm not sure I understand it.

 

I'd also like to know some specs of your PC ... CPU and motherboard.  Thanks.

 

 

Not exactly equivalent, but close.  You need an output and an input so two txUSBexp cards can not be used.  That card's input is the PCI slot.

 

Roy is using the txUSBhubIN as an input for his music files.  This may be what @Alan_J is doing as well, I'm still unclear.  Roy was going out the txUSBexp and then into a txUSBultra.

[Johnseye]

25 minutes ago, Alan_J said:

 

You are right. An internal usb cable comes out of tX-USBexp then goes into tX-USBhubIN. For this, SOtM modded tX-USBexp to make an internal usb connector. In the May's photo I attached, the yellow cable comes out of the newly created connector on the back of tX-USBexp and goes into tX-USBhubIN.

 

Very smart move.  I like it and wish I had done the same thing.  Nice!

[Johnseye]

On 10/9/2017 at 2:30 PM, ElviaCaprice said:

LOL, it's a disease building high power PC's.  Did it for many years myself, thus I can see how the computer audiophile (especially beginners) find it compelling to go the HQP route with these kind of builds.   Just like big ass speakers and amps.  The bigger the better sound.  NOT

It was hard at first for me to scale back my PC mentality and go the low power route for audio.

 

7 hours ago, firedog said:

 

I think it's a mistake to generalize. Take a maker like Innous - they use "off the shelf" MOBO's. But, they claim they painstakingly measure basically everything on the market (slight exaggeration) and find the boards that are low noise. Acc'd to them, some of these exist, and you don't need an "audiophile" board if you use them and then optimize OS, etc. 

 

Innuos is not using a high power PC.  One of their servers runs between 10-15w and their high end one runs at 12-25w.  They also advertise a low ripple LPSU.  They are on the same page, doing the same thing we are.  We are using low power, off the shelf boards with LPSUs and sharing our experiences with them here.

 

After using my latest board for a couple months, while it is good practice to keep it low power, I do miss some of the speed and pep my previous proc had.  My current board has a built in Celeron with a 1.6Ghz proc IIRC.  It's rated at 6w and while I haven't measured it with a Kill-a-watt yet I'm guessing it uses all 6.  I'll measure it this weekend.  My previous proc was an i7 rated at 35w.  That entire server never used more than about 25w.  Where the Celeron is lacking is its ability to quickly analyze files.  Anyone who uses Roon or JRiver know that when you import new music it analyzes the tracks.  It is painstakingly slow with the Celeron.  It also doesn't help that I was cleaning up metadata recently and have 55,000 tracks to analyze.  I'm churning through about 10k per day where in the past this would have just taken a few hours.

 

So there are trade offs.  Windows installation time is another, but fortunately that's usually one and done unless you're doing a lot of testing of various OS's.  Linux, and ROCK in particular is always a fast install.  Whether there's a difference in SQ between the 6w Celeron vs the 35w i7, on their own and not taking into consideration the other motherboard factors, is unknown to me at this point.  There was a difference in SQ between these two unmodified server builds, with the Celeron Jetway board sounding better.  I can only guess it's because of the lower power.

[Johnseye]

39 minutes ago, firedog said:

I'm not an expert and not arguing with you, but I still think it is difficult to generalize. There are some makers that say they get better sound with high powered boards. I'm guessing there are some implementations that work better with low power and some with high power. 

 

I agree, it is difficult to generalize.  The theory behind low power is that high power introduces more noise and is more difficult to power with an LPSU.  Using a switching PSU again introduces more noise.  Are there benefits that components with higher power bring to the table, yes.  One I can think of is with upsampling to DSD512.  However this is the only situation I know of where more power can be used for better SQ.  Otherwise introducing more power means more noise.

[Johnseye]

4 minutes ago, mozes said:

After my experience with Dave and sPS-500, I no longer believe that linear is always superior to switching PSUs.

 

I don't know about the Dave, but my understanding is that the sPS-500 has excellent filtering, as does most of SOtM's products.  Lee's a noise filter expert wherever that's applied.  I don't think that the type of filtering he does is applicable to many switching PSUs.  Those appear to be exceptions.  Linear power supplies do not generate high frequency noise in the first place.  These power supplies are bigger, heavier and more expensive.  You need to consider the effect the filter has.  It's a requirement to eliminate the noise of an switching supply and the impact of the filter needs to be considered wholisitically. 

[Johnseye]

1 hour ago, AmusedToD said:

 

Well, that’s not new, even in high end audio. For example Jeff Rowland is a firm believer in switching mode power supplies with filtering. All of his products in the current lineup (even the M925 monoblocks with a price of $50k or more) use high efficiency SPMS.

 

1 hour ago, mozes said:

Linn as well

 

The Benchmark amp I use, which is the lowest noise amp on the market, also uses an SMPS.  I don't know if I would call it common in the realm of PC and network hardware.  It is more common in audio equipment, which is why you are pointing this out.  However, we are talking about customized PC and related hardware.

 

Here's what Benchmark has to say about the PSU in their amp.

 

INNOVATIVE LOW-NOISE POWER SUPPLY

 

Most high-quality power amplifiers have linear power supplies, large toroidal transformers, and large banks of energy-storage capacitors. These linear supplies are usually unregulated and the capacitors help to remove ripple produced by the audio and by the AC line. In contrast, the AHB2 uses a tightly regulated resonant switching power supply that includes a very fast control loop. This control loop responds to audio-frequency load changes and keeps the supply voltage constant without the use of a large bank of capacitors. This active regulation is much more effective than capacitive energy-storage. Consequently, the peak power output of the AHB2 does not vary with line voltage or audio loading. The power supply rails maintain a constant voltage during audio peaks.

The power supply in the AHB2 switches at frequencies that are well above audible frequencies. This eliminates mechanical hum while significantly reducing the strength of stray magnetic fields. For a given amount of power, magnetic field strength decreases as switching frequency increases. The lower field strengths also provide a significant reduction in size. High-frequency transformers and coils are also much smaller than line-frequency components. This size reduction contributes to the small physical size of the AHB2.

The switching power supply used in the AHB2 is a zero-voltage switching, resonant power converter. This means that the power devices in the supply switch near zero voltage and zero current, eliminating the large switching transients produced by conventional switching power supplies. The power supply in the AHB2 is actually much cleaner and quieter than a conventional linear supply. 

The power supply In the AHB2 is well over 90% efficient, much more efficient than linear supplies. This means that little power is lost to heat.

[Johnseye]

3 minutes ago, Cornan said:

Wow. Even how impressive that was I could'nt even finish it understanding it all. I am 100% sure you've got it all right, but did it prove your point? I don't think so! It was just to much "jitter" there that covered the truth. I am normally quite resistant to "jitter" on forums, but find your point quite hard to follow. I do beleive you, but I do not follow you so to speak.

 

Simply stated, my point was that manufacturers in the audio industry pay closer attention to noise from power supplies than other industries like computer and network.  I didn't say anything about jitter, unless you were using that term to describe the Benchmark information.

 

What information you didn't finish or understand was from Benchmark.  Maybe this will help you.

 

 

[Johnseye]

56 minutes ago, BigGuy said:

Not to throw names around but the poster whose initials are "sandyk" commented in the last post of the (dead) thread "Should I use SOTM In-Line Filter..." that there was power shortcoming to the SOTM SATA Filter...

 

The problem with the average power filter, such as the SOtM SATA Filter, is that it needs to use surface mount components in order to reduce it's physical size. The inductors are of necessity, small in size ,and usually have more resistance than desirable due to the much finer gauge of wire needed . The capacitors at the output, being surface mount types are limited in the amount of capacitance that can be used. This results in a far less than very low and flat impedance right across the audible bandwidth and higher. An electronic filter on the other hand , such as a shunt regulator can have the equivalent capacitance of as high a value as 1 Farad.

The problem with most Series and Shunt Regulators is that almost all have too high a voltage drop across them unless you are converting , for example, an internal +12V supply rail to a cleaner +5V supply rail.

The John Linsley Hood designed PSU add-on that I use, provided that it has suitable protection from the huge inrush currents possible at start up in a normal PC, has no voltage drop through it.

The use of a good shunt regulator,(or a series regulator when converting from +12V to +5V ) actually results in an improvement in soundstage, with more "air", and improved ambience due to lower noise and a lower output impedance to well past the audible bandwidth .(>300kHz typically)

 

I went to the SOTM website looking for information, installation instructions, etc.  Nadda!  Even the AudioCircle link is dead!

 

I am using a DELL PC running Win7Pro with 500GB HDD for OS and 2TB HDD for music library.  I use JRiverMC and playback from memory to external DAC.

 

Should I expect to hear any improvement in SQ with the SATA filter?

IF so, where would the gains potentially be coming from?

 

No instructions are necessary. Plug one end into the drive and the cable goes into the other. 

 

I have no experience with the John Linsly Hood filter but maybe Alex can tell you where to find one to compare. For $65 the SOtM SATA II filter gives an excellent improvement. 

[Johnseye]

43 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Johnseye, have you compared with and without the SATA II filter on your sCLK-EX server?  If so, what are you impressions?  Was it OS, DATA or both?

 

Yes. OS only. Made a significant difference going from m.2 to sata ll with that filter. 

[Johnseye]

58 minutes ago, elan120 said:

The picture you show here is for sCLK-EX board version 1.2 and 1.3 jumper setting, not for tx-USBUltra.  Did you looking for voltage output setting for sCLK-EX board or tx-USBUltra?

 

55 minutes ago, beautiful music said:

tX-USBUltra

 

The tX-USBultra uses the sCLK-EX. It has one inside its chassis. You change the voltage on the sCLK-EX board. The diagram and LTG2010s advice is correct. 

[Johnseye]

16 minutes ago, beautiful music said:

My unit was set to 12v so I think there is not a jumper in my board, here is my question, can I use the jumper that had been used in HDD?

 

Yes but be careful and make sure there isn't a jumper already there. 

[Johnseye]

2 hours ago, austinpop said:

I've been busy over the holidays with family and trips, so have not been posting much. Now that I am back from 80º F weather to 20º F weather - yes, we do have winters in Texas, even snow...

 

I have an SR4 and a Zenith SE burning in, and this coming week, have a dedicated AC circuit (6AWG cable and outlet, supplied by Jim Weill of Sound Application) going in to my setup. It will take a few weeks for all of these changes to stabilize and break in, after which I plan to do a lot of critical listening and some comparisons.

 

Please be patient with me.

 

I'm surprised by the preliminary results of the SR4.  If after your burn it in further, and it's the same result, I suspect the sPS-500 the better supply and says a lot for Paul's new line.  Disappointing and I'm glad I waited as I was about to order one.

 

Did you buy a Zenith?  That's a lot of coin.  Congrats.

 

I just started a thread on breaker to outlet AC wiring.  Would appreciate your input if you've been doing some research.  6awg is some thick wire.  I'm guessing the outlet is designed for it.  Looks like we continue down the same path.

[Johnseye]

1 minute ago, austinpop said:

Link?

 

 

[Johnseye]

1 hour ago, mozes said:

Sonore vs SOTM by Audiostream

 

https://www.audiostream.com/content/audiophile-conundrum-sonore-vs-sotm

 

I agree with the conclusion although my comparison was with the mR and iR

 

1 minute ago, mozes said:

Will be interesting to see if @austinpop Zenith SE will beat the Trifecta!

 

It will, but I'm personally more interested in whether it would beat the modified motherboard with tX-USBexp and tX-USBultra trifecta version.

[Johnseye]

1 hour ago, limniscate said:

Only romaz can speak to that, since neither @austinpop nor I have the tX-USBexp.

 

1 hour ago, austinpop said:

 

 

Yeah, our comparisons are not going to add to Roy's comparison of trifecta vs. sCLK-EX modded server. At best, it will be an indirect comparison. Roy compared Zenith SE vs. his sCLK-EX modded server over on head-fi. We will be comparing Zenith SE to our respective trifectas.

 

In my case. I'll add another caveat. The Zenith SE, directly attached to my DAC (Ayre Codex) does not work. Nuno @ Innuos has suggested this is a known incompatibility between their USB controller and certain DACs, but as yet has not indicated whether fixing this is a high priority with them. As it stands, I will not be able to do a comparison of Zenith SE (by itself) vs. the trifecta.

 

The comparisons would then be:

• Trifecta (Baseline): modded switch > modded sMS-200 > ISO-R > tX-USBultra > Codex
• SE with tX: Zenith SE > tX-USBultra > Codex
• SE with switch and tX: modded switch > Zenith SE > tX-USBultra > Codex

I am at about 70 hours of burn in. I'll wait until I get to 200 hours. Yes, I am a patient guy!

 

I know of a way

 

[Johnseye]

6 minutes ago, austinpop said:

 

 

Since we have the trifectae, Zenith SEs, a smörgåsbord of PSUs, and a reference clock, one of you guys should just fly down with your custom sCLK modded server, and we can do a real bake off! You could fit it in your roll-aboard.

 

Think about it.

 

I will find my way to Austin one day.  The Bon Iver, Hiss Golden Messenger run at Austin City Limits will likely be some good shows.  Ausin's a good place for music.

[Johnseye]

7 hours ago, beautiful music said:

I would like to know if tX-USBexp board can be incorporate in tX-USBUltra case.

 

 

 

 

 

Not with the sCLK-EX in the case as well.  Not enough room.  The tx-USBexp is a fairly big card, as big as the sCLK.

[Johnseye]

28 minutes ago, LTG2010 said:

Here's another goodie from Zenith se. The AC input has a 'medical grade' filter. We can't see which one as its covered up, but it's a good way to suppress emi/rfi from entering the power supply - there are plenty available.

Untitled11

 

Your picture is broken.

[Johnseye]

It sounds like the sPS-500 is the way to go until the next LPS-1 (.2) is released.  Then we'll see.  A shame the SR4 wasn't a clear winner.  Considering the hassles in wait time, risk, etc, etc...well I've said enough.

[Johnseye]

14 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

It's a shame that you guys aren't into DIY. You could transform an existing PSU such as an HDPlex  etc. just by adding a JLH PSU add-on after the appropriate supply rail, at a far less cost .Perhaps around $60 plus the PCB you would need to etch yourself.  Unlike an Ultracap PSU there is also the possibility of fine tuning the sound a little just by changing an electrolytic capacitor or 2 for a different type to suit the direction you wished to go.

i.e. slightly less detailed , or slightly more HF detail. 

 

A bridge I may cross one day.  There are time and confidence factors at the moment.

[Johnseye]

2 hours ago, tapatrick said:

If you mean the SR4 - that is misleading. I ordered one and it arrived in a couple of days. It’s a very high quality LPSU. 

 

You had unusual luck and must be in the UK. Everything I'm reading now is delays even with the SR4. 

[Johnseye]

1 hour ago, austinpop said:

Bridging Revisited

 

A few days ago, before my tX-USBultra failed, I had a chance to revisit the original tweak that started this thread - bridging. If you've been following my saga, you know that I recently got a 6 AWG dedicated circuit put in. I'll be posting about that soon. But due to its location in another room, I needed to move my setup, which made the previous bridged configuration inconvenient. So, for a while, I was running this setup:

• router > shunted Netgear GS105 (el cheapo LPS) > sCLK-EX modded switch > Zenith SE > tX-USBultra > Codex

Before you ask - yes, this was with the Zenith SE during its burn-in. So while I didn't get a chance to compare the Zenith SE to my trifecta before my tX-USBultra died, I was able to test the effect of bridging. 

 

When I first tried and adopted bridging about a year ago, it was well before the recent John Swenson findings with regards to switch magnetics (Netgear FS/GS 10x) and the effect of shunting (JSGT). I had actually started to wonder if the SQ benefit we originally heard from bridging was the same SQ benefit now being realized with JSGT. In other words, did the combination of Netgear GS105 with JSGT essentially render the need for bridging moot?

 

To test this, I temporarily ran a 50 foot Cat 6a cable from my bridged W10 box to my setup. I compared the setup above with:

• bridged W10 box > shunted Netgear GS105 (el cheapo LPS) > sCLK-EX modded switch > Zenith SE > tX-USBultra > Codex

From a music perspective, I ran Roon Core on the Zenith SE, with the music files on my NAS.

 

Verdict

 

Bridging still matters! Even with the GS105 and JSGT shunt in place, the effect of going to a bridged machine vs. a router still made an impact. To be honest, I was hoping that JSGT would render bridging irrelevant, but based on my tests, there is still some benefit from bridging.

 

The "why" is still a mystery, but it sounds like @JohnSwenson and @Superdad are looking at this space, and may have some forthcoming products soon.

 

Glossary

 

JSGT == John Swenson Grounding Tweak

 

I think every time you introduce a new device with it's capacity to influence the sound by introducing noise you stand the chance of negatively impacting your SQ.

 

Looking forward to hearing the results of your electrical wiring.  My electrician will be finished with my work tomorrow morning.  I've gone with dedicated 20 amp circuits and 10 awg wire.  I've twisted the three wires together with John S's recommendation.  Originally I was going to use pump wire which was twisted at the mfg.  Lowes screwed that order up so I ended up getting my own strands.  Using a drill and a board with holes cut into it for each strand I was able to get a very tight twist.  I've also introduced a Topaz 91001-31 isolation transformer for two channel devices only.  I'm using Walker Audio E-SST contact treatment everywhere possible.  This is essentially paste with silver in it.  Since I'm adding it along with all my other changes I'll never know if it helps.  It' just one of those things that may help so why not.

 

One problem I've had in my theater room is that I share a sub between two channel and multi channel equipment.  The sub is powered so if it's plugged into the 2 channel circuit, it's being powered by a different circuit from the multi channel equipment.  This creates a ground loop and a minor hum when watching movies.  I don't notice it when the movie is on, but when it's not and I stick my head against a speaker I heard it, so I wanted it fixed.  I'll have 2 outlets for the sub and change the power cable depending on whether I'm listening to music or watching a movie.

 

Along with all these new improvements to my power my 9 ft. pool table is being setup tomorrow so it will be a fun filled day.

 

[Johnseye]

3 hours ago, KingRex said:

I also have a clean well functioning Topaz 2.4 kva 91002-32 transformer I no longer use. Its the. 00005pF model.  My work phone is (206)949-5739.

 

It needs to be located in another room. Its large and will make noise.  

 

I also have a small Tripp Lite 500 Watt medical grade isolation transformer I don't use. 

 

Why don't you use the Topaz anymore?  Did you hear any benefit from it?