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

[BigAlMc]

6 minutes ago, look&listen said:

Yes, Phasure is cool with subject, but Ghent Audio is really first with commercial JSSS-360 product, appearing just days (week?) after emerging from these pages!

 

I know. I bought two JSSG 360 DC cables from Ghent too ?

 

Just net someone too step up on offering JSSG 360 for Lan cables now... 

 

[BigAlMc]

3 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

Does ghent make jssg usb cables?

 

Nope, was just DC power cables when I last checked but it's worth checking. He does some nice work at very reasonable prices and is pretty responsive to the trends of this community. 

[BigAlMc]

I've emailed Ghent and asked whether he has any plans to offer JSSS-360 USB or LAN cables or whether these can be custom ordered. 

 

Should hopefully help settle whether reluctant types like Beer and myself need to reach for braid, a heat shrink and Google instructions ?

 

Cheers, 

Non-DIY capable Al

[BigAlMc]

On 8/19/2018 at 8:42 AM, BigAlMc said:

I've emailed Ghent and asked whether he has any plans to offer JSSS-360 USB or LAN cables or whether these can be custom ordered. 

 

Should hopefully help settle whether reluctant types like Beer and myself need to reach for braid, a heat shrink and Google instructions ?

 

Cheers, 

Non-DIY capable Al

 

Ghent replied that he can make JSSS-360 USB or LAN cables on request. 

 

Email him if you are interested. 

 

[email protected]

 

On a separate note I should get my Lush^2 today. 

 

Cheers, 

Alan

[BigAlMc]

7 hours ago, Bruce Orr said:

 

Got it. The SE is both server and player?  Are you upsampling?  I know Innuos has admitted to not having the processing power to do much upsampling. 

 

Hi Bruce,

 

I know the question was to Rajiv but fwiw I'm giving upsampling in Roon to Max PCM x2 a go on my SE and no issues so far. No stuttering or dropouts.

 

Also on another previous topic I've ordered a 1 meter JSSG360 LAN cable from Ghent Audio. Want to compare it to my Sablon LAN cable.

 

Also currenly burning in a pair of Lush^2 cables with promising first impressions.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

12 minutes ago, austinpop said:

 

Bruce, not sure what you're asking? Bump in SQ relative to what?

 

Hi Bruce,

 

Yup - I'm similarly confused. My comment was that I'd enabled Roon DSP with no issues. Can't say I've noticed any difference whatsoever. But perhaps I've just not listened closely enough.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

Ghent just sent me this based on the custom JSSG360 LAN cable he made for me and has just shipped ?

 

https://www.ghentaudio.com/part/et11.html

 

 

[BigAlMc]

3 minutes ago, Bruce Orr said:

 

Relative to Roon Core not on the SE; and relative to the library not being on SE

 

I'm running Roon Core on the SE and have my library on the SE.

 

I might be missing a trick but I didn't spend that sort of dough on a server with 2TB storage to relegate it to endpoint duties.

 

Although I accept there are many ways to skin the cat.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

11 minutes ago, elan120 said:

Very nice looking cable.  Looking forward to your impression when you get it.

 

I am currently using the JSSG version of this cable, and curious how the JSSG360 compares and wonder if SOtM dCBL-CAT7 will be better still?

 

I have a couple of the JSSG versions too so can try to compare.

 

They got repurposed to non Audio duties when I bought the Sablon and currently link my non-Audio switch to my TV PVR and my Oppo blu ray player.

 

I balked at the price of the SoTM cable tho.

[BigAlMc]

15 hours ago, hols said:

Yes, I have ordered Lush 2 and will try it when it arrives.

 

Hi Hols,

 

Great review.

 

I'm loving the Lush^2, so looking forward to your thoughts and comparison to the Intona.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

2 hours ago, hols said:

I received my Lush 2 last week and has burned it for more than a week continuously before I evaluate it together with a few of my audiophile friends. So this is only a sort of early report of the Lush 2 as it will need more burn in to reveal its full potential. I will only report 2 configurations of the shielding combinations here and leave the opinion on other configurations in the Lush 2 thread.

 

Frankly speaking we don't have great expectations at first because we had been 'tricked' before by other cable manufacturers who come up with a little modification and boost that it is a revolution. So when the Lush 2 was used to replace another USB cable costing ($1800) from my SOtM Tx-USB ultra to the Chord Blu 2 our jaws dropped to the ground. This is the A: B-W-Y-R  B: B-W-R configuration. We were listening to Lanchbery In a Persian market a piece for chorus and orchestra, the chorus and orchestra suddenly come back to shape. The percussions are much more focused , the Cello melody come on so sumptuously. You suddenly found all the Persian goodies are well displayed in front of you. This is really excellent layering and holographic presentation of the orchestra. We then changed to the A: B-Y & W-R  B: B-Y & W-R configuration and this is another world. The instruments suddenly becomes much richer in timbre and so much more musical. You can feel the whole orchestra is enjoying the music. However the layering and focus of instruments are not as good as the first config. And opinions are a little divided here. Some would prefer this config than the first one for the musicality although I myself think that the piano sound is too thick and lost its liveliness. We have also substituted this Lush 2 with the Lush 1 and the reaction is that it is not listenable and have to change it back immediately. The difference is really great.

 

And then there is the question of how does it compare with the Intona Ultimate? So we replace the Intona Ultimate with the Lush 2 and WOW we lost half of the detail we have got previously. The orchestra shrunk down both in size and in layering and  in number of orchestra members. There appear to be holes in between instruments. 

 

What about using the USB cables just connected to DAC without the intermediary SOtM Tx USB Ultra. So we then tried the Lush 2 in another system where my Windows 10 HQplayer is driving my Holo Spring DAC. We tried Lush 1, Lush 2 , Intona Ultimate. The character of all the USB cables is similar to before. The Intona Ultimate is most detailed. Lush 1 appears musical but without too much of  layering or focusing of instruments. Lush 2 is miles ahead of Lush 1 and it has advantage of being able to change the character in minutes by changing the configurations. And the character could be so vastly different, not imaginable before.

 

So our conclusion is that Intona Ultimate excels in giving you details which at present no other cables can come close. Lush 2 is great either as a complementary cable to the Intona Ultimate or on its own. The question of (whether we Lush 1 owners should buy the Lush 2 or not)  has now changed to how many do I need?  No deal with Phasure ( I pay full price and get refund of 50 Euro like all Lush 1 owners). So it seems that both material & specification(Intona claims Ultimate 90 Ohm +/- 0.2 Ohm, Reference 90 Ohm +/- 0.5 Ohm) as well as shielding are all important in the final outcome of the sound generated. 

 

Thanks Hols for posting such a detailed review.

 

I'd a similar conclusion over on the Lush^2 thread where I felt the very highly regarded Sablon cable was probably more accurate and analytical but there was an immediacy and musicality with the Lush^2 that grabbed me more.

 

I'm on holiday this week and out of the country so have yet to try Peters latest config. Something to look forward to when I get home.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

3 minutes ago, hols said:

 

I find the best combination is Intona Ultimate from NAA computer to SOtM Tx USB ultra and Lush 2 A: B-W-Y-R  B: B-W-R from SOtM to DAC

 

Aah so here our findings diverge. For some reason in my setup the Sablon going into the tx-usbultra followed by Lush^2 into DAC resulted in a sort of crackling noise - like static on a record player. But crackling aside I didn't here anything in this combo (like additional details) that was missing in the Lush^2>Lush^2 combo. Might give that another listen when I get home.

[BigAlMc]

9 minutes ago, sig8 said:

What is A: B-W-Y-R  B: B-W-R....,etc? Sorry just can't comprehend.

 

The Lush^2 is configurable with different combinations of wires connected to the different available connections. The A: B-W-R is @PeterSt from Phasure nomenclature for describing the different configurations. 

 

See the Lush^2 thread in the general forum for more info.

[BigAlMc]

23 minutes ago, sig8 said:

Thank you. My Lush-2 comes in couple of days.

 

Great stuff. Let us know how you get on with it.

 

Meantime check out the Lush^2 thread as there's many different options and a few configurations getting a lot of recommendations.

 

Its a bit complicated, to me at least, but the system describes what connectors are connected (and in which order) on each side. So A: B-W-R is Black White Red on the USB A connector.

 

Kinda mind boggling but easy to master once you play around with it.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

2 hours ago, seeteeyou said:

SOtM sCLK-OCX10 – A High Purity, 10 MHz Master Clock Generator
https://audiobacon.net/2018/09/26/sotm-sclk-ocx10-a-high-purity-10-mhz-master-clock-generator/

 

The Linear Solution OCXO Audiophile Switch & Reference Ethernet Cable – The Missing Pieces of Digital Audio
https://audiobacon.net/2018/09/28/the-linear-solution-ocxo-audiophile-switch-reference-ethernet-cable-the-missing-pieces-of-digital-audio/

 

 

 

Yeah Jay has been busy. As well as the sCLK-OCX10 & Linear Solutions switch reviews he did a review of the LPS1.2 and a comparison with the Paul Hynes SR4.

 

Cheers,

Alan

 

[BigAlMc]

3 hours ago, austinpop said:

• The Statement MSRP is USD 13,750. Gulp.
• OCXO clocking of both USB and Ethernet

 

Hey Rajiv - thanks for the report and hope you're enjoying the show.

 

It"s a funny one as I struggle to picture me agreeing to pay 14k for one component. It sounds completely nuts to me.

 

But then when you tally up the cost of a TX-USBUltra, a sCLK-OCX10, a decent PSU for each,, an AQVOX SE, another decent PSU, a 700 quid BNC cable and of course a handful of decent USB and LAN cables - well craperoo - I'm in the 14k ballpark and have spaghetti back on my plate. Shit!

 

Not gonna lose much sleep as all importantly my system sounds terrific. But with that in mind having experts like Innuos compile and voice the OCXO clocking of LAN and USB sounds like a practical approach as it avoids spaghetti and the ever present (paranoid audiophile) concern that a component combo or wire combo lacks synergy and is somehow holding the system back from achieving its full potential.

 

I suppose the upside is the flexibility to tinker and replace within the spaghetti. Uptones upcoming switch for example.

 

I don't suppose you noticed what USB and LAN cables Nuno was using for their demo?

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

Hi Steve / @Blackmorec,

 

Yeah good thoughtful post.

 

Its easy to think in terms of the difference between the SE and the Statement as simply that Innuos adopted OCXO clocking. But as you point out that's an over simplification. Innuos have (to their great credit) paid attention to the clocking but have also simply continued their evolution towards sonic nirvana elsewhere in the Statement.

 

That said I'm sure the question will gravitate in many SE owners minds around how big the delta is between the SE & Reference Clocking versus the Statement.

 

Personally speaking unless convinced somehow that the difference was really compelling the cost/effort of selling the spaghetti-clock-marinara to fund a Statement is a dealbreaker for me at least.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

9 minutes ago, lmitche said:

Right, so you can make money from our ideas. I'm outta here!

 

Hi Larry,

 

Sorry but I think this is a bit harsh.

 

We greatly appreciate your contributions here and you without doubt have a right to be very proud of your pioneering efforts.

 

But personally I lack the skills to tackle a lot of this myself and as such I'm very glad to see Andrew and other vendors trying to understand what is being discovered and learned here.

 

Unless a vendor makes it simple the likes of myself and a few others simply won't get to the dizzy heights you're achieving.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

3 hours ago, austinpop said:

Don't worry - plenty of us are watching and waiting on the sidelines!

 

I don't know what you could mean! ?

[BigAlMc]

2 hours ago, romaz said:

Straight out of the box, even without the Ref10 and despite the initial harshness, I was simply blown away by this switch.  What is amazing is I thought I knew what to expect based on my experience with the prototype and yet my expectations were still exceeded.  As good as the TLS switch is, this switch is operating several notches higher.  This switch isolates, that's for sure, but more impressively, it acts like a gain stage.  Dynamics are unreal.  Everything is just bigger and badder but this switch also portrays the subtlest of nuances and the most delicate textures.  To my ears, this sNH-10G is their most impactful device that I have heard.  More impactful than the sMS-200ultra Neo, tX-USBultra, or sCLK-OCX10 master clock and so if I were forced to choose a single SOtM product, this would be it.

 

Hi Roy,

 

Many thanks for your recent contributions including the above on the sNH-10G

 

I've been in that rare audiophile state of being (fairly) content with my system and SQ for a while now. But funnily enough I spent a couple hours on Sunday morning rereading both yours and Rajiv's reviews of the sNH-10G prototype. Posted here for convenience of others that are interested:

 

 

 

 

 

I currently have the AQVOX SE in my system and am generally pretty happy with the SQ from Tidal. I also have the Zenith SE after following your findings on that and am generally pretty happy with the SQ of locally stored files (although annoyingly more with the LMS player rather than my preferred Roon).

 

But. And yes, there is ALWAYS a but! The prospect of the sNH-10G further lifting that Tidal playback is intriguing and there are two thoughts bouncing around my mind that have me intrigued (or perhaps that should be bothered!).

 

Path 1: Tidal into AQVOX SE > Zenith SE > TX-USBUltra > DAC

 

I'm intrigued by the prospect of enhancing this to:

 

Path 1: Tidal into sNH-10G > Zenith SE > TX-USBUltra > DAC

 

The sNH-10G comes with the option of me connecting it to my sCLK-OCX10 (which on paper at least) suggests it's likely to outperform the AQVOX.

 

(Also having spent the significant outlay on the reference clock there is an appeal to utilizing it more than I currently do).

 

But then there another path or two which become potentially very interesting. I have a DAC that accepts ethernet in. So by adding a switch that is disciplined by a reference clock two other paths open up that might just surpass my heavily optimised USB path:

 

Path 2: Tidal into sNH-10G > Zenith SE (LAN output) > DAC

 

or

 

Path 3: Tidal into sNH-10G > Zenith SE (LAN output) > sNH-10G > DAC

 

In other words I can pass 'clean/clocked' ethernet into the SE and then directly onto the DAC. Or I could pass 'clean/clocked' ethernet into the SE and then pack to the sNH-10G to be 'cleaned/clocked' again before being passed onto DAC.

 

Roy - my use-case is a lot closer to @austinpop's than yours but your observations of the sNH-10G: 

 

2 hours ago, romaz said:

switch isolates, that's for sure, but more impressively, it acts like a gain stage.  Dynamics are unreal.  Everything is just bigger and badder

 

Well that's put the cat amongst the pigeons for me. Especially in Path 3 where crucially both Tidal and locally stored files pass through the sNH-10G ?

 

Whilst I'm nowhere near as adventurous or experimental as many on this thread I'm tempted to give it a go out of scientific discovery as much as out of the hope of raising the SQ further. But then again it's spending another 2 grand on a system that I currently have no complaints about.

 

The SoTM website says the sNH-10G doesn't start shipping until 26th of November so I guess I have some time to ponder, pontificate and otherwise generally drive myself up the wall with such thoughts! ?

 

Then of course there is the other 'maybe hold off' factor. Which is @Superdad's upcoming audiophile switch. Alex - I don't suppose you and John S are any closer to announcing a much awaited release date for yours?

 

Anyway - pardon my ramblings but since I'm driving myself to distraction I thought I'd share in case any of the gang have any thoughts or insight.

 

Cheers,

Alan 

 

 

[BigAlMc]

5 minutes ago, rickca said:

See this post

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/38595-the-new-generation-ultracap-lps-12-user-impressions-and-questions-thread/?do=findComment&comment=892423

 

Thanks @rickca

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

7 minutes ago, rickca said:

I am confused because if you were using DLNA/UPnP in Path 3 the music stream would go directly through the switch into your DAC.  What I don't understand is how this works if your using LMS/Squeezelite with a control point like iPeng.  Maybe @left channel can educate me, please?

 

Hi Rick,

 

Actually I think you're right.

 

In path 2 the Tidal files go through the SE because the LAN cables are connected: Switch > SE > DAC

 

In path 3 the Tidal files would probably actually go Switch > DAC (and the only thing doing via the SE would be the server commands).

 

So with this in mind I guess the question is not whether the Tidal files get 'cleaned/reclocked' twice by the sNH-10G in Path 3, but whether Path 3 is better than Path 2 because it skips the SE and goes directly to the DAC from the (sCLK-OCX10 disciplined) sNH-10G.

 

Good catch!

 

Thanks,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

2 minutes ago, rickca said:

yes, I'm clueless about a lot of things. ?

 

And you're not alone there! ?

[BigAlMc]

19 minutes ago, austinpop said:

As you saw from my review, my experience with the SOtM switch was a more modest improvement than Roy's. Perhaps it's because he has switched back to the endpoint approach (server > switch > NUC) while you and I are still going switch > server > DAC. Either way, as if it needed to be said at this point in page 415 - with everything we're trying here -YMMV!

 

Hi Rajiv,

 

Yup totally. And that's what I meant when I said that my implementation was closer to yours than Roys as his sNH-10G prototype review was a substantial length of ethernet to the switch to NUC as endpoint (from memory anyway). Whereas yours is much closer to mine in terms of switch > SE > DAC. One of the main differences being that our locally stored files don't go via the switch but streaming does.

 

And I'd also paid attention that you found the difference between the TLS switch and the sNH-10G to be less that Roy observed.

 

But whilst the TLS switch sounds like a great bit of kit the ideal of the sNH-10G and it's presumed synergy with my sCLK-OCX10 is very intriguing. 

 

(Though the counter argument is that the BNC cable to connect the sCLK-OCX10 & sNH-10G probably costs ballpark what the TLS switch does!!).

 

29 minutes ago, austinpop said:

It has more to do with the Ethernet implementation of these devices. Both Ayre's use a ConversDigital board, and if I'm not mistaken, so does the DS.

 

Yes, spot on again. The Directstreams Bridge II is a ConversDigital board.

 

I was wondering if the sNH-10G might compete with the TX-USBultra path - especially given Roys findings. But I need to decide if I want to lay out 2 grand to find out. That ConversDigital board might well be the limiting factor.

 

And as per Diecasters subsequent post there are some DS owners that prefer USB. I personally found USB and Ethernet to be fairly evenly matched until I went down the USB optimisation rabbit hole. Which brings me full circle to whether Ethernet optimisation might level that playing field or not.

 

18 minutes ago, diecaster said:

Not only does the PS Audio DirectStream sound better over USB versus Ethernet, it sounds even better in you pull the Bridge II card from the chassis (less internal noise).

 

 

Thanks for the feedback. Some more thought clearly required.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

19 minutes ago, austinpop said:

Someday direct streaming to a DAC via Ethernet will exceed the performance of USB. Until then it's a (drum roll)...

 

Bridge II (too) far.

 

 

?