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

[jean-michel6]

10 hours ago, hurka said:

X10Sba Mobo arrived,i want to feed with some lt3045-lt1963-lt1084`s-sps 500 in the first time.(later maybe add sotm card ,clock,linear power-transformers,rectifiers ….)if the sound promising.

This is a great mobo . I use it since 6 month and love it in term of sq it is very quiet. My local audio friends here have all converted to this mobo !

[jean-michel6]

5 hours ago, feelingears said:

 

Will have to dig a bit to compare. This seems to be a consistent factor with cables in my experience.

 

BTW the new Audience Forte power cable is 10 gauge I think and it’s a top to bottom winner in my system where others have sparkled up top but consistently ruined the bass when used with a Naim Hi Cap. 

 

1 hour ago, lmitche said:

I have no idea why the Gotham sounds better. The shield design is one likely reason, but that is conjecture. I expect we will never know the reason. I'm ok with that.

One thing for sure  , if you take the exact same cable  .If one is  JSSG360 treated it is clearly superior .

 

In you case you have two different cable with different metallurgy and construction and it is not because one is JSSG 360 that it will be better .

 

In my case i have found the Gotham to be clearly superior to a canare 4S6 JSSG 360 . I do think that the gotham has an extremely good shielding and may be better copper than canare ... They are both star quad .

 

I did another test with heavy gauge Neotech OCC copper in a twisted pair and JSSG360  , this is so far the best DC cable in my system .

Again star quad should be a plus but in this case the metallurgy brings more benefit than a star quad of lesser metallurgy .

 

To be done with that i have ordered silver cable from audio sensibility that i will treat with JSSG 360. 

 

To be followed ...

[jean-michel6]

On 1/4/2018 at 9:40 AM, beautiful music said:

Did you listen to your tX-USBUltra with LPS-1 or not yet?

 

Did you face a problem with those things?

Oops error !

[jean-michel6]

6 hours ago, lmitche said:

Jean-michel, yes your AG cable test will be interesting. What devices are you using for the test?

I will use it to power either my SOTM dxUSBhd or txUSB ultra .

 

You will need to be a little patient for result ,since i will be on holiday and report results around mid august .

[jean-michel6]

12 hours ago, Blake said:

 

Ok, my Ghent Gotham is burned in so I thought I would post my thoughts, comparing the Gotham to my Ghent Canare 4S6 star quad (not JSSG):

 

There is a rather evident increase in clarity/transparency, which allows more subtle musical elements to be more distinct and audible and the sound stage to be more distinct.  For example, the softer bell or chime sound in this song that is set back in the sound stage is more apparent/easily discernable:

 

 

That part is great as I am constantly seeking to increase clarity.

 

Unfortunately, I am also experiencing some glare or hardness to the treble.  To be fair to the Gotham, I have extreme sensitivity to treble frequencies. For example some headphones (HE-400) or vacuum tube models (12au7 clear tops) have consistently given me an ear ache after only a couple of songs, so it is my unique hearing that is the culprit.  Again, using the above song as an example, the repeating "high-hat" cymbal sound is uncomfortable to listen to and that is the glare I am speaking of.  With my Canare in the system, that is not the case.  The high-hat is bright, but not uncomfortably hard. However, the Canare has less clarity.

 

I know this song is not the ultimate test material and not the finest in fidelity, but I am using it because it gives an example of both the positive and negative aspects (just my subjective opinion) to the Gotham.  These attributes were evident to me as I ran through my dozens of test tracks.

 

Now, taken in context, I am perhaps the lone dissenter on this cable and others love it, so it is just me and my unique characteristics.  The Gotham is my first JSSG cable, so now my question is, is the glare/hardness a result of the metallurgy of the Gotham or JSSG?  I am thinking it must be the Gotham and not JSSG, so I will try a different JSSG DC cable.

 

If anyone has ideas or suggestions, that would be terrific.  I do have a custom Revelation Audio Labs Parable CryoSilver Reference DC cable with additional silver that I would be willing to have someone JSSG to give it another shot.  Does anyone know a person or company who does JSSG treatment at a reasonable cost?

 

Where in your system are you using the Gotham or canare DC cable ? 

 

I have both canare 4s6 jssg360 and the Gotham in my system. I am using them between a lps 1.2 and a dx USBhd (sotm). 

The Gotham did give a lushier sound , it is more musical than the canare which was somewhat brighter. 

 

JSSG 360 is extremely easy to do , you should try by yourself as there is detailed explanation in the previous pages of this thread

 

 

[jean-michel6]

JSSG 360 is apparently known by some cable company. 

I exchanged this tweak with an audiophile friend     

He did checked his Van Den Hull analog interconnect and he told me they were using JSSG 360. 

[jean-michel6]

20 hours ago, BigGuy said:

 

MuMetal being an alloy of Nickel and Iron is a conductor, albeit not a great one...not an insulator.  Since I could not find Conductivities in the same units, the Resistivities of Cu and MuMetal are as follows for comparison:

 

Cu = 1.724 micro ohm - cm

MuM = 47.0 micro ohm - cm

 

Fowler reported that the best construction for durability of the construction was to keep an air gap between the MuM foil and the Cu braid beneath.  Not sure how much affect a small(?) air gap would have as a dielectric/insulator?!  Since I cannot replicate the machine construction Fowler used, I am planning on putting a loosely spaced spiral of 1/4" wide copper foil tape with conductive adhesive below the MuM foil  to simulate the air gap.  Then I plan to put on an outer copper braid directly over the MuM. 

I was not planning on using the two braids in a JSSG360 configuration but did think about attaching an insulated wire head-to-tail, i.e., original JSSG.

IF still bendable at this point, I was planning on adding a braided outer sheath for aesthetics.

 

 

Got it.  Thanks.

Have you found a source for thin mumetal shield ?

I have been using 0.1mm film but this is very thick and not very practical as it make the cable too stiff 

[jean-michel6]

On 8/8/2018 at 1:29 PM, romaz said:

It's been awhile but I made a promise to someone that I would submit this post and so here goes.  I have not kept up faithfully with this thread or any other thread but friends have periodically brought certain important findings to my attention and so I am aware of how splendidly so many of you have continued to push the envelope with regards to digital.  It's nice to see that the spirit that this thread was founded on remains vibrant and strong.  Thanks especially to Rajiv for continuing to moderate this thread so ably.

 

Much has changed with my own system since I last posted.  While I have largely retired from posting due to other time commitments, my curiosity for the unknown aspects of digital continues to burn strong.  I have no scientific explanation for so many differences that I hear but as best as I have been able to figure out, good digital amounts to 3 things:  (1) low noise, (2) low impedance, and (3) low latency.  Maybe there are other characteristics I have left out but as I have attempted to improve my own digital setup, I have sought to address primarily these 3 things.

 

As those who have followed this thread from the beginning are aware, I put together my own single chassis server some time ago and it was the very best I knew how to do.  Foundational to this server were a modified DFI motherboard, 7 SR7 rails, 9 clock replacements (from the router all the way to my final endpoint just before my DAC), and a REF10 that tied all these clocks together.  My OS of choice was Windows Server 2016 running off an Intel X25-E SLC SSD which was further refined with AO/Process Lasso/Fidelizer Pro.  Roon was my player of choice.  What I got was smooth, harsh-free digital playback with robust dynamics.  Sitting atop a Synergistic Research Tranquility Base, I was pretty happy with this setup...for about 3 months.

 

Then came along the Innuos Zenith SE and it highlighted some important deficiencies in my system.  While my server brought about a greater sense of resolution and less harshness thanks in large part to all my clock replacements and the REF10, the SE displayed superior dynamics, even with my SR7 powering my server.  Having taken apart my SE and carefully examined what went into this build and having spoken with Nuno of Innuos and Sean Jacobs, the SE's PSU designer, it became clear to me there were several reasons for what I was hearing but a big reason was the SuperMicro board they chose was superior to the DFI motherboard I used with my build.  With the SE followed by my tX-USBultra powered by a DR rail from my SR7, this was now my very best setup and so I purchased an Innuos Zenith SE.  I was pretty happy with this setup...for about 6 months.

 

There remained a subtle harshness with my digital setup that was tolerable in my large listening room where I had my large Martin Logan Renaissance electrostats but less tolerable in my nearfield Voxativ setup.  Voxativs have a tendency to run bright and so any HF harshness tends to get magnified with these speakers resulting in fatigue.  When I swapped out the SE for my old modified Mac Mini that ran MacOS off an SD card, this harshness went away but it was at the expense of vibrancy and immediacy.  There was a definite tradeoff.  I swapped in my other modified Mac Mini that ran Windows Server 2016/AO off an integrated PCIe NVMe SSD and the vibrancy and immediacy came back but the harshness was even worse than the harshness I heard with the SE.  Just like in the past, after 5-6 hours of listening, there was fatigue.  In my view, it had to be the SSD that was the culprit.  According to Ed Hsu of Sound Galleries, SSDs emit a noise in the 6GHz range that is very difficult to filter and the faster the SSD, generally the noisier it is.  Based on what I was hearing, I had no reason to doubt what he was saying.

 

Late last year, I was introduced to Adrian Wun, owner of The Linear Solution (TLS) by a fellow CA member.  Adrian was designing his own server that incorporated the same SuperMicro motherboard used in the Zenith SE although he modified this board with multiple OCXO replacements and powered it with his own custom designed multi-rail ATX PSU.  What really intrigued me was his custom OS, basically a modified and purposefully-tuned Linux OS that he compacted down to a size below 6GB and so he was able to completely run this OS from memory.  With this OS completely running from 8GB of RAM vs a PCIe NVMe SSD, he said latency improved by a factor of 10-150x depending on what processes were running.  I filed this little tidbit into my own memory because I knew I would want to eventually explore this.  

 

A New Motherboard Discovery

 

My Innous Zenith SE experience taught me what many others on CA had known for some time, that performance is likely to improve if the CPU and the rest of the motherboard are powered independently.  This means that my DFI motherboard was being crippled by the single 12V DC feed that was powering the entire board.  In my mind, if I was to one day build something even better than the SE, I would need to target a motherboard that provided independent power to the CPU which meant I would be forced to using an ATX PSU (or at the very least, a DC-ATX converter).  Paul Hynes told me he would one day get around to designing one but he had too much on his plate to know when this would happen.  Sean Jacobs told me he could build one for me immediately.  As the Zenith SE I owned already incorporated one of Sean's wonderful designs, I figured my best bet was to stay put, however, I continued to be on the lookout for better motherboards that would allow me to completely do away with an SSD.

 

Earlier this year, I came across a particular Intel NUC motherboard that incorporated a certain feature that has intrigued me for some time.  This motherboard is the Intel NUC6CAYB and here is that motherboard:

 

 

https://www.yoycart.com/Product/549337720006/

 

What intrigued me about this board is its use of an eMMC device for OS storage.  This is 32GB of solid state storage that is "embedded" onto the board that is as electrically quiet as an SD card but has "near" the speed of a typical SATA III SSD.  Other features include an embedded low power Celeron CPU with an SoC architecture and up to 8GB of RAM capacity.  Unfortunately, there was no way to power the CPU independently as this board takes a single 12-19V DC feed, however, given the very small 4" x 4" size of this UCFF (Ultra Compact Form Factor) board, I figured it should have even lower impedance than a larger mini-ITX board and was worth $100 to test it.  

 

I was able to convince Adrian to "loan" me his customized OS for this build and so while his OS is permanently stored on the eMMC drive, upon boot up, this OS transfers completely into 8GB of RAM and so the eMMC drive serves only as a place to store the OS when the server is shut down.  While you could argue that I could have used an SSD drive in this situation and that the SSD would sit idle since the OS would be running completely from memory, my contention is that even a dormant SSD still generates noise.  In the end, the proof is in the listening.

 

With Adrian's Dream OS loaded onto this board and running completely from RAM, with Roon Server running as the sole app, and with this inexpensive server powered by a DR rail from my SR7, I was hoping it would come close to my Zenith SE with respect to dynamics but improve upon the SE with respect to less HF harshness.  I was not prepared to discover that this setup quite soundly bettered my $7k SE in every way.  Unlike my DFI board, it was as if this board was allowing my DR SR7 to really show what it could do.  Dynamics were superior to the SE.  Transients were cleaner.  Immediacy and tonal vibrancy were better and with none of the harshness!  I compared this NUC board against both my modified Mac Minis and against my custom server and this new build easily bested both Mac Minis.  Against my previous custom server, the perceived detail resolution was still superior with my custom server due to all the clock replacements but dynamics were easily superior on the NUC.  If I followed the NUC with my tX-USBultra/REF10, this was now my very best setup.  So good that I have sold my SE.

 

But Wait, There's More...

 

I tend to follow the product offerings of many music server companies to see what new innovations they have come up with and I noticed that earlier this year, Antipodes announced their new flagship was now a dual PC setup called the CX + EX, basically a server + renderer combo instead of the single box DX Gen 3.  I found 2 things to be interesting:

 

(1) Mark Jenkins felt that splitting up server and renderer duties between 2 machines resulted in superior SQ compared to a single PC functioning as both server and renderer.  This is not an entirely original concept as JPLAY has been championing a dual PC setup for years based on this premise.  Moreover,  devices like the original microRendu have popularized the concept of a separate server and a low power NAA or Roon endpoint for some time.  

 

(2) Mark decided to employ the "direct Ethernet connection" via bridged LAN ports between the CX and EX that many of us who have been following this thread since its inception began employing some time ago.  In his words, this direct Ethernet connection "provides a dramatic improvement over connecting your server and renderer through a noisy switch or over a long length of network."  Good for Antipodes. 

 

While neither of the 2 concepts above are original, Antipodes is the first server commercial manufacturer that I'm aware of that is not only advocating both concepts simultaneously but is also selling a turnkey setup that incorporates both setups and unlike an ultraRendu or sMS-200ultra that are incapable of running standalone, both the CX and EX are standalone PCs meaning if the owner chooses, they can run either one without the other.  

 

This really got me thinking.  While I left my SOtM trifecta some time ago because I preferred a more elegant single box solution, I decided to run my NUC as a Roon renderer only (Roon Bridge) and my Zenith SE as a Roon Server.  With both connected to my network via the standard "indirect" method, there was certainly an improvement in terms of "less edginess" but the improvement was subtle.  With the two connected directly via bridged LAN, the improvement in SQ as far a "less stressed" sound but also better transparency was more pronounced.  Of course, to relegate the $7k Zenith SE for server only duty didn't sit that well with me and so I decided to swap out the Zenith SE for my unmodified Mac Pro with 12-core Xeon, 64GB of RAM and 1TB of PCIe NVMe SSD to see how much degradation in SQ I would get and the degradation was indeed significant with respect to harshness.  This was the exact same observation I reported early on in this thread, that the direct Ethernet connection is not only more transparent to the qualities of the upstream server but also more transparent to any inadequacies that upstream server may possess.   

 

At some point during my testing with SE as server and NUC as renderer, I decided to move my SE into my home office where my near field Voxativs were kept while keeping my NUC in my larger listening room with my Martin Logans.  To directly connect these 2 devices, I had to run 53 feet of Blue Jeans Cables CAT6A Ethernet cable in my crawl space and that is exactly what I did.  While the improvement was still quite desirable, it was not as pronounced as what I had experienced with my SOtM trifecta which consisted of an sMS-200ultra, a cheap SOtM-modified switch, and a tX-USBultra.  As I first described my experience with installing a reclocked switch into this "direct" pathway early on in this thread, I found the impact of this switch to be dramatic and nearly on par with the tX-USBultra and so I knew that I needed to throw in the switch.

 

The Importance of the Network Switch

 

There was no doubt in my mind that introducing a reclocked switch into this direct pathway between the SE and the NUC would result in further improvement but I was curious to know if the impact would be greater with the switch connected closer to the SE vs connected closer to the NUC.  Keep in mind that these 2 devices are separated by 53 feet of BJC CAT6A cabling and I never had to contend with this length of cabling with my SOtM trifecta.  Most would probably guess that the switch would have a greater impact if I connected it closer to the NUC and indeed, that is what I found.  With the switch separated from the NUC by only 0.5 meter of Ethernet cabling, the improvement was quite dramatic.  It was like adding a buffered gain stage (ie an active preamp) to an amplifier.  Noise floor drops, dynamics improve, sound stage improves and detail clarity improves.  The switch before either the SE or the NUC when connected to the network in a standard configuration makes a difference but when the switch is placed in this "direct" pathway, the difference is definitely more stark.

 

To be honest, the above findings were expected rather than revelations.  What was a revelation was how well this switch now isolates the renderer from the server.  When I first described the impact of introducing a reclocked switch into the "direct" pathway, I was using only low-noise, high quality servers exclusively.  By this time, I had already established that the quality of the server matters and so I never bothered to go back to my noisy Mac Pro with 12-core Xeon.  In this instance, with the reclocked switch in the "direct" pathway, I decided to swap out my SE once again and replaced it with my noisy Mac Pro and what I found was truly revelatory.  This switch very effectively isolated the noise coming from the Mac Pro.  As I A/B'd between SE and Mac Pro, the difference between the 2 was now subtle at best.  In blind testing, I was unable to tell that there was a meaningful difference at all. 

 

The significance of this is potentially huge, especially for those interested in DSP or upsampling.  Now, with my untreated noisy but powerful Mac Pro, I am able to run RoonServer effortlessly.  Even with tens of thousands of tracks in my library, I can search and skim through my library with ease resulting in a much more pleasant and lag-free browsing experience.  I can run DSP and probably even upsample to DSD512 if I chose with this beast and with this switch in place, there would be no detriment to SQ!  While I haven't tried upsampling to DSD512, I have implemented my version of a "loudness" feature where I have boosted my signal at 100Hz and 10kHz by 7dB so that I can maintain dynamics at low listening levels.  While this breaks the "bit-perfect" nature of the stream, I have found this to be a wonderful "can't do without" feature with low volume listening.  While this is not CPU intensive, to enable this feature within the NUC results in smooth playback but there is a definite SQ hit in terms of an edginess.  With this feature enabled on my Mac Pro and with my NUC freed from any unnecessary side processes, I feel for the very first time that I have a true "no compromise" setup.  

 

Which Switch Is Best?

 

Despite Adrian's talk about his "super server," he was still months away from having a unit available for me to listen to although earlier this year, he asked if he could ship me one of his OCXO network switches to evaluate.  I was already quite happy with the switch that SOtM modified for me that was being clocked by my REF10 and was being powered by my SR7 but I eventually agreed to have him send me one.  I know there has been some snickering about the "lowly" specs of the OCXO that Adrian chose for this switch.  According to Adrian, it was important for him to find an OCXO that fit inside the chassis of their switch and so he realized that performance specs had to be compromised for the sake of small size although it was his contention that placing an OCXO directly onto the board would have its own advantages and as far as he is aware, his switch is the only switch currently in production that incorporates an OCXO within the switch chassis.  While he also tested lesser expensive clocks from Crystek, he preferred the sound he got from this mil-spec clock produced here in the U.S. by Conner-Winfield.  Like the switch modified for me by SOtM, the TLS switch also incorporates improved regulators and capacitors.  For his introductory price of $650, his switch also includes a custom 5V/2A linear PSU that was designed specifically for this switch.

 

Once again, say what you will about the pedestrian specs of the clock used in this switch and I realize there are the "engineer types" on CA who believe they already know how something is going to sound even "before the needle hits the groove" based purely on specs but this switch soundly outperforms my SOtM-modified switch even when clocked by my REF10.  Obviously, there's more to a component than just the clock and Adrian has voiced this switch beautifully with all that he has done to it.  If this switch has one downside compared against my SOtM-modified switch, there is a touch of brightness/harshness with the TLS switch that is not present with the SOtM-modified switch, especially when combined with the REF10.  If there is one thing the REF10 does so well, it is the removal of harshness, however, with the TLS switch powered by my SR7, soundstage is bigger, dynamic contrasts are more robust, and detail clarity is improved.  When combined with TLS's heavily shielded CAT7 cable (<$200 for 1.5m length), much of this brightness is nicely ameliorated although as good as his CAT7 cable is, I find SOtM's more robustly shielded and filtered dCBL-CAT7 cable to still be better.  No matter how good the switch, the quality of the Ethernet cable still seems to matter.

 

A few weeks ago, May asked me if I wanted to try SOtM's soon-to-be-released sNH-10G network switch.  Of course, I said "yes" and here is what their switch looks like:

 

 

Their switch (on the bottom) is quite monstrous in size compared to the other switches I have on hand.  The switch directly on top of the SOtM switch is the TLS switch.  On top of that is my "John Swenson" suggested switch with ground tweak and directly on top of that is the SOtM-modified switch that has been my reference for the past year.  At the very top of the heap is my ZyXel Paul Pang TCXO switch that started it all.  I would say that the Paul Pang switch and the John Swenson recommended switch with ground tweak work well but result in the smallest benefits.   On a scale of 1-10 (where 1 is the smallest improvement and 10 is best), I would assign both of these units a score of 1.  My original SOtM-modified switch when connected to the REF10 scores a 5.  The TLS switch scores a 7.  That means the new SOtM switch scores a 10.

 

This switch is completely of Lee's design and incorporates an sCLK-EX board.  The isolation used is based on Lee's iSO-LAN6 technology.  The unit I have is a prototype and so not all of the ports are functional but when connected to the REF10, I would call this switch Lee's best work yet and it is a masterpiece product.  It performs roughly on par with the tX-USBultra but considering this switch is placed before my NUC while the tX-USBultra is directly connected to my DAC, this level of impact is remarkable.  The fact that this switch allows me to connect my NUC to a noisy Mac Pro and result in the best SQ I have heard in my system makes it a game changer and a more valuable piece than my tX-USBultra.  Are these switches sensitive to the PSU that feeds it?  Despite all the regulation built into this switch and the TLS switch, the answer is absolutely and emphatically yes.  As rare and valuable as my SR7 rails are, I tend to reserve them only for the products that truly benefit and these switches are as deserving of an SR7 rail as any component that I have.

 

I am aware of the AQVOX SE switch which is no doubt a contender although I have not yet had the opportunity to compare that switch.  Of course, we're all waiting for Uptone's new switch.  As network switches are right in John's wheelhouse, no one will be surprised if this switch rises to the top, especially if value is taken into consideration, however, for now, SOtM's new sNH-10G when combined with the REF10 has set the bar for the very best switch I have experienced in my system with the TLS switch setting the bar for best value.

 

Hi Roy , 

 

It is a pleasure to read you again and thank’s for this very informative post. 

 

It is really a great progress to discover that you can use a noisy server as long as you are using a high quality switch to isolate server and renderer. This will make our computer audiophile life simpler. 

I have been running with excellent results a dual pc using super micro mobo with Sean Jacobs best psu ( only 12 v though ) and sCLK ex board for renderer. 

Roon on Linux both server and bridge. 

I am really curious to try this. 

[jean-michel6]

1 hour ago, RickyV said:

Hi @lmitche,

Where did you buy the mu metal braided shield from and do you have the specs?

I found this one https://hollandshielding.com/Flexible-EMI-shielding-tube.

It shows also the shielding performance of E-field and H-field.

Also found this one but is not as effectieve in low fields, https://cdn.techflex.com/assets/pdfs/specification-sheets/fsn.pdf.

Ś

 

3 minutes ago, auricgoldfinger said:

 

Here's a good source:  http://custommagneticshielding.magneticshield.com/viewitems/magnetic-shielding-for-wiring-applications/co-netic-aacableshield

Mumetal is a blend of nickel and iron  and I really do not understand what is mucopper described by the holland shielding company. 

 

I think the copper shield advertised are effective for RFI interférences for EMI that is another story as you have to use a mumetal foil which is usually quite expensive. 

[jean-michel6]

15 hours ago, Johnseye said:

I’ve been thinking through the outcomes of this post for the past two days.  Here’s my takeaways and resulting questions.

 

1.       The OS drive has played a significant impact in his tests.  Mac mini with Mac OS on SD card, Mac mini with Windows OS on NVMe SSD, drive of the Zenith SE, TLS Linux OS on RAM, NUC with TLS OS on eMMC.  Of all these options the NUC with TLS Linux OS on the eMMC drive that sounded the best to Roy.  My results with the Optane also blend well with these findings.

2.       The Celeron processor on that NUC could not upsample DSD, but if there is a similar board with i7 proc this could be possible.  I suspect an i5 or i7 will still require a fan.

3.       I suspect this is early in Roy’s testing, but this board could be modified by SOtM to utilize their sCLK-EX.  This would also allow the use of a REF10 for the board.

4.       The bridge connection with endpoint does bring us back full circle.  Many of us have or still do this.  Question is what the NUC brings to the table over another endpoint.

5.       Roy found little difference in the upstream source, comparing his Mac mini with the Zenith SE, especially with the modified clock switch in between it and the endpoint.  I my own listening experiments with Rajiv we both could hear a difference when the server was a noisy PC vs a customized sCLK, low power PC.  The difference was very subtle.  Roy’s comparison with a $7k Zenith PC reduces that device’s value.

6.       The ethernet and modified clock switch provides isolation, or filtering from upstream noise.  As Roy mentions, this has been known for some time.

7.       Switch versions with better clocks and power sources are undergoing rapid changes with the boutique audio companies.

@romaz why use the NUC as an endpoint when the sMS-200ultra or the ultraRendu provide the same functionality?  Was it because there wasn’t one of those devices to compare against the NUC?  Are the hard drives on those devices noisier than the eMMC on the NUC?  The sMS and uR can be powered by an LPS-1.2 or SR7/4 with less power.

I’d like to know how the TLS Linux OS compares to Roon ROCK when Roon is upsampling.  Likewise with HQPlayer.  Finally, both streaming to an endpoint.

1. On my Dual PC set up , on the renderer part i am running the Linux Roon OS on an SLC CF card with excellent SQ results significantly better than a SSD . I have a SOTM modified CF sata adapter  ( clock , regulators , capacity ) that i will receive in a few days and see if it brings better results .

 

@romaz " why use the NUC as an endpoint when the sMS-200ultra  "  - My experience between single PC and DUAL PC is very clear  , i always get better SQ with DUAL PC ( super micro board ) , i also found that the super micro board ( with sCLK clock board ) was superior to the SMS-200 ultra that i tried in my system .

By the way the sMS 200 ultra is using an SD card to host the os .

[jean-michel6]

9 hours ago, auricgoldfinger said:

 

The AA Cable Shield is made by the company that manufactures MuMetal.  The shield is made from Co-NETIC, which I believe uses the same alloys as MuMetal, but you may want to double check before buying.  The WBS-250 is $11.35/ft. and the WBS-375 is $12.60/ft.

Thank . The co-Netic is apparently  a proprietary alloy where mumetal is also an other proprietary alloy but more common source .

 

Where have you tried this Co-netic shield ? Which construction do you use  ( connected or not ? ,JSSG ? ....) ? Which SQ benefit did you get ?

 

Here in France there is a company HiFicable which is applying a double layer of mumetal very thin plasticized film to all his top of the line cable . The SQ benefit is usually a darker background .

[jean-michel6]

10 hours ago, Bricki said:

My latest adventures with dc cables. 

 

Recently I was revisiting the first post in this thread with the brilliant collection of links that Rajiv has put together and I started re-reading one of the posts by romaz about power cables. Here is a quote from that post where he talks about dielectrics. 

 

"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."

 

This got me thinking about something John Swenson said with regards to how dielectric absorption can effect the performance of a dc cable. 

 

Previously I have used chopped up bits of an audioquest ethernet cable with good quality solid core copper inside. A while ago I used all 8 conductors for a positive and all 8 in another section for negative. The results were underwhelming and I went back to my 10awg wire trimmed at each end to fit my plugs (in separate positive and negative wires). I wondered if all the insulation on each conductor was having a negative effect. 

 

So I stripped the insulation off each conductor. 

 

Then I wound 16 of the 28awg conductors together and using the handle of a cotton shopping bag (once cut it makes a nice cotton sleeve) 

I twisted the cotton sleeve around the conductor and used electrical tape to hold the cotton on. 

Ending up with a positive and negative each looking something like this... 

 

So I have 2 x 16 x 28awg. The positive is around 10cm long and negative is bit longer. I then did separate JSSG 360's around the positive and negative and put it in place between my lps1 and sMS-200. The end result is a very ugly looking "cable". But looks can be deceiving because this is by far the best sounding dc cable I have made. Everything sounds richer and smoother with better tone. Vocals have more of a sense of realism. Every note on the piano is better delineated from the other keys being struck. Brass instruments are less harsh and have better timbre. I think there is also a darker background with more depth and better image focus. 

 

Is anyone else using cotton as a dielectric on cables in their system? 

 

 

Hi,

 

 Congratulations for this nice trial. I am not surprised you get good result.  

However those will not last ,because copper will oxidize unless it is extremely pure occ copper. Copper oxide is a poor conductor. 

If you try the same thing with silver you will get result which last in time , silver will oxidize too but silver oxide is highly conductive.

I have several interconnect cable using air as dielectric and it gives very good result.

[jean-michel6]

3 hours ago, Cornan said:

I said earlier that I would come back with an impression of the LifePO4 battery powered 2A LT3045 board powering the GI Spdif output of my BluWave USB to Spdif board (into Brooklyn DAC) instead of Gophert csp-3205II>MS-HPULN (3A LT3045). BluWave USB input/board power is supplied by Balanced AC-AC>Sigma 11 (S12)>MS-HPULN>LT3045>ISO Regen>USPCB.

I got it yesturday, so here it is installed in my setup.

 

 

Definately a change for the better! The music is more in a ”right here with me” kind of way. Better resolution. Better low volume dynamics. More natural feel to it all.

 

The 5v GI output of the BluWave board is pulling an extremely small amount of current so I will be able to power it for a very long time before it needs a recharge, so it will still be very conveniant.

 

It looks like the isolation right before my Brooklyn DAC have improved and also that I have a MS-HPULN that I can use elsewhere! ?

 

I might buy two more of these boards quite soon. I gave it a go powering the ChromeCast Audio on my kitchen setup (Marshall Stockwell) and in my bathroom setup (Audio Pro T3) with great results as well! 

Could you provide a link on where to buy those boards LT 3045 powered with lifepo4 battery. 

Thank’s

[jean-michel6]

9 hours ago, Cornan said:

 

Here is the board (includes 18650 Li-ion batteries) https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F273135946356

 

Here is the LiFePO4 batteries in 18650 size https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F253459672096

 

The board have a balanced charger that can handle LiFePO4s, so they can be charged while providing output power. The board can also be used without batteries, ie directly with a DC supply if the batteries are removed.

Thank's for this info. I am ordering one right away. 

I will be using it to power a to link fmc 220. 

Contrary to several other feedback  you can achieve very good results with optical bridge as long as you apply the recipee used for other devices : good psu , good clock , good regulator and good capacitors . Mine were modified by SOTM. 

[jean-michel6]

5 hours ago, seeteeyou said:

 

Does a pair of TP-LINK MC220L require one 25MHz clock on the Tx side plus another 25MHz one on the Rx side? If so, we could have a smoking deal when we get two of them

 

https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/connor-winfield/OH4610LF-025.0M/CW899-ND/5641634

 

Those A123 batteries cost about 4 RMB (about $0.6) a piece in China but they might or might not be genuine imitation

 

https://pro18650.taobao.com

https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?id=551650873526

 

It would be fantastic if someone were able to make another version with two slots for 26650 and we could use a pair of A123 ANR26650 instead

 

https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?id=559189013755

http://a123batteries.com/anr26650-lithium-ion-cylindrical-cell-anr26650m1-b/

It does use only one clock for each tp link , I have been using a sCLKex SOTM clock board which is very convenient. 

[jean-michel6]

3 hours ago, Cornan said:

 

You´re welcome! ?

It will probably be really great powerig your TP-Link FMC 220. Back at the time when I was using FMCs battery power was the best option for the FMC closest to the audio device. This board is vastly better than the TP-Link Vivid, KingRex uPower and chinease Li-ion battery packs that I used at the time. I´m pretty sure that fiber optical is a really great choise if everything optimized. In my case I left the FMCs when I heard how great the TP-Link wireless adapter into Aqvox switch-8 sounded like. I´m sure you have erased all the draw-backs of FMCs with all your mods. FMCs should really be the better option to wifi and copper ethernet.

Nowadays I am using a powerbank to power two fmc , I know that is not the ideal power scheme for these as those powerbank have noisy internal regulators and there is not a very good electrical separation between the two outlet. 

I am curious of the improvement brought by this nice battery LT 3045 board. 

A very nice finding Cornan .

[jean-michel6]

7 hours ago, Cornan said:

 

I will be interested how it turns out powerig FMCs as well. The kudos for the finding really goes to @seeteeyou who orginally posted the link of this board here on this thread. Otherwise I would´t have known about it in the first place. I just found out that it was possible to use LiFePO4s which was a major game changer for me!  

I will post the outcome once I get it and thank’s @seeteeyou for this and all the very goood input on this thread. 

[jean-michel6]

2 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

From the audiomart post, a double shield is more effective than jssg, and i see belkin makes double-shielded usb cables?

 

https://www.usaudiomart.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1469

 

https://prod-www-origin.belkin.com/usb2_cables.pdf

 

 

 

Interesting info but let's be serious , i went to see the specifications of the Meterk EMI detector which was used by the person on the audiomart link . 

It does measure in the 30-300Hz frequency range ...it may be ok for electromagnetic interference coming mainly from AC ... but it does nothing to measure RFI who are everywhere and probably a much larger source of pollution for us audiophile .

 

Therefore in my opinion it gives no worthwhile info on the effectiveness of the JSSG360 .

 

The best  measurement instrument in this case is probably your ears ?

 

[jean-michel6]

43 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 maybe so, but even so, lemitche and gang's ears  DO sing praise of the "double-shielding" concept and there has to be some reason that my ears have preferred enet to USB over all these years....if not poor shielding, then what?  Even the usb toys are designed to minimize USB jitter.  Is it your belief that this dual shielding does nothing?  I personally believe that a dac with good isolation and a double shielded cable may be the key to leveling the field between enet and usb that i have been looking for, for nearly 7 years..

May be i was not clear in my comments . this is what has written the person in audio mart for which you have provided the link .

 

So it seems all the Hyperblovating on CA about this JSSG or JSSG360 is a silly waist of time.    

I knew it!  

What a bunch of BS tail chasing. Now that is settled - time to focus on real improvements that work!

 

Yes of course i do believe in this double shielding scheme JSSG360 and my ears tell me it is a very good thing and i have a lush usb , two cat supra 8 and three dc cable modified like that with excellent results .

 

But in conclusion we seem to agree !

 

 

[jean-michel6]

The reference clock ! Icing on a cake ... 

I had the opportunity to listen to an SOTM  ocx10 in my system and I was not ready for what I heard ...

The sotm ocx10 was powered by an sps 500. In my dual pc set up the ocx10 is driving 8 different clocks :

- dx USB hd

- 2 tp link 

- lan and system of pc player mobo 

- tx USB 

- sotm Pcie usb

 

Even though my system is already well optimized and giving very good sq , the addition of the ocx10 was a huge step to increase the musicality of my system in a way I was not expecting. 

It brings  much more music because it gives you a much better insight on what makes the soul of the music : attack and decay of notes , color shade of timbre .

Additionnally it does also improve bass and all the subtle info that tells you where the music was recorded. Voices gains a lot of very subtle colors making it even more real. 

 

It is very easy to do almost instant comparison with and without the ref clock as it is just a question of turning on or off the psu to the ref clock .

 

On several records containing cords or piano , the addition of the ref clock makes the attack of the note so much better that you sometime almost feel it is a different recording. 

 

This ref clock for me is a true game changer and I will say that if you have gone as far as investing in the sotm  sCLKex clock board you absolutely owe to yourself to try a ref clock . It is that good and I was not expecting it .

 

[jean-michel6]

By the way the ocx10 I have is a modded one with Evox capacitor. 

One last comment , good recording become much better and bad recordings stays bad. The gap between both become bigger and i think this last barrier on musicality will trigger a harder search for better records instead of better equipment ? hopefully if I can be cured ....

[jean-michel6]

1 hour ago, austinpop said:

 

 

Very glad you heard the effect a good reference clock can have!

 

BTW - to add to the results of the Austin Clock Meet, that @limniscate and @auricgoldfinger already described. We also had access to a vanilla OCX-10 with sPS-500 PSU. The 2 key takeaways for me were:

1. It is possible to get very, very close - though not quite equal - to the SQ of the Mutec Ref 10 with the OCX-10. It requires:
   • the Evox caps and the eABS-200 RF/EMI paper, and
   • an SR-7 PSU
2. There is a big SQ jump going from the vanilla OCX-10 to:
   • the Evox caps and the eABS-200 RF/EMI paper, and
   • stepping up from sPS-500 to the JS-2 to the SR-7. Each PSU step is significant, and not subtle.

For this reason, I think SOtM would be well advised to ship the OCX-10 standard with the Evox caps and eABS-200 paper. The experience with the SR-7 underscores the advantage of having a device that allows external PSUs, but of course the aggregate cost of the OCX-10 with an SR-7 rail is then quite high.

Does you or anyone has tried powering the OCX-10 with an LPS 1.2 as in my experience the LPS1.2 is significantly better than the SPS-500 .

 

The person who loaned me the ocx10 also reported that he has a friend who has a mutec ref clock in his system and has achieved significant sq increase by disconnecting the internal psu of the mutec and powering it by an sps-500 ...probably the impact of outside psu which is quite often a good thing as it removes vibrations and electrical noise from sensitive components .

 

 

[jean-michel6]

1 hour ago, austinpop said:

Quote

The person who loaned me the ocx10 also reported that he has a friend who has a mutec ref clock in his system and has achieved significant sq increase by disconnecting the internal psu of the mutec and powering it by an sps-500 ...probably the impact of outside psu which is quite often a good thing as it removes vibrations and electrical noise from sensitive components .

 

I wish I had the chops to attempt a mod like this! I'm surprised that he heard an improvement even with an sPS-500. If so, imagine the possibilities with better PSUs!

 

Has this "friend of a friend" posted his experience anywhere? Not that I am likely to try this any time soon, but I'd like to know what's involved.

To my knowledge he has not posted that anywhere but i will see if i can try to get some useful info  .

[jean-michel6]

1 hour ago, elan120 said:

Another Gotham JSSG360 successful application.

 

I have been curious about how much benefit Gotham JSSG360 cable could help connecting external power to SOtM sCLK-EX board inside a PC where the environment is quite noisy.  Initially, I have replaced all my DC power cable to Gotham JSSG360 with very good result, but didn't have time to replace the this cable inside my PC until tonight.  The result is surprisingly good, which gave me enough motivation to do the same for my txUSBUltra soon.

 

Here are couple pictures showing the cable.

 

Stock cable:

 

 

New Gotham JSSG360 cable:

Hi Kevin ,

 

Congratulations for this modification, I am in a similar situation as I have also an sCLKex board in my dual pc set up.

How you will qualify this change in term of sq. 

Is it significant ?

[jean-michel6]

 

5 hours ago, Johnseye said:

I have been using the tX-USBexp out to the tX-USBultra, both clocked by the sCLK-EX.  I am removing the tX-USBexp and tX-USBultra because the NUC alone with Audiolinux loaded into RAM is better sounding.  My sCLK-EX is using the Mutec REF10 as 10MHz master clock.

 

3 hours ago, austinpop said:

Fascinating findings!

 

Well, I guess I will try my setup without the tX now and see how that sounds. That should also answer @FredM's question.

 

 

Wow ... I am impressed by these results ...removing both tX-USBexp and  tX-USBultra and get better SQ !

 

Myself i am in a dual PC  set-up ( Super Micro X10 SBA ) all that with tX-USBexp and  tX-USBultra , everything clocked by sCLK ex but no Ref 10 and very good psu ( Sean Jacobs and LPS 1.2 )

I am using Roon server and bridge in linux fedora 27.

I have always found the dual PC set-up to be superior to sms 200 ultra as endpoint and of course to single pc set-up  from a SQ perspective . It seems that dual - pc  is now the direction taken by several on this thread . 

 

What baffles me is that this small NUC wit RAM audiolinux  is so good that tx-USBultra degrades the SQ . It is the first time i read that tx-USBultra sees to degrade the SQ . Usually USB output of PC Mobo is so bad and noisy that it does require tX-USBexp and  tX-USBultra to get good SQ .

Congratulations for this finding .

 

I am curious to heard further experiment from Johnseye and the trial from Rajiv .

 

This hobby is fun and exciting