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

[austinpop]

22 hours ago, romaz said:

 

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

 

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

 

While I wait on your measurements, let me ask - what's a good way to measure current draw? I have a basic multimeter, nothing fancy.

 

Looking at the tX-USBultra manual, SOtM strongly recommend using only one USB port, else SQ will be degraded. I'm not sure what the rationale for 2 ports even is for an ostensibly audio-focused component.

 

My DAC, the Codex is a bit peculiar, in that it has a built-in LPS for the headphone amp section, but the DAC appears to be Vbus powered. Actually, I don't know if that is strictly true - i.e. does it actually draw current - but it certainly requires the presence of Vbus 5V and GND to function.

[austinpop]

56 minutes ago, tedwoods said:

I think maybe you could facilitate the use a dual headed USB cable with the tX-USBUltra: one port with the 5V bus engaged and one port with the 5v off as data only.

 

Ok understood, but assuming your target is a single DAC, is there value to sending VBUS and GND from one port and + and - from another on a dual headed cable? How is that superior to just sending all 4 on the same cable?

[austinpop]

2 hours ago, tboooe said:

Just measure amps perhaps by opening up the unit and finding the DC wires.  From there you can calculate wattage since you already know input voltage.

 

In my current chain, my DAC is preceded by the W4S Recovery (RUR). I'm leery of opening either the RUR or my DAC.

 

What's the view of "USB multimeter" devices like this one: https://www.amazon.com/DROK-Digital-Multimeter-Voltmeter-Capacitance/dp/B00S2HJAUE ? Are they any good?

[austinpop]

30 minutes ago, tedwoods said:

The very existence of dual headed cables (i-fi and such) or semi dual headed cables (like the Curious) is based on the theory of physical separation of the power and data lines and the beneficial effect that absence of proximity has on sound.

Companies like i-fi for example also use twin USB ports on their hubs, for the same reason.

Regardless of whether that theory has any merit, if you have the ability to move power and data away from each other, in a scenario where the DAC is USB powered, all for the better. It's always nice to have more options.

 

Ah OK. Duly noted. I used to have a Lightspeed 2g cable around here somewhere. I may have to dig that out of the drawer and try it when the time comes!

[austinpop]

9 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Using an adapter makes the need for any dual headed USB chord or separate Vbus mute.   As long as one uses clean power, like the LPS-1 for powering the preceding upstream component.

If one would like to remain with an LPS-1 for powering all the new sotm components,  I suppose one could get the new clocking board separate and power the clocking board and each sotm component with their own LPS-1.

What I don't like is Sotm's pricing without the clock.  Really they should offer these components for less than the previous non ultra ones.

Thus in my opinion these new ultra components are far too expensive and I don't think they will sell very many. 

 

Agreed, the pricing for these Ultra products is rather high.

 

The same thought occurred to me, and I asked May - why not offer the sCLK-EX board in a chassis as a master clock, and enable components like the sMS-200 and the tX-USB to accept a master clock input. 

She replied that they're considering it, but there are complexities - which I quite believe!

 

For now, we will just have to see what kind of SQ improvement people experience with the Ultra products, and decide if it's worth the premium cost.

 

[austinpop]

1 hour ago, lmitche said:

Here is the split cable I use here.  

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01DZQEIJE/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

TheOTG design is helpful with the microidsd.  Out of the box I perform a couple mods and it's good to go.  It beats the lightspeed 2g hands down.

 

Let's see what the findings are. I am not sure I buy the premise that a split cable helps, if the power source is simply another USB port on the source component.

 

OTOH - using the power split directly from an LPS - that I can see! 

[austinpop]

1 hour ago, moussaobeid said:

Yes the price of the tX-USBultra is rather steep, but if it proves to be a worthwhile upgrade to my system, then I will sell my LPS-1, RUR, Curious Regen link and intona Industrial and use the rail on my JS-2 that I currently use to energize the LPS-1. So I don't think I will be paying anything from my pocket at the end. At least this is my wishful thinking

 

As @romaz said - you may be able to use the LPS-1 to power the tX-USBultra, depending on the current draw. Does you Brooklyn need VBUS at all? If not, then you may well be OK with using the LPS-1. No need to even bring in the JS-2.

[austinpop]

I'm pursuing a similar project as Roy. Once I receive the equipment I will post impressions. It won't be for a few weeks.

[austinpop]

Excellent advice as always from @romaz

 

The only caveat I would add is that I don't believe the Ultra version of the dX-USB HD has been released yet, nor even announced AFAIK. It makes all kinds of sense, but I would suspect it's later in the roadmap after the sMS-200 Ultra.

 

Of course, SOtM should be open to doing a mod for you like they did for Roy - i.e. take the stock dX-USB HD and embed the sCLK-EX board. On their website, they offer and "sCLK-2244" upgrade, which is the usual confusing jargon SOtM is so fond of. I think that is their "not as good as EX" sCLK, but I'm just guessing.

[austinpop]

19 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

 

Just to correct you on this point, the 2Qute is galvanically isolated and in fact I've read where it's of the same design as the DAVE.

 

10 minutes ago, romaz said:

 

You're absolutely right. I stand corrected.

 

I have nothing but the greatest respect for Rob Watts and the Chord DACs, but just a point of order, since galvanic isolation is such an overloaded term.

 

Many vendors claim GI, but only in the conventional sense of DC isolation. Yet, as @JohnSwenson has pointed out many times on CA, the real challenge is isolation from leakage loops at higher frequencies.

 

So can y'all clarify - is Chord's claim of GI truly isolation from leakage loops? I sure hope (and expect) so, but just wanted to ask.

[austinpop]

 On this point of clock quality - while I've found @romaz's experiments fascinating and educational, one aspect really puzzles me. Perhaps someone with a deep technical knowledge of digital audio clocking can educate me/us?

 

The question is this - unlike S/PDIF and AES/EBU that are synchronous, most DACs these days implement an asynchronous USB interface. I guess the pedants would say isochronous USB using the asynchronous transfer mode. Whatever.

 

So for synchronous interfaces, I can certainly see how the quality of the clocks upstream of the DAC come into play.

 

But what about the async USB case? Here, the clocking is controlled by the DAC, isn't it? So how and why does the quality or accuracy of the clocks in the upstream components come into play?

 

I wouldn't be surprised if @JohnSwenson has a treatise on this somewhere on CA, but apologies, I couldn't find one.

 

[austinpop]

18 minutes ago, austinpop said:

 On this point of clock quality - while I've found @romaz's experiments fascinating and educational, one aspect really puzzles me. Perhaps someone with a deep technical knowledge of digital audio clocking can educate me/us?

 

The question is this - unlike S/PDIF and AES/EBU that are synchronous, most DACs these days implement an asynchronous USB interface. I guess the pedants would say isochronous USB using the asynchronous transfer mode. Whatever.

 

So for synchronous interfaces, I can certainly see how the quality of the clocks upstream of the DAC come into play.

 

But what about the async USB case? Here, the clocking is controlled by the DAC, isn't it? So how and why does the quality or accuracy of the clocks in the upstream components come into play?

 

I wouldn't be surprised if @JohnSwenson has a treatise on this somewhere on CA, but apologies, I couldn't find one.

 

 

Actually you know what - as I read this back I realized the answer is most likely - we don't know why.

 

This is no different than the question - why do USB regenerators improve SQ for asynchronous USB DACs? 

 

So sorry for opening this can of worms. Let's not take the lid off, shall we? 

[austinpop]

1 hour ago, JohnSwenson said:

I have covered this fairly extensively in my series at Audiostream.

http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-john-swenson-part-1-what-digital#35WEoHuMXmJ00tIX.97

http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-john-swenson-part-2-are-bits-just-bits#Fz4mY1iS5fqvIUkV.97

http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-john-swenson-part-3-how-bit-perfect-software-can-affect-sound#6yFiDB63CIzx5f3V.97

 

John S.

Bingo!

 

Thanks, John. Part 2 specifically gave me a lot to think about. I found Gordon Rankin's comments rather interesting too. 

[austinpop]

8 hours ago, romaz said:

 

Much appreciated, John.

 

Rajiv also inquired about leakage current which I know you've extensively covered already here on CA.  Here are notable excerpts from some of your posts:

 

 

 

 

Thanks for pulling these together in one place, Roy.

[austinpop]

Apropos of nothing - how about that Ignore feature on the new CA?

 

If you folks haven't tried it... Say a silly user's posts start to wear thin, hover over their user handle in the left column until a pop-up appears, and select "Ignore user." Works like a charm.

 

Ah, bliss.

[austinpop]

Several things:

1. SQ is improved both by improving signal integrity, and by squashing leakage loops.
2. Signal integrity can be improved by better clocking and regeneration. Regenerators like the RUR, Regen, iFi etc have been around for a while. In this thread @romaz, @mozes and others have described the effect of superior clocks using the sCLK-EX Ultra SOtM products.
3. Leakage loops can be broken by using isolated power supplies like the LPS-1 and VR Mini and/or by isolators in the signal path, like Intona for USB, Baaske/EMO EN-70HD/FMCs on Ethernet
4. As Alex has mentioned, and SOtM has communicated to me and Roy, implementing galvanic isolation in the signal path on USB is challenging in terms of jitter. Uptone has taken the approach of trying to mitigate this problem in their eagerly-awaited ISO-Regen. SOtM have taken a different tack - until they find a galvanic isolation solution that they feel has low enough jitter, they've chosen to refrain from addressing it.

Now here's the thing. There is no RIGHT ANSWER, nor is there a sure-fire cook book for newbies on offer. All of us are doing empirical, subjective, listening, and reporting our findings. YMMV! 

 

If you want my opinion - and it is just that, an opinion - it is preferable to address leakage loops primarily via isolated PSUs, which does not directly impact - and very likely, improves - signal integrity as well. Once you have that basic foundation, try isolation in the signal path - and see if it helps or hinders. 

 

For example - @mozes reported no improvement using Intona in his chain with tX-USBultra here:

However, others like @lmitche find benefit from EN-70HD isolators in their chain.

 

My own experience: I used to use FMCs upstream of my Aries Mini streamer. But since I went to:

• Direct connection using bridging
• sMS-200 powered by LPS-1

I've found the FMCs actually sound worse in the chain.

 

Like I said - wait for it - YMMV!

[austinpop]

11 hours ago, romaz said:

If all goes well, my reclocked motherboard will arrive from SOtM sometime next week.  At that point, I will report on the impact of removing as many bad clocks as possible from the server and whether this negates or further enhances the impact of endpoints like the mR or sMS-200.  Despite the broad topics that have been discussed, for me, it has still always been about finding ways to improve upon the mR or sMS-200.  

 

Just to add my own teaser - I have a similar project underway at SOtM as well, similar to Roy's first sCLK-EX experiments, but using the tX-USBultra rather than the dX-USB HD Ultra. I too am hopeful to receive my gear back in the next week, maybe two. As we get closer, I'll talk about the experiments I have planned.

 

11 hours ago, romaz said:

Shortly after that, I will be making my exit from this thread (and from posting on forums, in general), at least for the foreseeable future due to other more pressing and time-consuming commitments.  Because we are talking about a few weeks of time, I will likely make no attempt to start any new threads although I certainly won't discourage anyone from breaking this apart into dedicated sub-topics.  It's been a fun ride...

 

It takes time and effort to participate in these discussions, and I am profoundly grateful to Roy for sharing so much of his knowledge, insights and findings with us.

[austinpop]

Hey hey he hasn't left yet!

 

I still want to hear about the mobo clock mods!!

[austinpop]

Bravo, Roy, for another great finding!

 

7 hours ago, romaz said:

 

With analog, it is generally accepted that the fewer components in the chain, the greater the transparency.  With digital, it could possibly go both ways.  My theory remains (based on my observations) that the more damage caused by bad clocks and noisy components upstream, the more reparative devices you need (like the tX-USB Ultra) downstream to restore signal integrity.  As I have added a reclocking switch, an sMS-200 Ultra and a dX-USB HD Ultra (4 clocks total) in series within this "direct connection," as long as each successive clock is at least equal to or better than the previous clock and as long as each device is powered to an equivalent high standard with a low noise and low impedance PSU, as many of you know, I have found that SQ improves and the cumulative improvement can be dramatic.  

 

Serendipitously, I just got my FedEx notification of the arrival of my own Ultra chain: 

1. tX-USBultra
2. sMS-200 with sCLK-EX mod
3. Zyxel switch with sCLK-EX mod

It'll take me a few days to get my head around all this, but once I've verified everything is working, I will be back shortly with a post that describes my planned experiments.

 

7 hours ago, romaz said:

This brings up another point.  Since I have found that multiple reclockings can result in additive improvements, does the sMS-200 Ultra (with its 2 clocks) sound better than the tX-USB Ultra (with its one clock)?  

 

This is one of my planned experiments.

 

7 hours ago, romaz said:

To add to the mystery, here's one more observation.  Over the weekend, a good friend lent me a pair of his SOtM dCBL-CAT7 ethernet cables ($500 each).  According to SOtM, combining a pair of these cables along with their iSO-CAT6 LAN isolator ($350) can lead to dramatic improvements.  As I already own (and have currently been using) SOtM's dCBL-CAT6 combined with their iSO-CAT 6 LAN isolator in my direct connection (which has resulted in decent gains in SQ over my BJC CAT6A by itself), I thought there would be no way their CAT7 Ethernet cable that incorporates a "filter" would do that much more.  Boy, was I wrong.  I elected to place SOtM's recommended "ultimate" combination of dCBL-CAT7 + iSO-CAT6 LAN isolator + dCBL-CAT7 between my Mac Mini and my Trend Net reclocking switch within the "direct connection" pathway and compared this against my dCBL-CAT6 by itself, a Supra CAT8 cable, and a BJC CAT6A cable and the improvement was nothing short of stunning in the form of a larger and more holographic soundstage and improved dynamics.  It's as if those other cables were suffocating my music.  The midrange sounded a bit more recessed than I would prefer but overall, the SQ improvement was tremendous and of similar impact as the reclocking switch itself!  In fact, it literally doubled the impact of the switch and nearly matched the improvement of the sMS-200 Ultra in terms of "air" and dynamics.  

 

Wow, this blows my mind. Ethernet is clearly still a frontier to be discovered and conquered.

 

One question: did you find the symmetry important? I think you compared:

• dCBL-CAT6 > iSO-CAT 6 > dCBL-CAT6

with

• dCBL-CAT7 > iSO-CAT 6 > dCBL-CAT7, correct?

Did you try any of these combos:

• dCBL-CAT6 > iSO-CAT 6 > dCBL-CAT7, or
• BJC CAT6a > iSO-CAT 6 > dCBL-CAT7?

Just curious if the principle of "nearest to the audio end" concept matter, and if there is a lower cost option to springing for 2 of these expensive cables.

 

7 hours ago, romaz said:

This has led me to conclude that Ethernet may not necessarily be better than other pathways such as USB as it seems just as susceptible to cables, at least within this highly revealing direct connection pathway.  As the weeks go by, it will be interesting to hear from others who buy the tX-USB Ultra or ISO Regen regarding whether they believe either of these USB endpoints by themselves can better their NAA counterparts like the mR or sMS-200 (Ultra or otherwise).  

 

Indeed it will. I've always felt these direct PC vs. Ethernet "wars" were silly, because so much of it is tied with optimizing cost, architectural preference, and most importantly where you're coming from. If you've already invested heavily in a PC/Mac based music player system, then you will (and should) make different choices than someone like me who already has an investment in endpoints, and none in the PC side.

[austinpop]

23 minutes ago, romaz said:

Yes, this is a crazy set of experiments, especially when what I have already is sounding so spectacularly good but because several within my local audiophile society have been involved with my experimentation from the beginning and are intrigued by what these fiber options might provide, we have decided to pool our resources to fund all of this testing.  While I cannot say enough good things about the sMS-200 Ultra (thus far, the very best endpoint I have yet heard), the dX-USB HD Ultra (thus far, the very best USB-to-SPDIF converter I have heard) and this reclocking switch that has proven to be an uber bargain, ultimately, I am bothered that SOtM's dCBL-CAT7 Ethernet cables can still make such a huge difference.  My guess is that there still even more noise in the line that can be removed and an optimized fiber solution may hold the key.

 

Dayumn! 

 

I'm in awe of all this stuff you're exploring!!

[austinpop]

9 hours ago, romaz said:

 

I'm very much looking forward to your findings, Rajiv.

 

The Ultra stack has arrived! My setup is in a mess, but here are some pics:

 

 

Pardon the mess. Seriously, if you go down this path, the clock cables are fragile, and I will have to think seriously about how to securely place these in my rack. Right now, it's all on top for easy experimenting.

 

 

Again, pardon the rat's nest. But notice:

• My amateurish Canare 4S6 DC cables. Thanks to John Swenson and the DIY DC cables thread.
• The thin black clock cables that run from the tX-USBultra - 2 to the sMS and 1 to the switch.

 

So from a system topology perspective, here are the before and after views. While my sMS-200 was away for this mod, I had reverted to my Aries Mini setup, which looked like this. This is my current baseline:

 

 

As of now, I have connected the full monte Ultra chain, and letting it burn in to my system. This is the new topology:

 

 

I did a little bit of listening last night, and suffice it to say, I'm smiling! This is a whole 'nother ballgame compared to the previous chain. But I'll say no more until I've done a lot more listening. I don't know how motivated I'll be to do a ton of experiments - not least to avoid stressing the tethered clock cables.

 

I plan to follow a subtractive approach this time - start with the full stack and remove things as I go. So far my list is shown below. Beware this is fluid and evolving:

1. compared to sMS-200 "ultra", what is the additional benefit of tX-USBultra, and the "ultra" Zyxel switch?
2. Is GI still an issue in my setup? Add my existing Intona between sMS and tX and see what I hear. It's a worse clock, but potential blocks leakage loops
3. Power switch with a battery (Tecknet on hand).

 

If you have any burning questions, let me know, and I'll consider adding it to the list.

 

Stay tuned.

 

[austinpop]

12 minutes ago, Bamber said:

I'm enjoy reading this thread as I may be using a similar topology.

 

Stay tuned.

 

I can't wait to hear your impressions of the SMS-200 (modded to Ultra) followed by tX-USBultra.

 

Patience! 

 

12 minutes ago, Bamber said:

I have ordered a SMS-200 Ultra and may also order a tX-USBultra.

 

Cool. One question in my mind is whether there is a difference between my modded stack, with its external clock cables, and full SMS-200ultra followed by tX-USBultra. But I have no way of comparing.

 

12 minutes ago, Bamber said:

 

Other option may be to have SoTM mod a Regen ISO with one clock from the SMS-200.

 

Sorry - not an option. May has mentioned to me that they don't mod other audio manufacturers' equipment. They are fine modding non-audio devices like switches etc. I had asked about modding an Intona (pre-ISO-Regen days).

[austinpop]

13 hours ago, hols said:

I must make some correction here as to the use of Ultracap lps-1 to power the SOtM tx-USBUltra. Initially I thought it was the iPower charging not fast enough that caused the USBUltra to stop functioning but after 2 more days of running the USBUltra using Teradak to charge the Ultracap it turns out that the USBUltra also stops working several times. No pattern could be traced. It happens in Linux system or Windows10 system. It occurs both in light loads like chamber music or in heavy loads like orchestral pieces. So it is more likely that the USBUltra actually requires a current higher than 1.2A momentarily now and then so much so that the Ultracap lps-1 stops providing current and caused the USBUltra to stop. So I have to reset the system by pulling off the USB cable and reconnect. But frankly speaking the sound is so great that even though this might be a bit disturbing at times it is still worth it. Alternatively one would have to think about using a Vinnie rossi (can also deal with leaking current) or Paul Hynes power supply(well optimised and galvanically isolated) for it.

 

Hmm, I've hit a snag similar to @hols

 

Here is an excerpt of the note I've sent to May. Since it's night time in Korea, I'm hoping to hear back tonight.

 

The glitch I am seeing is that the music stream pauses. Within 2 secs, I can resume it, by hitting play. This happens in both Roon Ready and DLNA modes. Based on this, I formed some possible theories:

1. The problem does not cause either the sMS or the tX to reboot, as they take longer than 2 secs to come back up
2. Perhaps the switch is malfunctioning. Experiment 1: take switch out of the loop.
3. Perhaps the tX has an instantaneous current surge that the PS cannot handle, but not enough to reset the unit. Experiment 2: vary the PSUs for the tX.

Results:

1. Experiment 1: no difference. Even without the switch in the path, within a few minutes of start, the pause still happens
2. Experiment 2: So far, I have tried the following PSUs on the tX-USBultra:
   • Uptone LPS-1: 7V/1.1A
   • Breeze Audio Chinese LPS: 7.5V/30W (based on R30 core). Nominally it is 9V, but I had reduced it to 7.5V for a previous use.
   • Stock 9V/2A SMPS included with the tX unit
   • HDPlex 100, which can put out 9V/5A at least.

The problem still persists with all of these. This is a real mystery.

 

The only other things I can think of are:

• Software bug in 3.7 firmware - which is unrelated to my hardware, so others should be reporting this, or
• Some fault in my equipment.

I really hope it is not a side effect of the external clock mods. I really do not want to ship all this back, but may have to. 

[austinpop]

12 minutes ago, ChrisG said:

FWIW, I'm using an Uptone JS-2 to power my SOtM tx-USBUltra (which is reclocking the USB from an sMS-200 powered by an LPS-1) and there haven't been any hiccups (dac is Chord DAVE). And, yes, the tx-USBUltra made a noticeable improvement in SQ versus using the sMS-200 directly into DAVE. looking forward to getting my hands on the sMS-200 Ultra!

 

Hi Chris - what version of sMS-200 firmware are you on? Is it 3.7?

 

9 minutes ago, mozes said:

I am sorry that you have this issue  I know it can very disappointing. In my case I have never had any issue with my tX which is the 12v version and I use it with JS-2. 

 

Thanks Moussa - yes, indeed it is. I am hoping the smart folks at SOtM have some ideas.

[austinpop]

16 hours ago, ChrisG said:

 

Yes, v3.7

 

OK that's the same as I have.

 

17 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

Thanks Moussa - yes, indeed it is. I am hoping the smart folks at SOtM have some ideas.

 

Well, I did not hear anything back from SOtM, which is quite unusual, but upon checking, I realized Friday was a national holiday in South Korea. I'll have to see when they get back to me.

 

Meanwhile I've confirmed this momentary pauses are completely unrelated to PSUs, as I've tried both HDPlex 100W and el cheapo 30W LPSes on both the sMS-200 and the tX-USBultra with the same outcome. These PSUs are massively larger than needed, so there should be no issue with current spikes.

 

We shall see.