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

[the_doc735]

6 hours ago, LTG2010 said:

Am powering mine with a Sean Jacobs 12V 1.5amp rail sound is sublime, all the usual audiophile phrases and more.

Was struggling to get the tonality of my server back, thinking 1.5 amps would not be enough as I have a single 8gb RAM, had initially powered it with my sPS500, the sound was good but missing warmth and bass punch.

I reduced the power settings and increased the temperature the fan kicks in and finally the WOW! moment most have been talking about arrived.

Do you mean this Sean Jacobs or someone else?

sean jacobs (click link).

Cheers!

[the_doc735]

9 hours ago, LTG2010 said:

Yes as a previous owner of an Ultra, but why? I'm not sure but there are some differences between the 2.

First,, the NUC in general has more processing power.

Second the NUC processors mentioned have a much larger processor cache.

Third, you can use audiolinux booted into RAM on the NUC, rather than an OS on a micro sd card. I dont think there is enough memory on the rendu/ultra to boot audiolinux in RAM, that would level the playing field for testing.

@LTG2010 

quote barrows: "In terms of technical facts, the Rendu's load their operating system into RAM at boot up, and they play files from RAM, all playback operations are run from RAM, not from the SD card.  Additionally, the idea that having an SD card present adds noise is just technically incorrect, it is just not a fact.  The fact is that any of these NUC commercial computers have many times the noise present on their boards as any Rendu, whether they have a drive (USB stick or SD card, whatever) present or not. The Rendu's are designed to have the absolute lowest noise profile possible, which can be easily shown through measurements.  They are many times better than any commercial computer device adopted for audio use.  NUC users are not "discovering" anything, all of their findings, are things we at Sonore have known  for a long time, indeed they have yet to "discover" many other optimizations we already know.  We already have a very highly developed, low latency operating system (sonicorbiter), running from RAM, which has been optimized over many years of development.".

I don't believe he would debate this statement and it is not open to any sort of discussion. He is just simply stating his own personal opinion about SQ in the NUC.

[the_doc735]

9 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

Hi Adveira,

 

I sympathize with the difficulty in keeping up with this thread. It has gotten pretty wild in the last few months! 

 

BTW - I am not picking on you - I quoted your post to represent a sentiment I get a lot via PM which goes along the lines of - "So what are the conclusions?" Again, I completely understand the sentiment, but it's a question we can't answer. 

 

This thread is a journey with no foreseeable "conclusion!" Yes, I know Roy, Larry, and I talk in moments of excitement of how this is endgame stuff, but this thread is, and will always be, an exploration for more SQ, and most of time with mechanisms that don't have clear objective explanations. That's OK.

 

Take my setup, for example. When Roy started this thread on Jan 1, 2017 - yes, almost 2 years ago - I was using an Aries Mini with Auralic LPS as my endpoint, with MinimServer on my NAS. I thought this was about as endgame as it got. Then I tried:

• FMCs
• bridging
• a plethora of PSUs
• sMS-200
• sCLK-EX with the famous trifecta of switch-sMS-tX
• Reference clock - first Cybershaft, then Mutec Ref-10
• then I moved from distributed to standalone (Zenith SE)
• more stuff
• then I tried AL/RAM on my SE
• Now I am back to distributed with NUC/AL as endpoint.

Is this the conclusion? For me and many of us here - you know it isn't! I have zero doubt we will learn more, and we will continue to improve the SQ of our systems. Ultimately this thread stays popular because a critical mass of people try these findings for themselves and report their findings. As Larry pointed out, not everyone hears the same effect, or even a positive change. That's OK too. We all start from a different baseline, and we all hear things differently. 

 

The only "conclusion" is to ask what people are using currently, and I'll post a diagram soon, but my system is till in flux. 

To parallel this: some times there are many small incremental changes that occur fast! Other times there is one giant leap that is often discovered by accident that no one thought of or considered and was usually dismissed without a second thought! IMO the NUC/AL 'discovery' IS one of those 'Lotus 72' moments, i.e. it was so good they didn't bring out a totally new design for FOUR years; the Lotus 77. But after this things still carried on progressing to the present day, like you say: no conclusion just progression. I suspect 'idiots' will mark this off topic even though all I am doing is replying to @austinpop 's post. I am completely at home with this, if that is your intention? Thanks to austinpop for bringing a little clarity to this thread and just maybe my little comment will serve to drive the point home for those that haven't been able to grasp the fundamental meaning of austinpop's post.

[the_doc735]

9 hours ago, LTG2010 said:

Go fanless in any type of server / endpoint. The fan introduces electrical noise, emi, vibration and it just blows hot air around onto other components. Plus the processor is monitoring temperature and adjusting its speed etc.

At the moment I have a noctura fan on my 218+ and it doesn't blow hot air on other components because it sucks the hot air out of the casing. This is fitted with the SOtM fan filter. Currently have 3 on going projects. This is just one of them.

[the_doc735]

8 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

Search is your friend. Please search back on this thread, we have posted this multiple times.

 

Yes, the consensus is the NUC (or endpoint) running AL in RAM provides the bulk of the improvement. Whether it is 60% or 80% or some other number is based on subjective opinions.

 

The server still seems to matter. Running AL in RAM on the server matters. System speed seems to matter. But bigger systems with their noise add harshness too. Yes, even through the switches. Where is the sweet spot? What are the best CPU options? Is TDP a guiding metric? Where should music be stored? Pros/cons?

 

These all need research. So get to work!

Also somewhere in this thread someone said that there is no consensus, I find that contradictory. 

[the_doc735]

6 hours ago, mourip said:

 

I run AL in ramroot on my endpoints but Windows 10 Pro on my Roon server for now. I found that when I installed Audiophile Optimizer it made a big difference in overall sound quality which lends support to the general consnsus that the server OS and tweaks still do matter.

why not just buy something that doesn't have unnecessary processes, that you will  'kill' anyway with audiophile optimizer?

[the_doc735]

5 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

I'm not asking you to leave. Just saying that you have a commercial affiliation and are a product developer. When you talk critically of competing products, then you necessarily have a credibility gap to cross, and a higher threshold to meet to not appear biased.

 

Instead of general comments or friends' experiences, more useful would be your own personal experience with a concrete example. I.e. on this HW platform, I first ran X then Y, and to my ears I liked X. Here's why.

I'm sorry, but I was told on here that there are no concrete answers, just developments, discoveries and experiments. i.e. no conclusions, no consensus. With respect, it looks like posts are contradicting each other! Just trying to clarify this issue please?

[the_doc735]

5 hours ago, Em2016 said:

 

Assuming everything stays in DSD, it's likely the quieter couple of pops between tracks has always been there with Audiolinux but maybe you never noticed it... as mentioned a few times, it's nowhere near as loud as the classic PCM to DSD transition pops. Easier for me to hear with headphones but they are there with speakers too with Audiolinux.

 

When you do your testing you may find these quieter pops with Audiolinux (and everything else) disappear with Jussi's bootable image - that's what I found.

 

I'm also at DSD512 for everything - it's possible it's less of an issue at lower sample rates with Audiolinux (and others) but I haven't bothered testing because with Jussi's bootable image it's 100% pop free at DSD512 between tracks (for me).

In terms of sound quality with my subjective impressions (on topic), I find that all DSD512 makes my tinnitus worse. So for now I have to stick with PCM. Needed - tinnitus friendly DSD (LOL).

[the_doc735]

55 minutes ago, mourip said:

 

I am sure that he believes this but as a developer //member of the trade he would have everything to loose by entering a thread like this one and making that statement about his own products...true or not. I find it a very slippery slope when developers post here. Some, like our good friends from Uptone Audio, play that line very carefully and gracefully, contributing a great deal as fellow enthusiasts. Others have trouble identifying the line and end up turning folks off... or worse post unsubstantiated biased opinions without identifying their affiliation.

 

I am much more likely to accept the opinion of someone who has no financial interest in making their case. Was this quote from another thread on CA?

I don't have permission to divulge the source, very sorry!

But he does say: The Rendu's are designed to have the absolute lowest noise profile possible, which can be easily shown through measurements.  

Just because he has a vested interest, does that make him a liar? There are audio business people on CA don't forget.

Maybe someone with the gear will do the measurements/tests against the NUC/AL combo and present their findings to us all?

[the_doc735]

41 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

 

LOL sorry to read that doc. Surprised that this variable (DSD512 vs PCM768) with the same HQP filter (?) is enough to affect your tinnitus. We can ask Jussi in a HQP thread, to ask why that may be.

Even doctors don't know and there is no cure at the moment. Makes playing the latest ozric tentacles album impossible! Even after one track it's like I'd been in the front row of a heavy metal gig and leaves heightened ringing in my ears for hours! (LOL). I digress - sorry!   ...back to topic....

[the_doc735]

3 hours ago, shyamwanne said:

I just realized I have a similar tinnitus problem.  My high quality home headphone setup has started aggravating my tinnitus,  If I listen with the same HD800s headphones on my portable setup....no tinnitus.  I've been curious why, so I can rectify it....like if ultrasonic frequencies are being passed through, or ?????    I know its off topic, so don't want to take up people's time here, but if you, EM2016 or doc735, have a link to more information in another thread please post or PM me:)   Thanks guys!

The only thing I know of is the anti-noise technique were they play it back to you and one is supposed to cancel out the other and you have to pay for it! NO free anti-noise LOL!

[the_doc735]

1 hour ago, sam1000 said:

 

I'm very inclined to build NUC based solution because the cost of admission is relatively cheap, but at the same time, I'm also think that I'm susceptible to the tricks that my mind plays on me. Yesterday I read the following post and it made me think about biases quite a bit .

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/uptone-lps-1-linear-power-supply-review-and-measurements.1849/page-9#post-60699

I can identify with the above post because I also bought a TA cable which costs a fortune and I think I should be able to discern it without any problem. (I have not subjected myself with DBX).

 

Please understand that I've utmost respect for contributors on this thread. In fact I like the DIY solution which is tenfolds cheaper than the megabucks steamers. I just don't get it when we can't pick our favorites in a blind test ? DO you think DBX test put too much pressure on us. Do you know what characteristics Rajiv liked when he picked ZENith over NUC in a blind test? did you do this multiple times or was this a single test.

they don't like audiosciencereview on here with it's apparent objective proof, I got blasted for it! As austinpop said: this is a subjective thread with no proof or objective evidence, only listening and our ears! - So, be careful what you say. friendly warning!

[the_doc735]

wtf: Synergistic Research Tranquility UEF base.?

[the_doc735]

12 minutes ago, LTG2010 said:

The NUC has a tiny case, especially on the more powerful processors, the fan does not work so well.

Uh! ~ I was talking about my synology NAS 218+, not a NUC?

[the_doc735]

12 minutes ago, LTG2010 said:

Well the discussion was based around NUC and the benefits of removing it from its case and using an Akasa fanless one. Temps dropped more than 10 degrees. As well as improvements to sound quality, mentioned by quite a few posters.

I was just making a remark about fans in general, I know the thread is about novel ways to improve sound quality.

[the_doc735]

15 minutes ago, austinpop said:

Bridging still helps!

 

More than 2 years into its tenure, I yet again found that the technique that launched this thread - Ethernet bridging - makes a big difference in my system.

 

Background

 

Of late, I had not been using bridging in my system, for 2 reasons:

1. from just over a year ago and until recently, I had moved from my SOtM trifecta to a Zenith SE-based all-in-one approach, so there was no network path between my Roon server and my Roon endpoint, since they were both running on the same machine.
2. I moved my rig to another room when I put in a dedicated circuit, so my faithful Dell server was not conveniently located to run an Ethernet cable directly from its location to the listening room. All the rooms in my house have Ethernet home runs (in-wall) back to a wiring closet, so this is where my modem, router, and NAS live - far away from my listening room.

The NUC era

 

With my recent return to the distributed model (I've come full circle), I resurrected my Dell server (now running AL in RAM, with Roon DB in Optane SSD, and all other SATA devices disconnected) to be my Roon Core, but due to its location, could not accommodate a bridged setup.

 

Here is the baseline layout. A couple of notes:

• while I have it, the TLS DS-1 has usurped my i7 NUC as the endpoint
• While not shown, the tX-UBSultra is reference clocked by the Ref 10
  • Side note - for me, the tX-U reference clocked by the Ref-10 is still a HUGE improvement vs. going direct to the DAC from the NUC/AL/RAM endpoint.

Since my evaluation DS-1 has freed up the i7 NUC to try as a server, I recently reported in Larry's Audiolinux Server thread on comparing this i7 NUC as a Roon Server with the Dell. The latest post in that sequence is here: https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/55247-audiolinux-server-configurations-software-hardware-and-listening-impressions/?do=findComment&comment=917305

 

Which leads me to bridging. Since my system has been in so much flux, my most recent configuration looks like this:

 

 

Baseline topology

                                           
                                          Router (HDPlex 100W) ---------- NAS (SMPS)
------                                           |
|      | ______________________ |

|      |
|      |------------------------------- i7 NUC (sPS-500 @ 19V)
|      |
|      |-------------------------------- DS-1 (SR-4) > tX-U (LPS-1.2) > QX-5 > amp
|      |
|      |_____ JSGT ground

------

TLS

OCXO

Switch (LPS-1.2)

 

Note that with this configuration, my i7 NUC is in my listening room, configuring a bridge on it was trivial.

 

Bridged topology

 

As you would expect, with bridging, the topology now looks like:

                                           
                                          Router (HDPlex 100W) ---------- NAS (SMPS)
------                                                         |
|      |                                                        |

|      |                                                        |
|      |------------------------------- i7 NUC (sPS-500 @ 19V)
|      |
|      |-------------------------------- DS-1 (SR-4) > tX-U (LPS-1.2) > QX-5 > amp
|      |
|      |_____ JSGT ground

------

TLS

OCXO

Switch (LPS-1.2)

 

Listening Impressions

 

I won't belabor the point. The bridged configuration sounds noticeably better. There is more air around instruments, a larger image, and a small reduction in "harshness," which at this point in my system is strictly a relative term, as my baseline system does not sound harsh by any means!

 

For me, the lesson was that while all the other optimizations that this thread has covered after bridging - power, clocking, OS, isolation, etc - all make a positive difference, it doesn't remove the additional benefit that bridging still seems to provide.

 

Explanations - none. But do try for yourselves and see what you think.

 

what is your definition of bridging?

 

i am thinking of something like this CISCO Linksys WES610N

 

cheers!

[the_doc735]

5 minutes ago, Dev said:

 

I have a similar setup with JCAT and bridged topology ever since I started using the NUC couple of months back. Interesting that you are able to mod the JCAT with sCLK-Ex. Did Sotm did the mod ? Btw, which mobo are you using to host the JCAT PCIe ?

what is your definition of bridging/non  bridging?

 

i am thinking of something like this CISCO Linksys WES610N

 

cheers! 

[the_doc735]

14 hours ago, Geir-T said:

I can confirm the listening impressions as reported by andervt on the NUCPJYH/Akasa fanless vs. SOTM-SMS-200 Ultra Neo  > tx-USBultra and LPS 1.2 vs. SPS-500. I am the one initiating this comparison since I am the owner of the NUC and the LPS 1.2 used in the test. 

 

I have been a long time lurker on this thread and have used the listening impressions reported here to decide what changes to apply in my own system. This has led to several changes over the past couple of years and the latest one change was to replace my Microrendu with a NUCPJYH built into an Akasa fanless case. This led to a clear improvement in my system and I decided to find out how this compared to the SOtM-SMS-200 Ultra Neo  & tx-USBultra. Based on the findings reported here, I expected the NUC alternative to be better, but to my surprise I found the opposite to be the case.

 

The following equipment were used in the test:

Paul Pang server full of the OCXO stuff running Roon Core

SOtM sNH-10G w/sCLK-EX

SOtM-SMS-200 Ultra Neo  & tx-USBultra powered by SPS500's

Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC 

Mola Mola Kaluga monoblocks

Respons Magna Musicum loudpeakers

Paul Pang cat 6 cables

Spiral Groove Strange Attractors under ALL boxes

More Furutech equipment than I can ever afford

Dedicated listening room with practically no remaining surface left acoustically untreated. 

 

A couple of the albums used for testing: Doug MacLeoud There's a Time (24 bit/Reference Recordings), Marta Gomez Entre Cada Palabra (24 bit). 

 

The SOtM-SMS-200 Ultra Neo  & tx-USBultra powered by SPS500's w/ SOtM silver DC cable were first swapped out for the NUC/Akasa/LPS 1.2/Ghent Neotech (JSSG360) cable (LPS 1.2 powered by SPS500)

 

It became evident that the NUC alternative lacks some definition in the bass region compared to the SOtM kit. Localization of instruments is also less precise in the NUC and the soundstage is smaller especially in width. Resolution in the highs is reduced with resulting less air and transparency. The difference was not subltle in this system.

 

Based on this result I wanted to find out how much of the difference came from the power supply of the NUC, so we swapped out the LPS 1.2 with the SPS500. In short the difference between the NUC and the SOtM rig was cut in half. The SPS500 improved all qualities of the sound. (Please note that power cables and DC cables used for the SPS500 are 2-3 X cost of the SPS500 itself, so result is not with stock cables)

 

A third finding of the test was that the NUC benefited from Spiral Groove Strange Attractors under its belly. It resulted in a slightly blacker background and also a slight improvement in resolution.

 

Since the first two findings are not in accordance with the impression I get when reading through this thread, I think it is of importance to report it.  

 

I plan to test the SPS500 replacing the LPS 1.2 in my own (more modest) system in the near future to see if I end up at the same conclusion or not. I am also curious about how the SR4 compares, but I guess I need to buy one to be able to find out. There are no Paul Hynes shops around here.

 

 

 

wonder if this verdict was the result of a backhand deal? (£xxxx)

[the_doc735]

20 hours ago, andervt said:

 

Before writing my post yesterday a read Austin Pops excellent intro to orientate me in this enormous thread. Readers are told to focus on direct listening test, and that is what i did.

 

As agreed, after this was commented, it is a good thing to identify that you are in the trade, but did not think of it when I wrote the post and agree that this is something the readers should know when they read my listening comparisons.

I do think someone in the trade also should be allowed to write their listening impressions in this forum. If not this forum will become poorer.

 

My commercial gain from what I wrote yesterday is hard to see. My name, contact info, webpages or other was not revealed before an other poster wrote my name and webpage url in a comment. That a potential buyer should find me in my frosen corner on the earth and buy products from me based on this post was not very realistically until my name and webpage url was published in the thread.

 

After 35 years as audio enthusiast I am not afraid to put my head forward and tell others of  my experiences and listening impressions even it they do not correspond with others. 

My impressions of the LPS and SOTM powersupply was commented as suspect since they were different. Next time I do a listening test and the result is different from others, I will still tell my version because it is the only one I know. If all tests have to have the same result this forum has now value. 

I am not the maker or distributor of Sotm, but have choosen to offer some of the products for sale since they are the best I have tested in their class.

I think this result is most interesting for readers, and showing that 2+2 is not always 4 in hi-fi encourage to test themselves.

My intensions with this test is totally misunderstood, and I stand 100% by the listening impressions i wrote yesterday.

 

There have been a NUC "wave" in this thread, and people have replaced a full package of Sotm units including masterclock with their NUC.

So when the NUC owner and I should compare SMS-200UN and tx-USBultra with the AL NUC we almost expected it to wipe the floor with the Sotm boxes. It did not.

I think it is interesting for readers to know that there are different experiences with NUC`s.

My intensions with this test is totally misunderstood, and I stand 100% by the listening impressions i wrote yesterday.

 

Informing that I experienced good results with Strange Attractors feet under Sotm and NUC made someone meen that I was misleading readers and dishonouring the forum since I sold these feet. In the next sentense I encouraged to try with small aluminium feet or other stiff alternatives. These can be found in your home or garage and cost nothing. Try a small shot glass or something like that 🙂  This is not very commercial , and is not misleading but informing, and a good advice to improve the sound in your system.

As this thread is so big I am not aware if this has been discussed here, but placing the SA feet under NUC when doing the test made an important improvement to the sound if you see it with an audio enthusiast eyes.

This tip is absolutely misunderstood and I stand 100% by this.

 

too late! ~ you have already been found out which has led to your discredit. you should have pointed out your trade status first. I think you are only saying this because you have been found out? If you hadn't been found out you would have just carried on without this kind of post and a change of direction!

[the_doc735]

17 hours ago, Geir-T said:

 

The Paul Hynes SR4 is absolutely on my radar, and I will decide on whether to buy one to check it out after I have tested how the SPS500 compares against the LPS 1.2 in my own system.  

 

My expectations to how the NUC7PJYH would compare to 200 Ultra Neo +tX-USBultra was influenced from info in this thread. After all users of the full «spaghetti solution» including external master clock have changed to the NUC alternative. 

 

Based on my experience so far comparing these products, I can understand the change to NUC from a cost perspective. After all the NUC alternative is unbeatable in value for money and easily betters my MicroRendu. 

 

 

is your M.R. 1.3 or 1.4?

[the_doc735]

4 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

 

 

Guys we need to be careful how we interchangeably use terms. While switches can act like bridges, bridges are not switches. There are also layer 2 and 3 switches which provide different functionality. We should call a bridge a bridge and a switch a switch or we're going to confuse a lot of people. A PC or server can act as a bridge but not a switch. 

....exactly!

[the_doc735]

5 minutes ago, lmitche said:

I give up.

typical!!!!

[the_doc735]

21 minutes ago, Poldi said:

Many thanks @Bricki! I wasn't aware of this possibility.

 

Regarding the server I have one more remark:

Although I found several posts trying to explain the reason why NUCs are so special regarding sound quality, I got the impression that this applies especially to NUCs as endpoints, right?

 

Because according to this post (and other posts) of @romaz: https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/30376-a-novel-way-to-massively-improve-the-sq-of-computer-audio-streaming/?page=409&tab=comments#comment-892124

 

... he got very good results using non-NUC-servers together with NUC-endpoints. And his guess seems to be that having more cores and (perhaps a bigger smart cache) in the server has a positive impact on the sound. So for the server side it doesn't have to be a NUC as long as you can run Audiolinux on it in RAM?

Because if that is true, people who (like me) want to have a fanless server could also look for other solutions than NUC.

 

 

my server: (not NUC but quite powerful)....

MSI Z370i GAMING PRO CARBON AC mini-ITX + Intel® HD Integrated Graphics 630. £220

Intel Core i7 Coffee Lake 8700 SE Gen.8 2.9GHz LGA1151 TDP 35W CPU. £400

Pink Faun i2s Bridge PCI-e (expansion/riser) Card. £370

Samsung (250GB) 960 M.2 (2280) Evo PCIe 3.0 (x4) NVMe 3D V-NAND SSD MZ-V6E250BW (x1). £135

Patriot Viper 4 16GB Dual Ch. DDR4 3000MHz PC4-24000 DIMM PV416G300C6K. £135 (expandable)

Streacom st-fc9b-opt-alpha PC Fanless Chassis. £200

Seasonic Prime Ultra ’80+’ Titanium 650 Watt ATX M-PSU. £215

 

...please note I have 3 projects on the go right now!

 

[the_doc735]

10 hours ago, drjimwillie said:

Shot it down twice today in the use of Optane drives.....

 

 I have read this thread from the beginning. I found it in July and I just finished it today!! I like to read from the beginning before I’ll post something. Also, it slows down time, because you’re trying to catch up to the present moment.

 

 This is where I am today:  I’m saving to build a  NUC.

While I’ve been doing that I am  simplifying the  equipment I already have.

I needed a new NAS, so I bought the Fanless- Qnap HS 453dx NAS. It has a Celeron J4105 processor and 4GB of RAM. So basically it’s a NUC with 2 HDD Drive days and 2 M.2 SSD Drives. 

 I’m going to use it as a Music server. The advertising shows it running Roon.  I will use it to run Roon and hold an HDD with my music. I was not planning to use an SSD because of the noise. But, with reports of Optane being quiet enough to not make a difference, I thought that  I would try it for the performance boost it would give Roon. So I got a 32 GB Optane drive. After I installed it, I was told by Qnap that it does not support the octane drive. 

 Can you make a recommendation of SDD to replace the Obtane, please. M.2

Do you think Roon will run fine on the 6TB WD Red drive, so I do not need the SSD?

 

 Also, I have a CAPS  Pipeline server.  I am getting it ready to be a server for my NUC.  I am going to run the  Pipeline in AL/Ram.  For the moment it will be the endpoint, only running HQPe.  I don’t want to Boot from the stick,  so I planed to use an Optane drive. I had been told by supermicro tech-support that I can use Optane on this motherboard because it supports NVME. Today when I called to find which slot would be best, they told me the Optane would not work.  No NVME support.  After I told him I was using it as a server for music,  that the Optane would replace a 1TB SSD  to be removed because of “noise”, he became interested.  He told me I would not be able to boot from the Optane. He told me that he would help me, possibly make it work.  It feels a little risky to me. 

 I am wondering because I have the SOTM SATA filter on the SSD drive  in the  Pipeline currently,  maybe I use 32GB SATA drive, on that SOTM filter?

 

What do you think I should do, please?

 

It is always a wild ride.

 Thank you

Bill

I also have the SOtM SATA filter on the SSD drives in my syn.ds218+ with 6GB of RAM + Roon server + LPSU. Interesting to follow your progress!

[the_doc735]

6 hours ago, the_doc735 said:

I also have the SOtM SATA filter on the SSD drives in my syn.ds218+ with 6GB of RAM + Roon server + LPSU. Interesting to follow your progress!

+ SOtM fan filter.