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

[mozes]

1 hour ago, lmitche said:

Ted, no I never tried the JCAT card. So I'm saying I have no experience, and that others I respect with experience are not impressed. So, I don't have a strong opinion, and the opinion of others makes me skeptical, but open minded.

 

Anyway, the next $500 I spend will be for a new stainless steel propeller for my boat, CA expenses will have to wait until the fall.?. Unless someone wants to send me a USB card to test?.

That's a better investmemt for summer

[rickca]

7 minutes ago, mozes said:

The setup of my system maks a pain to move things around especially with shorts usb and dc cables. I will get to this at some point. Based on what I heard so far IR is a killer performer for the price, so even with two in series it is still much cheaper than the tX ultra

OK thanks.  I certainly understand how much work it is to reconfigure things.

[ElviaCaprice]

57 minutes ago, mozes said:

The setup of my system maks a pain to move things around especially with shorts usb and dc cables. I will get to this at some point. Based on what I heard so far IR is a killer performer for the price, so even with two in series it is still much cheaper than the tX ultra

 

And that definitely could be the case, especially since you do not have any other sclk EX components working off the same master clock board.  Could easily run one IR with GI the second without.  But I suspect your selling the tX ultra short and that it is a far better endpoint than a second IR.  In fact, It may be that the GI of the ISO Regen has made the tX ultra a much better performing component.  Will be nice to hear your conclusions in moving the IR around.

[pam1975]

On 27/05/2017 at 8:32 PM, ElviaCaprice said:

 

That's interesting, but if you do mod your sms-200 to an ultra you would probably be better served with a good cheap Intel Ethernet card mod by sotm for s-clk EX.

you can have an ethernet card modded by sotm?? sorry but what do they do exactly?

[ElviaCaprice]

4 hours ago, pam1975 said:

you can have an ethernet card modded by sotm?? sorry but what do they do exactly?

 

Replace clock with sclk EX for starters.

[rickca]

19 hours ago, rickca said:

The price for this is now $1650.  That's $450 more than the sMS-200ultra.  It includes a switch sourced by SOtM and replacement of regulators and capacitors on the switch.  A second output mod is available for an additional $150.

 

SOtM also is offering a tX-USBultra plus an upgrade of a customer-supplied sMS-200 for $1300.  That's $310 more than the tx_USBultra.

 

So these clock mods aren't cheap.  I looked back at what @romaz said he paid

They charged me $1100 for 4 clocks + $25 per clock installation (labor) for the 3 other clocks = $1175. This included drilling a hole through my switch chassis to allow passage of the clock cable and all soldering that will be necessary.

 

Granted his mod was hardwired.  SOtM is now using SMB connections which is a lot neater.

SOtM keeps changing prices on their website.  The prices in my earlier note are no longer correct.

 

The sMS-200ultra plus Ethernet switch mod is now $1500.  A tX-USBultra plus upgrade of a customer-supplied sMS200 to ultra is now $1250.  

[austinpop]

On 5/27/2017 at 8:59 PM, austinpop said:

 

Tonight will be one of those surreal nights, then!

 

I borrowed @limniscate's LPS-1 for the night, so I have now got 3 LPS-1's in the house. Once the family is abed, I'll be doing some comparisons. I want to see if my Y-cable is holding back SQ. I am going to compare:

 

 

with:

 

 

It should be very interesting. For the sake of my wallet, I hope it is a wash, or close.

 

Well, after 2 nights of listening, I must say it is quite close. 

 

Having an LPS-1 dedicated to each of the switch, sMS, and tX does add a touch more authority and ease to the music, but you have to really listen hard to distinguish. Without that point of reference, my shared LPS-1 between the switch and the sMS sounds wonderful.

 

Obviously, with no budgetary restrictions, a separate LPS-1 is ideal, but I know now that my config is really close to that ideal.

 

Like an ultra cap bank, I will let my coffers recharge for now. Eventually, when @limniscate receives his Hynes SR7 far, far in the future, I want to see how that improves things over the LPS-1s.

 

And the dance continues...

[Cornan]

8 minutes ago, austinpop said:

 

Well, after 2 nights of listening, I must say it is quite close. 

 

Having an LPS-1 dedicated to each of the switch, sMS, and tX does add a touch more authority and ease to the music, but you have to really listen hard to distinguish. Without that point of reference, my shared LPS-1 between the switch and the sMS sounds wonderful.

 

Obviously, with no budgetary restrictions, a separate LPS-1 is ideal, but I know now that my config is really close to that ideal.

 

Like an ultra cap bank, I will let my coffers recharge for now. Eventually, when @limniscate receives his Hynes SR7 far, far in the future, I want to see how that improves things over the LPS-1s.

 

And the dance continues...

 

It would be very interesting to see what happens if you plug in both of your two feeder supplies into a safety isolation transformer (IT with floating secondary). Did you order one yet?

[lmitche]

On 5/28/2017 at 10:28 AM, rickca said:

You'll probably try attaching it to the bow. 

That is very funny!

[seeteeyou]

Just saw this Compute Card from Intel with quite a few options, maybe it's a good candidate for audiophile carrier boards?

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/compute-card/intel-compute-card.html

https://liliputing.com/2017/05/intel-compute-card-specs-leaked-apollo-lake-kaby-lake-models.html

http://www.cnx-software.com/2017/05/29/intel-compute-card-apollo-lake-and-kaby-lake-skus-block-diagrams-and-partial-specifications/

 

And then here's NexDock

 

http://nexdock.com

https://liliputing.com/2017/01/intel-compute-card-will-upgradeable-brains-2nd-gen-nexdock-laptop-dock.html

http://www.cnx-software.com/2017/01/18/nexdock-is-working-on-a-hybrid-laptop-dock-for-intel-compute-cards/

 

i5-7Y57 could go all the way down to 3.5W while both N3450 and N4200 are capable of running at 4W

 

https://ark.intel.com/products/95596/Intel-Celeron-Processor-N3450-2M-Cache-up-to-2_2-GHz

https://ark.intel.com/products/95592/Intel-Pentium-Processor-N4200-2M-Cache-up-to-2_5-GHz

https://ark.intel.com/products/95449/Intel-Core-m3-7Y30-Processor-4M-Cache-2_60-GHz-

https://ark.intel.com/products/97461/Intel-Core-i5-7Y57-Processor-4M-Cache-up-to-3_30-GHz

[guillaume31]

Hi all,

 

great post and too bad to see Romaz leave it.

 

I hope the community can help me: I have an sMS-200 in my set-up and I'm trying to connect it in Bridge mode.

 

I have a QNAP HS-251+ NAS with JRiver installed on it. Right now, the sMS-200 is connected to the same router as the NAS but I want to connect it directly to the NAS. I tried a couple of times and did not manage to get the sMS-200 to work.

Basically, the NAS would be connected to the sMS-200 in Ethernet and the sMS-200 to the DAC via USB. The NAS remains connected to the router with it 2nd Ethernet port. I have no idea what I need to do to bridge the 2 RJ45 port of the NAS so that the sMS-200 can work in this configuration. Do you have any idea what settings I should look for in the NAS ? I think it is Linux operated.

 

Could anyone help ? it would be much appreciated

 

Guillaume

[lmitche]

If you are running the qnap os, the recent versions support serup of a network bridge from the gui.

 

https://www.qnap.com/en/how-to/tutorial/article/how-to-use-and-set-up-your-network-virtual-switch

[TopQuark]

Roon bump this "bridged" set-up one notch higher with ROCK server.  ROCK can now be setup without bridging the 2 ethernet ports but creating it's own LAN between the music server (sMS-200 or uRendu) and the Roon server (NUC).

 

This set-up prevent outside packets from internet and your local network traffic from reaching the music server so only pure unhindered music data packets reach the music server. In my system, this has added dimensionality from the previous bridged set-up.

 

The only drawback is the music server will be cut-off from the local LAN.  Updating the firmware of the music server takes extra steps but it's a minor nuisance and well worth the trade-off.

 

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/rock-dual-ethernet-primary-port-not-exposed/26222/42

 

I thought I should mention this since Roon was used in the original thread.

[AmusedToD]

1 hour ago, TopQuark said:

Roon bump this "bridged" set-up one notch higher with ROCK server.  ROCK can now be setup without bridging the 2 ethernet ports but creating it's own LAN between the music server (sMS-200 or uRendu) and the Roon server (NUC).

 

This set-up prevent outside packets from internet and your local network traffic from reaching the music server so only pure unhindered music data packets reach the music server. In my system, this has added dimensionality from the previous bridged set-up.

 

The only drawback is the music server will be cut-off from the local LAN.  Updating the firmware of the music server takes extra steps but it's a minor nuisance and well worth the trade-off.

 

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/rock-dual-ethernet-primary-port-not-exposed/26222/42

 

I thought I should mention this since Roon was used in the original thread.

 

Interesting. I am thinking about going the ROCK route with an Intel NUC. So if you connect the NUC directly through its LAN port with an appropriate streamer (sms200 or microrendu), how do you provide internet access for the NUC? Through a LAN-USB adapter or through wifi?

 

Do you think Roon OS would sound better than Windows 10?

 

Another think to consider is an appropriate linear PSU for the ROCK NUC. If one decides to go for the more powerful unit (NUC7i7BNH) a simple 19v linear PSU probably won't do it. Perhaps something like iFi DC iPurifier along with the stock SMPS could do the trick for less money.

[TopQuark]

1 hour ago, AmusedToD said:

Interesting. I am thinking about going the ROCK route with an Intel NUC. So if you connect the NUC directly through its LAN port with an appropriate streamer (sms200 or microrendu), how do you provide internet access for the NUC? Through a LAN-USB adapter or through wifi?

 

Yes, through a USB Ethernet adapter.  The Pluggable USB3 gigabit sold at Amazon is compatible with ROCK.  This adapter connects to the local LAN and internet.

 

1 hour ago, AmusedToD said:

Do you think Roon OS would sound better than Windows 10?

 

Do you mean Roon OS sounds better in ROCK than Roon OS in Windows 10?  If so ROCK, where Roon OS resides at, is very light and optimized for just serving Roon files and passing audio files getting rid of other unnecessary features.  The image file itself is only 307MB and it took me like 2 minutes to install it to the NUC from a USB stick and that includes Linux and Roon Server! 

 

Whether it sounds better than a similar Roon OS setup in Windows 10, I cannot tell because I run this setup before without the sMS-200.  Theoretically though, ROCK in Linux should be better just because it was designed from scratch just for audio without the gazillion things going on in Windows.

 

1 hour ago, AmusedToD said:

Another think to consider is an appropriate linear PSU for the ROCK NUC. If one decides to go for the more powerful unit (NUC7i7BNH) a simple 19v linear PSU probably won't do it. Perhaps something like iFi DC iPurifier along with the stock SMPS could do the trick for less money.

 

If you do DSD512 and multiple endpoints, then NIC7i7 is best alternative.  Otherwise, NUC7i5 can serve DSD512 for a single endpoint and it's TDP is only 15W max compared to 28W max on the NIC7i7 so you can leave it running 24/7 without much concern for electricity consumption.

 

19V is more than enough.  NUC can run 12V at 3.5A just having the standard DRAM, M.2 SSD, and ethernet connected to your NAS.  Adding an internal hard drive will significantly bump this up.

 

 

[Johnseye]

2 hours ago, AmusedToD said:

 

Interesting. I am thinking about going the ROCK route with an Intel NUC. So if you connect the NUC directly through its LAN port with an appropriate streamer (sms200 or microrendu), how do you provide internet access for the NUC? Through a LAN-USB adapter or through wifi?

 

Do you think Roon OS would sound better than Windows 10?

 

 

Check the Roon forums on ROCK. Last I read ROCK did not sound better than an AO optimized Windows server. This may have changed with more recent releases, but there were still issues with the ROCK OS. 

 

What kills ROCK for me is I can't simultaneously run Roon Core and JRiver MC like I can on Windows.  I use JRiver and it's remote app to stream music from my server to my phone, which allows me to stream via Bluetooth in my car or any other Bluetooth enabled device. Even my PC at work.  Roon can not port forward, so no streaming out my LAN.  If they ever allow this, goodbye JRiver.  Although I will also say, updating metadata is infinitely easier in JRiver. 

[greenleo]

On 2017-5-28 at 11:35 PM, ElviaCaprice said:

 

And that definitely could be the case, especially since you do not have any other sclk EX components working off the same master clock board.  Could easily run one IR with GI the second without.  But I suspect your selling the tX ultra short and that it is a far better endpoint than a second IR.  In fact, It may be that the GI of the ISO Regen has made the tX ultra a much better performing component.  Will be nice to hear your conclusions in moving the IR around.

Elvia,

 

Do you mean that txUSBUltra > IsoRegen in terms of SQ?

[ElviaCaprice]

58 minutes ago, greenleo said:

Elvia,

 

Do you mean that txUSBUltra > IsoRegen in terms of SQ?

That one is a bit tricky, greenleo.  In combination with other sclk EX components off the same master clock board, yes.  As a stand alone???  Rule would say that the best clock be the endpoint before the DAC.  How much better of a clock than the DAC's own clock?  Then throw in the GI, especially if your DAC doesn't have it?  I think you have to take it case by case with each system makeup.  Would like to see other testing with the ISO in combination with Ultra sotm components and versus.  To make it short, at this point, I don't know.

[greenleo]

2 hours ago, ElviaCaprice said:

That one is a bit tricky, greenleo.  In combination with other sclk EX components off the same master clock board, yes.  As a stand alone???  Rule would say that the best clock be the endpoint before the DAC.  How much better of a clock than the DAC's own clock?  Then throw in the GI, especially if your DAC doesn't have it?  I think you have to take it case by case with each system makeup.  Would like to see other testing with the ISO in combination with Ultra sotm components and versus.  To make it short, at this point, I don't know.

Thank you Elvia.

 

I do understand that there are lots of complications and permutations there.  My key question is whether the clock of IR is >, =, < the clock of txUSBUltra.  Then the permutation can be fixed using the rule the  best clock closest to the DAC.

 

Thank you again for your reply.☺

[ElviaCaprice]

1 minute ago, greenleo said:

Thank you Elvia.

 

I do understand that there are lots of complications and permutations there.  My key question is whether the clock of IR is >, =, < the clock of txUSBUltra.  Then the permutation can be fixed using the rule the  best clock closest to the DAC.

 

Solo?  Probably?  In combo with the same master clocking board, lethal.  And thus the need to test the ISO between two components with the same clocking board, to confirm.  That will be the tell all.  We also still need someone to test the ISO vs. tXUSB Ultra, solo and in combination after a tXUSB ultra as an endpoint, with or without the GI.

[Superdad]

21 hours ago, greenleo said:

My key question is whether the clock of IR is >, =, < the clock of txUSBUltra.

 

AFAIK SOtM have never published a phase-noise plot for their clock board.

 

The 25.0MHz Crystek CCHD-575 we use in the ISO REGEN typically has 10Hz offset phase-noise values of -108dB to -112dB (Crystek admitted to me that they need to update their published plots for the 575; current production is vastly better than what is shown on the web site; The random samples they sent us with individual plots are where the above numbers come from.)

That's quite amazing for a production XO that fits in a small space, does not take a lot of power, and does not cost a bundle to use. 

 

Yet all this talk of clocks leaves aside actual USB output signal integrity (see eye-pattern) and impedance match.  Something we know a thing or two about. 

 

Of course, in the end what matters is how it all sounds to you (and maybe if there is anything left in you wallet afterwards).  

 

[rickca]

On 5/31/2017 at 11:11 PM, ElviaCaprice said:

In combo with the same master clocking board, lethal. 

That's a very strong statement.  Is it based on personal experience?

[austinpop]

4 hours ago, Superdad said:

 

AFAIK SOtM have never published a phase-noise plot for their clock board.

 

The 25.0MHz Crystek CCHD-575 we use in the ISO REGEN typically has 10Hz offset phase-noise values of -108dB to -112dB (Crystek admitted to me that they need to update their published plots for the 575; current production is vastly better than what is shown on the web site; The random samples they sent us with individual plots are where the above numbers come from.)

That's quite amazing for a production XO that fits in a small space, does not take a lot of power, and does not cost a bundle to use. 

 

Yet all this talk of clocks leaves aside actual USB output signal integrity (see eye-pattern) and impedance match.  Something we know a thing or two about. 

 

Of course, in the end what matters is how it all sounds to you (and maybe if there is anything left in you wallet afterwards).  

 

 

I would so love to compare and contrast the ISO-Regen in my Ultra chain, but it does get surreal in terms of LPS-1s I'd need.

 

I know Alex would give me good terms in terms of return policy and so on.

 

Still thinking about it. Luckily my recent Austinpop-alooza spring sale was a sell out, so the balances are +ve again. ??

[greenleo]

4 hours ago, Superdad said:

 

AFAIK SOtM have never published a phase-noise plot for their clock board.

 

The 25.0MHz Crystek CCHD-575 we use in the ISO REGEN typically has 10Hz offset phase-noise values of -108dB to -112dB (Crystek admitted to me that they need to update their published plots for the 575; current production is vastly better than what is shown on the web site; The random samples they sent us with individual plots are where the above numbers come from.)

That's quite amazing for a production XO that fits in a small space, does not take a lot of power, and does not cost a bundle to use. 

 

Yet all this talk of clocks leaves aside actual USB output signal integrity (see eye-pattern) and impedance match.  Something we know a thing or two about. 

 

Of course, in the end what matters is how it all sounds to you (and maybe if there is anything left in you wallet afterwards).  

 

Hi Alex,

 

I certainly know that our ears determine which sounds best rather than the spec, and my question is exactly asking this question.  But it seems that so far no solo comparison between IR and txUSBUltra has been released in here yet.

 

So many options came out recently makes purchasing decisioin difficult☺

[rickca]

 

On 5/31/2017 at 11:11 PM, ElviaCaprice said:

In combo with the same master clocking board, lethal.

Does SOtM claim there is a benefit from clocking multiple components from the same sCLK-EX board compared to the same components with independent sCLK-EX boards?  

 

That would mean an sMS-200 with a 2 transplanted clock points from a tX-USBultra would outperform independent sMS-200ultra and tx-USBultra.

 

Maybe you didn't have this in mind when you said 'same master clocking board'.  If you are instead referring to SOtM 10MHz external master clock synchronization, nobody has heard that yet.