Building a PC to improve SMS-200 Ultra

[TopQuark]

It is somewhere here: http://www.tirnahifi.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1494&start=2070#top

 

I cannot find the review but is it 2 mobo clock replacement from this photo:

 

[ismewor]

Yes, it is. But base on this I  guarantee it won’t go far. 

And the  only commercial product with good mobo clock replacement is SGM2015

[TopQuark]

5 hours ago, Johnseye said:

The sms product line is not the same.  It's an endpoint.  If it could host the application processing the music that would be one thing, but it's not.

 

The sms is a just another motherboard with a CPU. Not sure what you mean by hosting application processing. That was implemented in software. One can play audio today by just loading the audio in the microSD card or external USB drive to sms and let it sing.  Just like a RPi, it can act as a renderer/endpoint or a server or both.  It's the software.

 

Again, you have to look at it in the context of Roon which I don't think you are using. Roon server uses a lot of resources unless you just want it to play music without further processing but that is not Roon.  But to use it just to play audio without processing, the surrounding components have to be top notch costing order of magnitude more just like Roys than a typical setup.  A typical Roon set-up will have some sort of DSP either for room correction, upsampling, or just volume leveling.  With those cases, Celeron is not going to work.  The subject of the matter here is alternative to a mac mini!  He already has his "Celeron" in sms-200Ultra.

 

5 hours ago, Johnseye said:

I don't know what Roy's preference of Windows has anything to do with this, but ROCK isn't any further today than it was two weeks ago when Roy posted last, or even a month or two ago.  That digresses from the question of whether any motherboard has been built with audiophile clocks.

 

Roy hasn't posted that he tried Rock for one because of limited customization and he didn't like Linux so Windows it is. Motherboard with audiophile clocks?  Same as my last answer - sms-200Ultra.  A low power mobo with "audiophile" clock.

 

[octaviars]

10 hours ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Also with Windows 10 I can use the proprietary DAC driver for best SQ results, far better than a Linux generic version, which is what your stuck with on a renderer.

 

Is this something that is a known thing that a proprietary driver is better than using Linux generic USB 2?

 

Why I am asking this is that my new DAC will support both Windows, MAC and Linux but it has a proprietary driver for Windows.

 

[Summit]

37 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

The sms is a just another motherboard with a CPU. Not sure what you mean by hosting application processing. That was implemented in software. One can play audio today by just loading the audio in the microSD card or external USB drive to sms and let it sing.  Just like a RPi, it can act as a renderer/endpoint or a server or both.  It's the software.

 

Again, you have to look at it in the context of Roon which I don't think you are using. Roon server uses a lot of resources unless you just want it to play music without further processing but that is not Roon.  But to use it just to play audio without processing, the surrounding components have to be top notch costing order of magnitude more just like Roys than a typical setup.  A typical Roon set-up will have some sort of DSP either for room correction, upsampling, or just volume leveling.  With those cases, Celeron is not going to work.  The subject of the matter here is alternative to a mac mini!  He already has his "Celeron" in sms-200Ultra.

 

 

Roy hasn't posted that he tried Rock for one because of limited customization and he didn't like Linux so Windows it is. Motherboard with audiophile clocks?  Same as my last answer - sms-200Ultra.  A low power mobo with "audiophile" clock.

 

 

Many that have Roon do it just to play audio without utilizing its extra processing futures. I have found the purist way, without up sampling and EQ, to sound best to me, others have found it to be best with some additional processing. With Roon you can test and choose what’s best for you, the same with HQPlayer.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Regarding tweaking PC mobo or use of uR/SMS-200 Ultra/dCS Network Bridge which already are built around minimalized power need, minimalized processors and programs; it’s all in in the implementation. Not only the implementation of the uR/SMS-200 Ultra/ sCLK-EX, dCS Network Bridge, which is crucial but your whole server, render and fil management.

[Johnseye]

11 hours ago, TopQuark said:

It is somewhere here: http://www.tirnahifi.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1494&start=2070#top

 

I cannot find the review but is it 2 mobo clock replacement from this photo:

 

 

Thank you.  I hadn't known someone else tried this as Frankenstein as it is.  I'm guessing he cleaned it up, but it was 5 years ago.  So there is one instance of someone else in the world who's done this before.

 

6 hours ago, TopQuark said:

 

The sms is a just another motherboard with a CPU. Not sure what you mean by hosting application processing. That was implemented in software. One can play audio today by just loading the audio in the microSD card or external USB drive to sms and let it sing.  Just like a RPi, it can act as a renderer/endpoint or a server or both.  It's the software.

 

It's an endpoint.  Roon core isn't running on it.  If you're aware of a way that the sMS-200 can run Roon core, please share.  Seriously, I'd really like to know because for me that's a big win.

 

6 hours ago, TopQuark said:

Again, you have to look at it in the context of Roon which I don't think you are using. Roon server uses a lot of resources unless you just want it to play music without further processing but that is not Roon.  But to use it just to play audio without processing, the surrounding components have to be top notch costing order of magnitude more just like Roys than a typical setup.  A typical Roon set-up will have some sort of DSP either for room correction, upsampling, or just volume leveling.  With those cases, Celeron is not going to work.  The subject of the matter here is alternative to a mac mini!  He already has his "Celeron" in sms-200Ultra.

 

I am using Roon.  I've used ROCK, Windows Server 2012R2 and 2016 with AO and Fidelizer.  I have used Roon's DSP to upsample along with other functions and I use HQPlayer to upsample using a motherboard with its proc and memory clock dumbed down to 800MHz.  Unless you need to upsample to DSD256 or 512 it will work just fine.  Have you tried it?

 

 

10 hours ago, ismewor said:

Yes, it is. But base on this I  guarantee it won’t go far. 

And the  only commercial product with good mobo clock replacement is SGM2015

 

That SGM2015 is impressive.  I wasn't aware of a commercially available server with customized board.  OCXO clock and Mundorf caps. Very nice.  It looks like they only replace the system clock and not ethernet or USB.  They use a high powered proc with a lot of RAM.  Enough to do DSD256 and 512 so if that's your game this thing will work well.  If you don't need DSD256/512 then you're just introducing more noise from the proc and RAM.  I wonder if its USB is as good as SOtM's or if they use the mobo's USB.  If it's the mobo's USB and they didn't modify those clock there's a shortfall, and based on their picture it looks like they use the mobo's USB.   Not sure what their low noise, high powered PSU is and whether it's an LPSU. 

[octaviars]

27 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

I am using Roon.  I've used ROCK, Windows Server 2012R2 and 2016 with AO and Fidelizer.  I have used Roon's DSP to upsample along with other functions and I use HQPlayer to upsample using a motherboard with its proc and memory clock dumbed down to 800MHz

 

As I know you are geting a Jetway mobo modified by SOtM what OS will you be runing on that? Have you found a favorit OS?

 

How did you feel Roon worked when it is scaning the library with a slower CPU?

 

 

[Johnseye]

Just now, octaviars said:

 

As I know you are geting a Jetway mobo modified by SOtM what OS will you be runing on that? Have you found a favorit OS?

 

How did you feel Roon worked when it is scaning the library with a slower CPU?

 

 

 

I'll be running Windows Server 2016.

 

My initial library was built with my current server at a higher proc frequency.  When I add new music to the library it doesn't take long at all.  Not sure how long it would take if I rebuilt the library.

[Advieira]

Wow, a lot of information and debate.

I think I will keep the Ultra (SPS500) and change my mac mini for a quieter and small PC. If I will build it or buy it I dont know yet. SLCK-EX is out of question, I´m not able to install it as I live in Brazil.

 

Have anyone of you guys tried that cheap chinese htpc fanless i5? Like that https://pt.aliexpress.com/item/In-Stock-Skylake-Fanless-Mini-PC-Win-10-Barebone-i7-6500U-i5-6200U-i3-6100U-Intel/32777052321.html?

 

I wonder to know if it can be a good transport, better than a mac mini at least.

[ismewor]

45 minutes ago, Advieira said:

Have anyone of you guys tried that cheap chinese htpc fanless i5?

I would not. In audio world what you pay is half of what you get, because your mobo must be noisy than it doesn’t matter what kind of LPS you feed in. I’ll bet a used Mac mini sure better.

[Advieira]

 

2 hours ago, ismewor said:

I would not. In audio world what you pay is half of what you get, because your mobo must be noisy than it doesn’t matter what kind of LPS you feed in. I’ll bet a used Mac mini sure better.

 

Someone tell me there´s no difference between chines htpc and sonic transporter i5.

[TopQuark]

3 hours ago, Advieira said:

 

 

Someone tell me there´s no difference between chines htpc and sonic transporter i5.

 

Any reason why Intel NUC is not an option?  For one, only Intel NUC's are guaranteed to work with Rock.  I checked the price of the Aliexpress i5 htpc above.  With 4gb RAM and 128gb SSD, the cost is $343.  That is close to Intel NUC territory if you'll get the i5 that is 1 version older than the current one like the NUC6i5SYK for example.  https://kb.roonlabs.com/Roon_Optimized_Core_Kit

 

[TopQuark]

8 hours ago, Johnseye said:

It's an endpoint.  Roon core isn't running on it.  If you're aware of a way that the sMS-200 can run Roon core, please share.  Seriously, I'd really like to know because for me that's a big win.

 

sMS-200 is not going to run Roon core.  It is just Roon Ready and act as medium for Roon core.  The point I was alluding more to Caprice point that, if the OP want a low power mobo and sCLK-EX which is an excellent clock, the OP already has it today in sms-200ultra.  That's all.  sms-200 can act like an endpoint/server if you attach an external USB drive and use MPD, minim, bubble or other delivery medium that is available in Eunhasu.  Roon can develop Roon core into sms-200Ultra if they want to.  It is just an ARM CPU but it does not have the horsepower needed to maximize the power of Roon core.  The sms-200ultra hardware functions the same as to what Caprice is talking about with Jetway and sCLK-EX.  The limitation is really just the software.

 

8 hours ago, Johnseye said:

I am using Roon.  I've used ROCK, Windows Server 2012R2 and 2016 with AO and Fidelizer.  I have used Roon's DSP to upsample along with other functions and I use HQPlayer to upsample using a motherboard with its proc and memory clock dumbed down to 800MHz.  Unless you need to upsample to DSD256 or 512 it will work just fine.  Have you tried it?

 

Yes, it is going to work if you cut all of those. No question about it.  The OP already has a mac-mini that does the work of Roon core and an sMS-200ultra that delivers unadulterated audio and not diluted with other CPU hog like building album library, HQPlayer upsampling, etc.  Should the OP sell his sms-200ultra and mac-mini and replace both with a low power Celeron in a generic board + sCLK-EX?  At the least, sell his sMS-200ultra and replace it with Celeron and keep the mac mini to run Roon core?  That is where I mentioned that he already has his low power "Celeron" and sCLK-EX in sms-200ultra.

[Johnseye]

34 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

sMS-200 is not going to run Roon core.  It is just Roon Ready and act as medium for Roon core.  The point I was alluding more to Caprice point that, if the OP want a low power mobo and sCLK-EX which is an excellent clock, the OP already has it today in sms-200ultra.  That's all.  sms-200 can act like an endpoint/server if you attach an external USB drive and use MPD, minim, bubble or other delivery medium that is available in Eunhasu.  Roon can develop Roon core into sms-200Ultra if they want to.  It is just an ARM CPU but it does not have the horsepower needed to maximize the power of Roon core.  The sms-200ultra hardware functions the same as to what Caprice is talking about with Jetway and sCLK-EX.  The limitation is really just the software.

 

 

Yes, it is going to work if you cut all of those. No question about it.  The OP already has a mac-mini that does the work of Roon core and an sMS-200ultra that delivers unadulterated audio and not diluted with other CPU hog like building album library, HQPlayer upsampling, etc.  Should the OP sell his sms-200ultra and mac-mini and replace both with a low power Celeron in a generic board + sCLK-EX?  At the least, sell his sMS-200ultra and replace it with Celeron and keep the mac mini to run Roon core?  That is where I mentioned that he already has his low power "Celeron" and sCLK-EX in sms-200ultra.

 

Now we're getting somewhere. Anyone using an sMS-200 still needs a backend server. That backend server also has a significant impact on the sound regardless of whether you use an endpoint or not. There is nothing magical about an endpoint, it is merely a filter. Simply stated of course. 

 

One major point of building a low noise server is to eliminate the endpoint. This was Roy's goal and something I've been after for a long time. Fortunately Roy paved the way for many of us who choose this path through his research and investments. 

[Johnseye]

1 hour ago, TopQuark said:

 

Any reason why Intel NUC is not an option?  For one, only Intel NUC's are guaranteed to work with Rock.  I checked the price of the Aliexpress i5 htpc above.  With 4gb RAM and 128gb SSD, the cost is $343.  That is close to Intel NUC territory if you'll get the i5 that is 1 version older than the current one like the NUC6i5SYK for example.  https://kb.roonlabs.com/Roon_Optimized_Core_Kit

 

 

Not sure what "guarantee" means. ROCK will work with your standard Intel platform. 

 

Dont get me wrong, I like NUCs but you have limitations and can't customize them very much. 

[Johnseye]

4 hours ago, Advieira said:

 

 

Someone tell me there´s no difference between chines htpc and sonic transporter i5.

 

There's nothing special about the Sonic Transporter. You're right in  that the board from that PC is Chinese made but that shouldn't matter other than that it may have low quality parts. . It's just a low frills board

[Advieira]

2 hours ago, TopQuark said:

 

Any reason why Intel NUC is not an option? 

 

 

Because I suppose a NUC is not much different to a Mac Mini in SQ when used as Roon Core. 

My concerns are: what can I do in my transport/server to get better quality in the chain TRANSPORT/SERVER > ULTRA > DAC.

I really thought that Jcat Femto Net Card Lan was the ultimate key.

[ismewor]

44 minutes ago, Advieira said:

I really thought that Jcat Femto Net Card Lan was the ultimate key.

That is just part of it. But Certainly not ultimate. 

[ismewor]

47 minutes ago, Advieira said:

My concerns are: what can I do in my transport/server to get better quality in the chain TRANSPORT/SERVER > ULTRA > DAC.

 Yes, this is the correct chain. And they need to be separate. 

[TopQuark]

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Now we're getting somewhere. Anyone using an sMS-200 still needs a backend server. That backend server also has a significant impact on the sound regardless of whether you use an endpoint or not. There is nothing magical about an endpoint, it is merely a filter. Simply stated of course. 

 

That backend server can either be a NAS where you can install Roon Server or Rock.  Rock is very small. Install size is like <100mb of OS built for just audiophile audio.  You can even replace the clocks on NUC but the impact will be small since packets are blocked by subnetting.

[TopQuark]

4 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Not sure what "guarantee" means. ROCK will work with your standard Intel platform. 

 

Dont get me wrong, I like NUCs but you have limitations and can't customize them very much. 

 

Rock will NOT work with just any standard Intel platform.  Some BIOS are not compatible with Rock.  Roon Server will work with about any Intel platform but not Rock.  Rock was developed using Intel NUC from the beginning.  That's the reason Roon only sell NUC's in Nucleus.  The Rock page even puts a big warning for using non-NUC platform:

 

"If you do manage to get it to run, that's great, but we can not guarantee it will continue to work with future builds. Consider yourself warned."

 

Link here: https://kb.roonlabs.com/Roon_Optimized_Core_Kit

 

Customization was done in software and that is the big deal.  It is like an embedded purpose designed OS just for pure audio and Roon.  It is not a server or desktop OS where you will not need 95% if its features.  Intel NUC's are not using Realtek ethernet like most generic boards uses.  NUC uses only Intel ethernet.  Since the NUC bandwidth will be used only for album library, upscaling, convolution, etc. and not audio delivery, further modifications in hardware is not going to make significance in SQ. sMS-200ultra will be doing that for you.

 

Nucleus:

 

[Johnseye]

9 hours ago, TopQuark said:

 

Rock will NOT work with just any standard Intel platform.  Some BIOS are not compatible with Rock.  Roon Server will work with about any Intel platform but not Rock.  Rock was developed using Intel NUC from the beginning.  That's the reason Roon only sell NUC's in Nucleus.  The Rock page even puts a big warning for using non-NUC platform:

 

"If you do manage to get it to run, that's great, but we can not guarantee it will continue to work with future builds. Consider yourself warned."

 

Link here: https://kb.roonlabs.com/Roon_Optimized_Core_Kit

 

It's a specific Linux distro, built by them.  They don't want to develop drivers and test it with all the possible hardware options, and they will also want to sell their hardware.  I wouldn't worry about any guarantee, it just means they didn't test and their drivers may not compatible.  So there's a risk.

 

If you want to use HQPlayer, ROCK is not an option.  If you want to use any other applications, ROCK is not an option.  Personally, I liked how ROCK sounded.  But I also like using HQPlayer and JRiver.

 

9 hours ago, TopQuark said:

 Since the NUC bandwidth will be used only for album library, upscaling, convolution, etc. and not audio delivery, further modifications in hardware is not going to make significance in SQ. sMS-200ultra will be doing that for you.

 

 

Further modifications in hardware is not going to make significance in SQ??  This is flat out wrong regardless of OS.  Sorry.

[TopQuark]

3 hours ago, Johnseye said:

It's a specific Linux distro, built by them.  They don't want to develop drivers and test it with all the possible hardware options, and they will also want to sell their hardware.  I wouldn't worry about any guarantee, it just means they didn't test and their drivers may not compatible.  So there's a risk.

 

NO, it is not a distro. Sorry to say, please state only facts and not your own opinion so it will not confuse those reading this thread.  Danny Dulai explained it in more detail in the forum. He created a custom kernel and used part of Linux (not the distribution) just to allow the OS to access utilities since those are already well established.  The rest was constructed from scratch and created just for audio.  I was even the one who asked him about this!

 

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/rock-what-linux-distribution-answered-there-is-no-3rd-party-os/21613

 

If you are not worried about guarantee, then it helps to be reminded of what ROCK developer said to everyone - "Consider yourself warned".  He's not going to create the next version of ROCK based on another generic motherboard.  He will continue to develop it on an Intel NUC.  It's as simple as this.

 

3 hours ago, Johnseye said:

If you want to use HQPlayer, ROCK is not an option.  If you want to use any other applications, ROCK is not an option.  Personally, I liked how ROCK sounded.  But I also like using HQPlayer and JRiver.

 

This is your choice and I respect it.  You mentioned earlier you are using Roon.  Now, it is JRiver.  Everyone has their own preference.  I am not trying to sway you towards ROCK.  I am just stating what ROCK is capable of and it seems that not a lot are familiar with it.  I like HQPlayer myself.  I respect what Jussi has done.  He did a magnificent job and he will keep on raising the bar.  But let's face it.  ROCK has it's own HQPlayer features and more.  Some dropped HQPlayer in favor of ROCK for it's utmost simplicity, integration, and other new features.  High end features in HQPlayer does not yet exist in ROCK but Roon team is going to that direction.

 

3 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Further modifications in hardware is not going to make significance in SQ??  This is flat out wrong regardless of OS.  Sorry.

 

Again, let's make sure we are in the right context in saying this.  The hardware I am talking about is the Roon server in a generic motherboard or ROCK.  Both are connected through an ethernet cable to the sMS-200ultra.  The sMS-200ultra is connected to the DAC, reclocker, or any other converter used through USB.  The sMS-200ultra, a motherboard that contains sCLK-EX and other goodies who knows what that SOtM added, is the type of hardware that can significantly affect SQ if not properly implemented.  SOtM did the hardware mod already for better SQ to the motherboard.  The Roon server and ROCK are outside of the direct connection to DAC, reclocker, etc.  They just serve audio library creation and CPU hungry convolution.

 

In your generic Jetway motherboard, you had it directly connected to the DAC reclocker, or any other converter used through USB.  In your case, modifications in hardware IS going to make a significant difference. Roon Server and audio delivery running in a single box requires careful design to optimize the SQ.  SOtM already did that in sms-200ultra.  It is a purpose built motherboard just for better audio.  The motherboard was built from scratch and not another generic Intel motherboard.  Some decided to go with sMS-200ultra to avoid re-inventing the wheel.  Adding sCLK-EX is one thing.  What about use of better audio grade capacitors, motherboard layout optimized for audio, power filter, etc.?  I can't say the same thing in a generic Jetway motherboard.  Sorry.

 

 

 

[Johnseye]

57 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

NO, it is not a distro. Sorry to say, please state only facts and not your own opinion so it will not confuse those reading this thread.  Danny Dulai explained it in more detail in the forum. He created a custom kernel and used part of Linux (not the distribution) just to allow the OS to access utilities since those are already well established.  The rest was constructed from scratch and created just for audio.  I was even the one who asked him about this!

 

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/rock-what-linux-distribution-answered-there-is-no-3rd-party-os/21613

 

Yea, it is a distro.  It's just developed by Roon.

 

 

57 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

If you are not worried about guarantee, then it helps to be reminded of what ROCK developer said to everyone - "Consider yourself warned".  He's not going to create the next version of ROCK based on another generic motherboard.  He will continue to develop it on an Intel NUC.  It's as simple as this.

 

So what?  You either limit your hardware by Roon Rock or you find something that works with it, but you don't need to corner yourself into using a NUC just because that's what they "guarantee".

 

57 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

 

This is your choice and I respect it.  You mentioned earlier you are using Roon.  Now, it is JRiver.  Everyone has their own preference.  I am not trying to sway you towards ROCK.  I am just stating what ROCK is capable of and it seems that not a lot are familiar with it.  I like HQPlayer myself.  I respect what Jussi has done.  He did a magnificent job and he will keep on raising the bar.  But let's face it.  ROCK has it's own HQPlayer features and more.  Some dropped HQPlayer in favor of ROCK for it's utmost simplicity, integration, and other new features.  High end features in HQPlayer does not yet exist in ROCK but Roon team is going to that direction.

 

Yes, I use Roon and HQPlayer.  I've used JRiver for a lot longer and like some features and functions of it.  If I were to abandon the use of HQPlayer and JRiver I might just use Rock.  But right now and unless Roon can at least match what HQPlayer is doing with filters, the better option is HQPlayer and so Windows.

 

57 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

Again, let's make sure we are in the right context in saying this.  The hardware I am talking about is the Roon server in a generic motherboard or ROCK.  Both are connected through an ethernet cable to the sMS-200ultra.  The sMS-200ultra is connected to the DAC, reclocker, or any other converter used through USB.  The sMS-200ultra, a motherboard that contains sCLK-EX and other goodies who knows what that SOtM added, is the type of hardware that can significantly affect SQ if not properly implemented.  SOtM did the hardware mod already for better SQ to the motherboard.  The Roon server and ROCK are outside of the direct connection to DAC, reclocker, etc.  They just serve audio library creation and CPU hungry convolution.

 

This is where you're wrong.  Everything upstream has an impact.  The sMS does not magically make it all go away.

 

57 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

In your generic Jetway motherboard, you had it directly connected to the DAC reclocker, or any other converter used through USB.  In your case, modifications in hardware IS going to make a significant difference. Roon Server and audio delivery running in a single box requires careful design to optimize the SQ.  SOtM already did that in sms-200ultra.  It is a purpose built motherboard just for better audio.  The motherboard was built from scratch and not another generic Intel motherboard.  Some decided to go with sMS-200ultra to avoid re-inventing the wheel.  Adding sCLK-EX is one thing.  What about use of better audio grade capacitors, motherboard layout optimized for audio, power filter, etc.?  I can't say the same thing in a generic Jetway motherboard.  Sorry.

 

I have an sMS-200, an ISO Regen and I use them now.  I know what they do.  My new Jetway board will have its clocks replaced and the USB card on it will have the same clock as the sMS-200ultra and I could even use a tx-USBultra which is the same clock.

 

The point here which somehow you're missing, is that by improving the clocks on the motherboard, not to mention providing it good clean power, the sound quality is improved further even if you use an sMS-200.  SOtM can change the caps and regulators as well.  My approach to using the SOtM USB card in the PC is to eliminate the endpoint.  This has been proven by multiple people.  Not sure why you're struggling with it but I"m done trying to explain it.  Hopefully the OP got some benefit from this back and forth, and my apologies to him it.

[TopQuark]

1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

Yea, it is a distro.  It's just developed by Roon.

 

Let the readers decide that.  I already provided the facts.  My link is from the mouth of the Roon author himself.  I don't know how much more you can twist it.

 

1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

So what?  You either limit your hardware by Roon Rock or you find something that works with it, but you don't need to corner yourself into using a NUC just because that's what they "guarantee".

 

As I mentioned, I am just trying to correct misinformation about ROCK.  I do respect your decision in your choice of hardware as you see fits. I know you feel strongly about your chosen hardware but why this negative sentiment?  Again, I am just the messenger here so I posted the links from Roon author himself that he is NOT going to develop ROCK other than NUC and provided the warning. I didn't make my own opinion.  I could have made one but I didn't because, like assholes, everybody has one.

 

1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

Yes, I use Roon and HQPlayer.  I've used JRiver for a lot longer and like some features and functions of it.  If I were to abandon the use of HQPlayer and JRiver I might just use Rock.  But right now and unless Roon can at least match what HQPlayer is doing with filters, the better option is HQPlayer and so Windows.

 

Makes sense to me.  Please keep what you like.  I am not trying to convince you to switch if you already know what you are getting.

 

1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

This is where you're wrong.  Everything upstream has an impact.  The sMS does not magically make it all go away.

 

I didn't say there isn't an impact.  Isn't it?  I am saying that it is not as significant impact as the unit that is connected to the DAC or re-clocker or converter because it is further out from the chain.

 

1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

I have an sMS-200, an ISO Regen and I use them now.  I know what they do.  My new Jetway board will have its clocks replaced and the USB card on it will have the same clock as the sMS-200ultra and I could even use a tx-USBultra which is the same clock.

 

The point here which somehow you're missing, is that by improving the clocks on the motherboard, not to mention providing it good clean power, the sound quality is improved further even if you use an sMS-200.  SOtM can change the caps and regulators as well.  My approach to using the SOtM USB card in the PC is to eliminate the endpoint.  This has been proven by multiple people.  Not sure why you're struggling with it but I"m done trying to explain it.  Hopefully the OP got some benefit from this back and forth, and my apologies to him it.

 

Wait a minute here. The subject matter has changed. "..even if you use an sMS-200".  So now, there is the sMS-200 in the equation.  I was referring to a single box solution that is being suggested here that replaces the OP's mac-mini and sMS-200ultra.

 

This has been proven by multiple people?  I'm sure there are more of you other than yourself, Caprice, and Roy.  Roy is using a $10,000 Chord Dave that is non-delta sigma and non-R2R that does it's own noise filtering in the FPGA that is like over 100Mhz so he is getting the result he want without further upsampling.  Each set-up is unique in itself and one does not apply to everyone else.  Again, I have nothing about your choice.  I will say it again that I respect your choice.  It's just that I am straightening out the facts with the links to the references from the source.

 

1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

 Hopefully the OP got some benefit from this back and forth, and my apologies to him it.

 

Apologies to the OP too. I hope this will provide him enough material to come up with an informed decision.