Jump to content
IGNORED

Building a PC to improve SMS-200 Ultra


Recommended Posts

I do own the trifecta setup currently.

DigitalDac: Chord DAVE, Amp: MC275 Mono, Preamp: FirstSound, Source: Esoteric K01X, Cable: TaraLab GME interconnect,
CASSOtM Trifecta Mod 75ohm MCI, TheLinearSolution TCXO Router

Analog: SME 20/2, SME V, Skala, Esoteric C03 Phono

 
Link to comment
22 minutes ago, rocl444 said:

only 2 comps. the pc is no longer in the loop. the files are on the ssd inside the chinese celeron running windows, and that feeds the ultra via ethernet. great sound.

 

Could be ethernet providing good galvanic isolation. The chinese celeron acts as the file server so it has smaller influence on the sound than the sMS-200ultra directly connected to the DAC.

 

22 minutes ago, rocl444 said:

will try a linux distro on the celeron comp instead of windows. i am running the free Fideliser on the windows

 

Since you are trying Roon, too bad ROCK may not work with the Celeron but you can give it a try.  It installs only in like 3 minutes. Very very small file.

 

If ROCK will not work, try the smallest Linux install in Arch Linux.  I created a guide how to do this from here:

 

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/how-to-arch-linux-on-nuc6i5sy-nvme-and-bridged-interfaces/25720

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, rocl444 said:

the ssd dock was plugged straight into the sms200ultra. the sound was as good as when the ssd was in my pc connected via ethernet. but then i do have the ethernet mod.

I found the direct usb connection to SmS 200 provided a clean and clear sound, but very much dependent on the attached USB storage; 3.5 HDD sounded best and my seagate backup plus 2.5 just horrible with ssd somewhere in the middle, but thats a whole new topic :)

In my laptop transferring files to my NVME and playing them from there sounds best although Im installing a 5tb 2.5 HDD with a SATA filter to try.

I know that JRIVER can load files direct to memory so perhaps thats one way of bypassing storage quality.

At present I use ROON because of its AUDEZE filters, Upsampling and Convolution.

A laptop has the benefit of DC connector - this can be run with a linear power supply plus a high powered processor which can run ROON with all the upsampling etc.

To bypass the ethernet I could try installing SOTM's tx- UsbHub version of their USB card and use the Sclk EX from my Ultra, but the sound is pretty good right now and it would be more of a sideways move, as things are advancing so fast there is no urgency.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, TopQuark said:

 

Who said I stick with tried and known model?  I am not advocating a particular set-up. I am just answering the OP who already has sMS-200ultra.  Your suggestion to replace his sMS-200ultra with a single box server IS more expensive because he has to sell his sMS-200ultra and his mac mini at a loss for a cheap generic Jetway mobo with Realtek ethernet that you are advocating.

 

Here we go again.  If you don't think you're advocating a particular setup then I can't help you.  You're clearly advocating the sMS-200 endpoint approach.  Also, the OP never said he wanted to save money.  He said "upgrade my transport/source system.  I want to change the mac mini for a mini PC optmized to best transport and roon server."  So who cares about spending an extra $300 on a motherboard, hard drive and memory?  He can even use the sCLK-EX from his sMS-200ultra as taps for his mobo clocks if he wants.

 

With regard to the modified server motherboard, whether it's a Jetway or not and whether it's the OP or anyone else, by modifying the upstream system and ethernet clocks, better sound quality will be achieved.  The output will still be an sCLK-EX.  It could be a tx-USBexp (using the sCLK), an sMS-200ultra or a tx-USBultra.  With the sCLK-EX at both the delivery point to the DAC and on the motherboard, and even the switch will be an increase in sound quality.

 

I truly hope people reading this understand my last point.  This is exactly why TopQuark's posts are misinformation.  By having an endpoint as the sMS-200ultra it doesn't magically change what has been done by the upstream clocks.  I'm also not saying not to use an sMS-200ultra, I'm saying upgrade as many upstream clocks as you can afford.

 

 

5 hours ago, TopQuark said:

 

I gave you my answer. He has it already in sMS-200ultra. Don't play with your "endpoint" semantics. The sMS-200ultra contains an audiophile mobo + cpu + ram + usb + sCLK-EX.  This is better than your generic Jetway mobo + cpu + ram + usb + sCLK-EX because the sMS-200ultra was designed for audiophile audio from the ground up with better filters and capacitors and not the desktop Jetway mobo you are advocating that uses generic components. The difference is really only the software.

 

Again, don't take this out of context on what the OP raised from the original thread.  The title says "Building a PC to improve sMS-200 Ultra". He has sMS-200ultra and wants Roon.  It's bad advise to let him sell what he already has - mac mini and sMS-200ultra - and propose a solution that was tried by you and Caprice because it is the best in what you have tried.  Worst is, as far as I can tell, none of you have listened to the trifecta set-up yet.

 

 

You still miss the point that whether you use the sMS-200ultra as the endpoint a server is needed and that impacts the sound received by the endpoint.  I don't know if you truly don't get this, or you just love to debate.

 

By the way, updating the system clocks on the mobo and switch while still using a tx-USBex/tx-USBultra/sMS-200/ISO Regen or all of the above will still be better than what you don't think you're advocating.

 

Do you understand what I'm saying?  If you do, this shouldn't be a debate.  I'm not against the sMS-200ultra, I think it can be improved.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Here we go again.

 

If you keep on putting words in my mouth I cannot just let that go.

 

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

If you don't think you're advocating a particular setup then I can't help you.  You're clearly advocating the sMS-200 endpoint approach.

 

Yes, I do. -  For the set-up that the OP is looking for in this thread.  I thought you already got this by now.

 

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Also, the OP never said he wanted to save money.  He said "upgrade my transport/source system.  I want to change the mac mini for a mini PC optmized to best transport and roon server."  So who cares about spending an extra $300 on a motherboard, hard drive and memory?

 

But single server means replacing his mac-mini and sMS-200ultra.  This is not about saving money. It's about losing it and he already has a very good system.  What you are suggesting now to ADD a server in conjunction with sMS-200ultra is not what you were originally advocating.

 

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

He can even use the sCLK-EX from his sMS-200ultra as taps for his mobo clocks if he wants.

 

Precisely!  Use the remaining 24 Mhz clock for his mac-mini instead of the generic Jetway mobo. This is after the sMS-200ultra in the chain so the laws of diminishing return is something the OP will take into consideration.

 

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

With regard to the modified server motherboard, whether it's a Jetway or not and whether it's the OP or anyone else, by modifying the upstream system and ethernet clocks, better sound quality will be achieved.  The output will still be an sCLK-EX.  It could be a tx-USBexp (using the sCLK), an sMS-200ultra or a tx-USBultra.  With the sCLK-EX at both the delivery point to the DAC and on the motherboard, and even the switch will be an increase in sound quality.

 

I can't agree with you more.  Again, "better SQ can be achieved" is not a relative term.  When stating "server motherboard", just need to clear if it is the server after the sMS-200ultra or the server after the DAC because there is a difference how much better SQ each can achieve.

 

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

I truly hope people reading this understand my last point.  This is exactly why TopQuark's posts are misinformation.  By having an endpoint as the sMS-200ultra it doesn't magically change what has been done by the upstream clocks.  I'm also not saying not to use an sMS-200ultra, I'm saying upgrade as many upstream clocks as you can afford.

 

Misinformation? I hope readers read the previous posts. I am just a messenger. I provided references to the facts and not just what "I think".  

 

What a change of tone - from a singler server generic Jetway mobo, now to "upgrade as many upstream clocks as you can afford".  I hope you meant "downstream" or we will go around in circle again.  As I mentioned earlier, components that are farther away from the DAC, the least likely the returns will be.
 

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

You still miss the point that whether you use the sMS-200ultra as the endpoint a server is needed and that impacts the sound received by the endpoint.  I don't know if you truly don't get this, or you just love to debate.

 

No, you don't get it.  You don't need another server. I already explained this to you. You can run sMS-200ultra as a standalone server if you want by connecting a USB drive to one of the USB ports and it will act as a DLNA server.  But that is beside the point because, I was just explaining to you that the sMS-200ultra is your generic Jetway motherboard and even better but the software is the difference.

 

The Jetway mobo you are suggesting uses generic components, Realtek ethernet, generic regulator, generic capacitors, etc.

 

The sMS-200ultra uses a dedicated ARM processor board specifically developed for only audio use, low power dual core AMD chip, ultra-low jitter clock overriden by sCLK-EX, ultra-low noise regulator, active noise canceller, and audio grade USB output port.

 

Why push for the generic Jetway when the OP already has the sMS-200ultra and mac-mini?

 

I hate debate but I cannot tolerate misinformation and insinuations.  But I don't to take this any further.  The OP already made a wise decision.

 

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

By the way, updating the system clocks on the mobo and switch while still using a tx-USBex/tx-USBultra/sMS-200/ISO Regen or all of the above will still be better than what you don't think you're advocating.

 

Do you understand what I'm saying?  If you do, this shouldn't be a debate.  I'm not against the sMS-200ultra, I think it can be improved.

 

LOL.  Of course, it will.  You can also say, updating the clock in your router and modem will be better.  Again, you need to define and quantify "better".  How does it changes the shape of your sound, does it become more transparent and increases the soundstage or does it improve the dynamics of the highs and lows?  Is the change something that you prefer to listen? And to what cost?

 

This is the problem.  It's easy to go around in these forums and say my single generic Jetway mobo with sCLK-EX is "better".

 

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Do you understand what I'm saying?  If you do, this shouldn't be a debate.  I'm not against the sMS-200ultra, I think it can be improved.

 

Who said you are against it?  I am against recommendations using a generic Jetway mobo in place of sMS-200ultra + mac mini that the OP already has and plan to use Roon with it. 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

If you keep on putting words in my mouth I cannot just let that go.

 

Yes, I do. -  For the set-up that the OP is looking for in this thread.  I thought you already got this by now.

 

But single server means replacing his mac-mini and sMS-200ultra.  This is not about saving money. It's about losing it and he already has a very good system.  What you are suggesting now to ADD a server in conjunction with sMS-200ultra is not what you were originally advocating.

 

If I put words in your mouth I would quote what you typed.  I quoted what the OP wanted.

 

Go back and read my posts.  You're probably confusing what I've posted with someone else.  My server has always had an sCLK-EX involved in one way or another.  As I've repeatedly said it doesn't matter whether it's an sMS-200ultra or any other device using the sCLK-EX.  The point is that the sCLK-EX being used, is not only for the device connecting to the DAC but devices upstream like the mobo.  

 

 

4 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

Precisely!  Use the remaining 24 Mhz clock for his mac-mini instead of the generic Jetway mobo. This is after the sMS-200ultra in the chain so the laws of diminishing return is something the OP will take into consideration.

 

If he'd want his Mac mini modified sure, why not.

 

4 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

I can't agree with you more.  Again, "better SQ can be achieved" is not a relative term.  When stating "server motherboard", just need to clear if it is the server after the sMS-200ultra or the server after the DAC because there is a difference how much better SQ each can achieve.

 

Misinformation? I hope readers read the previous posts. I am just a messenger. I provided references to the facts and not just what "I think".  

 

What a change of tone - from a singler server generic Jetway mobo, now to "upgrade as many upstream clocks as you can afford".  I hope you meant "downstream" or we will go around in circle again.  As I mentioned earlier, components that are farther away from the DAC, the least likely the returns will be.
 

 

Point out where I said Jetway mobo based server only.  Link it or quote it.  Upstream to the endpoint would be the server, downstream would be the DAC.  I meant upstream.  Maybe you should try modifying your server's system clocks yourself instead of arguing against it.

 

 

4 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

No, you don't get it.  You don't need another server. I already explained this to you. You can run sMS-200ultra as a standalone server if you want by connecting a USB drive to one of the USB ports and it will act as a DLNA server.  But that is beside the point because, I was just explaining to you that the sMS-200ultra is your generic Jetway motherboard and even better but the software is the difference.

 

The Jetway mobo you are suggesting uses generic components, Realtek ethernet, generic regulator, generic capacitors, etc.

 

The sMS-200ultra uses a dedicated ARM processor board specifically developed for only audio use, low power dual core AMD chip, ultra-low jitter clock overriden by sCLK-EX, ultra-low noise regulator, active noise canceller, and audio grade USB output port.

 

Why push for the generic Jetway when the OP already has the sMS-200ultra and mac-mini?

 

Maybe if you don't want to use Roon, but that was the OP's ask so yea, you need another server.

 

4 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

I hate debate but I cannot tolerate misinformation and insinuations.  But I don't to take this any further.  The OP already made a wise decision.

 

LOL.  Of course, it will.  You can also say, updating the clock in your router and modem will be better.  Again, you need to define and quantify "better".  How does it changes the shape of your sound, does it become more transparent and increases the soundstage or does it improve the dynamics of the highs and lows?  Is the change something that you prefer to listen? And to what cost?

 

This is the problem.  It's easy to go around in these forums and say my single generic Jetway mobo with sCLK-EX is "better".

 

Have you ever modified your motherboard's clocks with the sCLK-EX, or even heard another person's system who's done it?

 

4 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

Who said you are against it?  I am against recommendations using a generic Jetway mobo in place of sMS-200ultra + mac mini that the OP already has and plan to use Roon with it. 

 

Let's clarify, you're against using a Jetway mobo and a tx-USBexp with clocks modified by an sCLK-EX to start, because that's part of the approach and considering I've said other devices could follow between that and the DAC I'll just leave it at that.  For some reason you're stuck on that mac mini.  You need a refresher on what I've posted and I knew you'd respond this way because even when we have commonalities you still argue.

Link to comment

It's a waste of time Johnseye, he only wants to sell his agenda like he knows it all.  Nobody else is going to come up with better solutions.  Regardless he's going to make it sound like his way is the only way, with tons of misinformation on other solutions that aren't his, and even his.  Incredible, that's why I put him on ignore.  Has nothing of interest or contribution.

(JRiver) Jetway barebones NUC (mod 3 sCLK-EX, Cybershaft OP 14)  (PH SR7) => mini pcie adapter to PCIe 1X => tXUSBexp PCIe card (mod sCLK-EX) (PH SR7) => (USPCB) Chord DAVE => Omega Super 8XRS/REL t5i  (All powered thru Topaz Isolation Transformer)

Link to comment
Just now, ElviaCaprice said:

It's a waste of time Johnseye, he only wants to sell his agenda like he knows it all.  Nobody else is going to come up with better solutions.  Regardless he's going to make it sound like his way is the only way, with tons of misinformation on other solutions that aren't his, and even his.  Incredible, that's why I put him on ignore.  Has nothing of interest or contribution.

 

I could repackage what he said and pretend it came from me and he'd argue against it.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

 

I could repackage what he said and pretend it came from me and he'd argue against it.

I was thinking the same thing.

(JRiver) Jetway barebones NUC (mod 3 sCLK-EX, Cybershaft OP 14)  (PH SR7) => mini pcie adapter to PCIe 1X => tXUSBexp PCIe card (mod sCLK-EX) (PH SR7) => (USPCB) Chord DAVE => Omega Super 8XRS/REL t5i  (All powered thru Topaz Isolation Transformer)

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

 As I've repeatedly said it doesn't matter whether it's an sMS-200ultra or any other device using the sCLK-EX.  The point is that the sCLK-EX being used, is not only for the device connecting to the DAC but devices upstream like the mobo.  

 

LOL.  Let me quote you here: From Johnseye: "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."

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

The point is that the sCLK-EX being used, is not only for the device connecting to the DAC but devices upstream like the mobo. 

 

I never said it is not. I just said the return is diminished as you go farther away from the DAC.

 

1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

Point out where I said Jetway mobo based server only.  Link it or quote it. 

 

Here you go: From Johnseye: "My approach to using the SOtM USB card in the PC is to eliminate the endpoint.".....  "The board I've identified, and will likely send off to SOtM for modification is the Jetway NF591.  Very similar to the DFI board Roy is using."

 

 

1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

Have you ever modified your motherboard's clocks with the sCLK-EX, or even heard another person's system who's done it?

 

What is relevant about this question?  Who is against it?  My earlier post even commended you for having a spare clock in the sMS-200ultra hooking it up to the mac mini.

 

1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

Let's clarify, you're against using a Jetway mobo and a tx-USBexp with clocks modified by an sCLK-EX to start, because that's part of the approach and considering 

 

I am NOT against a Jetway mobo as a Roon server to sMS-200ultra.  It's just not the ideal server board for Roon Server because you cannot run ROCK which the OP is planning to use from his original message.  I'm correcting a bad advise.  I am against using Jetway mobo as a sole server when OP already has sMS-200ultra.

 

1 hour ago, Johnseye said:

For some reason you're stuck on that mac mini.  You need a refresher on what I've posted and I knew you'd respond this way because even when we have commonalities you still argue.

 

You said, I am pushing Intel NUC and now mac mini?  Here's your refresher:

 

From Johnseye: "I was pointing out you don't need a NUC.  You definitely have an opinion or there wouldn't be this conversation."

 

 

The OP already has a mac mini!  All he needs is to connect the spare clock from sMS-200ultra or buy a NUC so he can run ROCK.  He can also connect the clock from sMS-200ultra.

 

I do not have a particular agenda except to help the OP and not push for something I think works better only for me.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Regardless he's going to make it sound like his way is the only way, with tons of misinformation on other solutions that aren't his, and even his. 

 

Windows 10 is free...

You can install ROCK on a fanless Celeron NUC...

No one has added sCLK-EX in a mobo...

ROCK will work with your standard Intel platform....

ROCK uses a specific Linux distro....

Packets cannot be blocked from the subnet in Roon....

 

... need I say more?

 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

LOL.  Let me quote you here: From Johnseye: "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."

 

This quote does not say server motherboard only.  It points out that you can't run Roon core on an sMS-200.

 

 

3 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

 

 

I never said it is not. I just said the return is diminished as you go farther away from the DAC.

 

 

Here you go: From Johnseye: "My approach to using the SOtM USB card in the PC is to eliminate the endpoint.".....  "The board I've identified, and will likely send off to SOtM for modification is the Jetway NF591.  Very similar to the DFI board Roy is using."

 

That does not say mobo based server only.  It states I'm using the sCLK-EX and tx-USB in the server instead of an endpoint.  These are essentially the same components in an sMS-200ultra which is why I don't get why you don't understand this approach.

 

2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

Point out where I said Jetway mobo based server only.  Link it or quote it.  Upstream to the endpoint would be the server, downstream would be the DAC.  I meant upstream.  Maybe you should try modifying your server's system clocks yourself instead of arguing against it.

 

 

3 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

What is relevant about this question?  Who is against it?  My earlier post even commended you for having a spare clock in the sMS-200ultra hooking it up to the mac mini.

 

What are you arguing against exactly?

 

3 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

I am NOT against a Jetway mobo as a Roon server to sMS-200ultra.  It's just not the ideal server board for Roon Server because you cannot run ROCK which the OP is planning to use from his original message.  I'm correcting a bad advise.  I am against using Jetway mobo as a sole server when OP already has sMS-200ultra.

 

Again, what are you arguing against?

 

You can run ROCK on a server built with a Jetway mobo.  Why do you think that's not possible?

 

 

3 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

You said, I am pushing Intel NUC and now mac mini?  Here's your refresher:

 

From Johnseye: "I was pointing out you don't need a NUC.  You definitely have an opinion or there wouldn't be this conversation."

 

Yup, I'm not sure what you support or are against anymore.

 

3 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

The OP already has a mac mini!  All he needs is to connect the spare clock from sMS-200ultra or buy a NUC so he can run ROCK.  He can also connect the clock from sMS-200ultra.

 

I do not have a particular agenda except to help the OP and not push for something I think works better only for me.

 

So you think he should spend money on a NUC when he has a mac mini?  Which is it, NUC or mac mini?

 

I don't think you know what you're talking about.  You're just caught up trying to win an argument that you've taken your own position into several different directions.

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, TopQuark said:

 

Windows 10 is free...

 

It can be used for free without authenticating it.

 

Quote

You can install ROCK on a fanless Celeron NUC...

 

Yes, you can.

 

Quote

No one has added sCLK-EX in a mobo...

 

 

Yes they have

 

Quote

ROCK will work with your standard Intel platform....

 

Yes it will in a generic sense.  As you pointed out, Roon doesn't guarantee it will work, which means they won't offer support. Doesn't mean you can't do it.

 

Quote

ROCK uses a specific Linux distro....

 

Yes it does.  "A Linux distribution (often abbreviated as distro) is an operating system made from a software collection, which is based upon the Linux kernel".  This is exactly what ROCK is.

 

Quote

Packets cannot be blocked from the subnet in Roon....

 

 

Danny's explanation was to not include DNS or the gateway.  This really comes down to semantics.   

 

Quote

... need I say more?

 

Don't and we can stop this back and forth.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

These are essentially the same components in an sMS-200ultra which is why I don't get why you don't understand this approach.

 

Finally, something we can agree of.  I wonder why it took so long.

 

3 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

You can run ROCK on a server built with a Jetway mobo.  Why do you think that's not possible?

 

Sure. Try it.  Consider yourself warned:

 

https://kb.roonlabs.com/Roon_Optimized_Core_Kit

 

3 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

Do you think he should spend money on a NUC when he has a mac mini?  Which is it, NUC or mac mini?

 

So you've changed your mind in me supporting NUC again? The problem is you skipped my posts.  NUC = if he want to run ROCK.  Mac-mini = if he want to run Roon Server

 

3 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

I don't think you know what you're talking about.  You're just caught up trying to win an argument that you've taken your own position into several different directions.

 

I don't care about losing or winning an argument but I care a lot about someone providing bad advise to someone who is just new to this forum.

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, TopQuark said:

Sure. Try it.  Consider yourself warned:

 

https://kb.roonlabs.com/Roon_Optimized_Core_Kit

 

I've done it.  I installed ROCK on my "cheap" yet industrial and really not cheap Jetway board.   It works just fine.  I had absolutely no problem what so ever.

 

 

4 hours ago, TopQuark said:

 

So you've changed your mind in me supporting NUC again? The problem is you skipped my posts.  NUC = if he want to run ROCK.  Mac-mini = if he want to run Roon Server

 

I don't care what you support.  What you shouldn't do is mislead people with misinformation by saying something can't work, someone shouldn't do this or that and that they're considered warned.  Do you think you're the Roon police?  My point which you clearly missed is that you can install ROCK an a lot more than a NUC and you sure don't need a mac to run Roon core.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Johnseye said:

I've done it.  I installed ROCK on my "cheap" yet industrial and really not cheap Jetway board.   It works just fine.  I had absolutely no problem what so ever.

 

So you just started using ROCK?  You said earlier it will work.  I see you just guessed then.  It will install on some Intel boards.  It's just not guaranteed that future versions will work because all development is done on Intel NUC.

 

Enjoy your ROCK!

 

3 hours ago, Johnseye said:

I don't care what you support.  What you shouldn't do is mislead people with misinformation by saying something can't work, someone shouldn't do this or that and that they're considered warned.  Do you think you're the Roon police?  My point which you clearly missed is that you can install ROCK an a lot more than a NUC and you sure don't need a mac to run Roon core.

 

I do not think we are communicating well.  Who said it will not work?  Point the link to me.  You are the one misleading people and lying by saying your Jetway will work but you only made a guess until you have installed it only now.

 

I already mentioned gazillion times, the warning is not from me. I am just the messenger.  It was from the creator of ROCK himself.  Let me do this again.  Go to the link here:

 

https://kb.roonlabs.com/Roon_Optimized_Core_Kit

 

From the very bottom of the page, count 4 lines going to the top. (I don't have to do this but I will so you can see it one step at a time.)  Count 6 characters from left to right.  After the period, you will see the warning.  See it? Got it? Does it say it came from TopQuark? 

 

Don't tell me again I am misleading people with misinformation.

 

3 hours ago, Johnseye said:

...and you sure don't need a mac to run Roon core.

 

Clearly, you are putting words in my mouth again.  Who said only mac will run?  Roon Server runs in a lot of machines.  I even mentioned in this thread I created an Arch Linux guide for an Intel platform.  As long as you have the OS that runs those machines, Roon Server will work.  Let's do this:

 

Go to this link:

 

https://roonlabs.com/downloads.html

 

Do you see the title that says "All Software Downloads"?  Count 7 lines from that title going down.  From the 7th line to the 13th, you will see the OS'es that will run Roon Server.  See it?  Got it?

 

Here's another method.  Click the link here:

 

http://bfy.tw/Ej2B

 

From the search result, click the 2nd link.  See it?  Got it??

 

The next step is to memorize the steps above because I will not repeat them again.

 

Link to comment

yes, I have install rock on non nuc setup and it work also. Sure it doesn’t  guarantee  it is on your own risk. 

DigitalDac: Chord DAVE, Amp: MC275 Mono, Preamp: FirstSound, Source: Esoteric K01X, Cable: TaraLab GME interconnect,
CASSOtM Trifecta Mod 75ohm MCI, TheLinearSolution TCXO Router

Analog: SME 20/2, SME V, Skala, Esoteric C03 Phono

 
Link to comment
51 minutes ago, ismewor said:

yes, I have install rock on non nuc setup and it work also. Sure it doesn’t  guarantee  it is on your own risk. 

It will work but will struggle with Hi res DSD etc with upsampling, convolution and heavy load  DSP enabled.

Why take the risk when Roon labs recomends NUC717BNH a 3.5Ghz processor? You can carry out SOTM's mods to this unit or a similar one and it has a DC input 12-19V for a linear power supply, you can use it with the ultra or have it modded completely as Elvia's post. Seems best of both worlds.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, LTG2010 said:

It will work but will struggle with Hi res DSD etc with upsampling, convolution and heavy load  DSP enabled.

Why take the risk when Roon labs recomends NUC717BNH a 3.5Ghz processor? You can carry out SOTM's mods to this unit or a similar one and it has a DC input 12-19V for a linear power supply, you can use it with the ultra or have it modded completely as Elvia's post. Seems best of both worlds.

 

That NUC is a very good option for a higher performing, low power server.  It only has one NIC but if that's all you need, which really comes down to bridging or not, then it's an excellent choice when powered by a 19v LPSU.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Johnseye said:

That NUC is a very good option for a higher performing, low power server.  It only has one NIC but if that's all you need, which really comes down to bridging or not, then it's an excellent choice when powered by a 19v LPSU.

I have an i5 6300hq quad core with a base frequency of 2.3 Ghz and 3.0ghz in turbo mode. Running Roon with upsampling to 32/192 and DSP  enabled the processor settles down at around 1 Ghz. Using similar but DSD 128 the frequency jumps to 3 Ghz.

I have a USB to ethernet adapter for bridge mode( the ethernet socket direct to Ultra and the USB for internet/network), although I dont use internet streaming so can't judge how this adapter might degrade the quality, nothing seems ideal.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Johnseye said:

That NUC is a very good option for a higher performing, low power server.  It only has one NIC but if that's all you need, which really comes down to bridging or not, then it's an excellent choice when powered by a 19v LPSU.

 

In case one want to access the audio files from an SMB file server instead of the storage in the NUC, a USB Ethernet Adapter for the 2nd NIC can be used like this one. ROCK has the driver for the ASIX chipset.  Just make sure to hook up the Intel NIC to the sMS-200ultra (or other renderer for that matter) and the 2nd NIC (ASIX) to the file server. 

 

Network traffic from the 2nd NIC can be isolated from the 1st Intel NIC through subnetting in ROCK.

 

Link to comment
12 hours ago, LTG2010 said:

I have an i5 6300hq quad core with a base frequency of 2.3 Ghz and 3.0ghz in turbo mode. Running Roon with upsampling to 32/192 and DSP  enabled the processor settles down at around 1 Ghz. Using similar but DSD 128 the frequency jumps to 3 Ghz.

I have a USB to ethernet adapter for bridge mode( the ethernet socket direct to Ultra and the USB for internet/network), although I dont use internet streaming so can't judge how this adapter might degrade the quality, nothing seems ideal.

 

I don't know what kind of impact a USB to ethernet adapter has on the sound.  Maybe none, but to me it's just another thing that could have an impact as opposed to an onboard NIC.  Another issue with the NUCs is there's no PCI slot, so you can never add a better USB device to the board itself.  You're limited to either an ethernet endpoint or one of the NUC's USB chips.  You could however have SOtM modify the onboard USB with an sCLK.  But you'd still want to use a tx-USBultra or sMS for the filter.  Another issue with the NUC is it's difficult to upgrade.  If you build your own you can easily swap out components.  Not for everyone, but if you're competent with PCs it has its benefits.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Johnseye said:

.  Another issue with the NUCs is there's no PCI slot, so you can never add a better USB device to the board itself.  You're limited to either an ethernet endpoint or one of the NUC's USB chips. 

Yeah, if your going to use a NUC and modify with sCLK-EX and want to stream USB direct, then your going to need a mini PCIe on the mobo.  Use a mini PCIe to PCIe adapter to run a lane outside the NUC for a tXUSBexp card. 

This does have an advantage in that you can use a USPCB to stream direct to a DAC (depending on design) and not have a chassis in the way of other connections needed.

Which is exactly what I do.  But I like Roy's idea of using two tXUSBexp cards, one for streaming and one for externally hooking up a HDD for data and OS.   Thus a mini-ITX mobo.

(JRiver) Jetway barebones NUC (mod 3 sCLK-EX, Cybershaft OP 14)  (PH SR7) => mini pcie adapter to PCIe 1X => tXUSBexp PCIe card (mod sCLK-EX) (PH SR7) => (USPCB) Chord DAVE => Omega Super 8XRS/REL t5i  (All powered thru Topaz Isolation Transformer)

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...