SOTM, RENDU, AUDIO-LINUX, DIY, DOES IT REALLY MATTER??

[beerandmusic]

So many wagons to jump on, but i still haven't jumped....

 

Since I have been on this site, the First popular solution discussed was Windows connected to USB DAC.

Then it was USB toys

Then it was Rendu or SOTM (pick your flavor, i think SOTM is more popular and gets better reviews)

Then it was improvements to network

Now it appears a lot of people are jumping on the audio-linux bandwagon with many suggesting it is better than all the previous solutions.

This is great since you get the kernal distro for $30 and run on just about any x86 architecture.

 

I was ready to jump on the bandwagon for the first time, because I always thought IF i was wiling to invest $1K plus (for a streamer only) that i would invest in the SOTM, but I just wasn't willing to part with that much money for a "streamer" only box....it just didn't seem like it made sense.

 

Now a $30 distro on any x86 architecture that will beat the sotm, now we are talking my language.

 

But after researching more, there are many skeptics (myself included), in what can this stripped down distro offer over any other streamer?  (e.g. a blu-ray player that supports dlna and dsd, or any of many other solutions.  Some say that moode on a pi will sound better, and others will say Volumio is free. So before I jump on this bandwagon, i started trying to figure out what would make one streamer better than another.

 

Everyone agrees that all streamers get the bits to dac with 100% accuracy, that really the ONLY thing that can improve SQ (inre digital front ends) is minimizing jitter.

 

I have to first ask if it is true, that the only thing that is sent (in addition to a reference voltage) is music and jitter, and the music is proven or accepted as 100% accurate, then the only thing remaining is JITTER that all these millions of different solutions are really trying to improve on, right?  Or is there something else we are trying to resolve for besides jitter?

 

I have asked around, and it seems, as usual, depending on who you ask, there are many different opinions from the ultra-objective, to those that rely only on subjective input, and then everyone else is in between.  Regardless of any of that let's take on those that first suggest OMG, greatest ever MASSIVE IMPROVEMENT, would they even care if they were to measure jitter (remember the only thing that exists is music and jitter as far as the dac input is concerned) and there was no jitter regardless of which solution was used?  Or if the jitter was so low, that everyone agrees that any decent dac can more than compensate for picoseconds of jitter?

 

Many of those that consider themselves objective, will suggest buying any cheap streamer is fine any decent ($1K) dac will compensate for any jitter so don't even worry about this area.  I am kind of curious about SACD players of "yester-year" that people would pay big bucks for, how the jitter compares to a solution today?  And how a high-end SACD player compare SQ wise?  Were people as crazy about which SACD player had the lowest jitter like hobbyists today that jump on every bandwagon screaming OMG massive improvement every other day?

 

I, personally, am of the thinking, hell for $30 why not try it, especially since supposedly it kicks SOTM's ass and I thought i would like an SOTM if i could budget it....but now, knowing that it is only jitter that we are trying to compensate for, and I have a marantz streamer that states they specifically designed the box to compensate for jitter, and many objective opinions suggest jitter is a known entity and has been managed for years....is it even really worth the effort, if i typically lean more toward objective opinions.  Then there are all these people trying it, and want to know which is the best nuc to use it with...i mean, does it really matter??? seriously?   Will one make a difference in jitter at the dac input that the dac can't compensate for over another?  Really?

 

Maybe i will just wait and see what the next bandwagon will be, and skip this one also....after all, it's just subjective....might as well get wooden cable lifters?

 

At least i am glad i didnt jump on the SOTM wagon to find a $30 linux distro will beat it.

 

I really don't mind subjective opinions inre the dac and beyond, but my logic tells me that we should be able to be "objective" up to the dac's input before conversion.  We should be able to measure jitter at the dac input and clearly see if one solution is cleaner than another?    Or is there something else besides music and jitter before the dac input that is not measurable?

[PorkChop]

Regarding music servers/renderers,  I too have been lurking....happy enough with my current set up to be okay with waiting while other people forge on making discoveries in a new frontier.  As a budget audio enthusiast, I feel a bit foolish now spending hundreds here and there to buy ancillary devices.  If that money were aggregated, I could have bought a high-end streamer with built-in audiophile power and signal de-crapifiers!

 

Still, I don't think of every new development as bandwagon fare.  We all know now that great D-to-A is a complex challenge.  So while the needle representing the "best solution" wavers a lot...with so many good minds working on it, I'm confident that a clear path to optimal playback will emerge soon enough.  These Audio Linux developments look quite promising - reading with interest.

[smodtactical]

I am wondering the same thing. I have right now windows foobar wasapi -> Terminator -> HE9 and everyone says connecting direct usb into my dac from my pc is just not optimizing the potential of my dac. Something tells me they are right and I am willing to invest in a network streamer. But want to also get something with good value.

 

If these small stream boxes can bring me in the same ballpark as SOTM then I am hugely interested. 

[beerandmusic]

3 hours ago, smodtactical said:

I am wondering the same thing. I have right now windows foobar wasapi -> Terminator -> HE9 and everyone says connecting direct usb into my dac from my pc is just not optimizing the potential of my dac. Something tells me they are right and I am willing to invest in a network streamer. But want to also get something with good value.

 

If these small stream boxes can bring me in the same ballpark as SOTM then I am hugely interested. 

 

when you really think about it, these streamers don't do anything musically.  All they are responsible for is to deliver the music "bits" to the dac to make the music, we just need something to deliver it with as little noise as possible.  This should not be rocket science and worth 1000s, so i very much doubt anything can beat a "audio-linux" distro, and frankly i believe that even a used blu-ray player can do the same job.  I think the real sell on these boxes is they are providing roon endpoints or better yet HQP interface...but you can do that with DLNA as well.  But for $30 you can't go wrong or even improve on it.  I think the pi solutions (e.g. moode and others) are 100% perfectly capable as well.  I also think a synology NAS  doing DLNA directly to dac is also a perfect solution. 

 

As far as streaming goes, that is really rudimentary, and i believe a lot of people make a lot about nothing with OMG massive improvement type posts....yea, maybe over direct connect to usb without toys, there may be a 5% improvement.

 

But, in the long run, if i was starting all over, i would likely go with one of these audio-linux $30 kernels on any x86 architecture....that is all a streamer is worth, and is likely the best solution for the money....of course if you are like JABBR, you can always make your own kernel for free....but if not, it would be hard to beat the audio-linux ($30) or volumio (FREE- if you could suffice with or prefer a web browser controller), especially if you already have x86 boxes laying around.....if you don't have x86 boxes laying aroudn and have to invest in hardware, a pi may be the right answer for you.  ME- i would go with audio-linux and HQP (i do believe software makes a difference where streamer does not).

[Norton]

I think this is just your perception of “wagons to jump on” based on the latest threads, most of these solutions have actually been around and discussed on CA for some  time.

 

I thought though that the main advertised advantage of SOTM and Rendu  type devices was that they used custom audio-specific motherboards, power supplies, usb interfaces, clocks  etc, so if there is any merit in that, how could an off  the shelf consumer NUC better them simply by virtue of running  Audio Linux?

 

My personal bandwagon is replay from the built in SD card transport of my DAC - bests anything I’ve heard before.  There is also wtfplay  if you want a remarkable Linux based replay, albeit somewhat hairshirt.

 

[beerandmusic]

37 minutes ago, Norton said:

I think this is just your perception of “wagons to jump on” based on the latest threads, most of these solutions have actually been around and discussed on CA for some  time.

 

I thought though that the main advertised advantage of SOTM and Rendu  type devices was that they used custom audio-specific motherboards, power supplies, usb interfaces, clocks  etc, so if there is any merit in that, how could an off  the shelf consumer NUC better them simply by virtue of running  Audio Linux?

 

My personal bandwagon is replay from the built in SD card transport of my DAC - bests anything I’ve heard before.  There is also wtfplay  if you want a remarkable Linux based replay, albeit somewhat hairshirt.

 

 

Yes, i agree.....there have been wagons to jump on since inception of CA, my guess is starting with USB dacs over 10 years ago?

I think usb toys about 7 years ago or so?....so yes, i know there is a history here, i have been on/off the site for about 8 years now.

 

My impression inre the Rendu/SOTM (i believe rendu was first), was that it gained popularity because it offered a solution to use enet vs usb.  I was already using enet via a dlna bluray player at the time, and then via NT503.  The enet and roon interface is what made these gadgets popular imho.  With my computer background it just seemed like too much money for a stripped os and an enet interface, so i never bought in.  I knew you could already build your own comparable device for those knowledgeable.  What is making audio-linux poopular now (great idea), is that you can get same functionality on your own x86 architecture for next to nothing.  Someone took the time and are offering a great service....likely, with time, there will be open source audio linux available for free, but for $30 and some support this can't easily be passed up.  I think anyone would be crazy NOT to finally jump if they want streaming, and haven't built their own.

 

INRE your sdcard dac, i strongly believe that is a GREAT solution and I even suggested the design before there were any on market...but again, there is a big price tag to go with that.  many are poor audiophiles including myself that won't work.....if i had all the money in the world, i would likely go with such a solution, as my library is not that big, even though i have 100s of native dsd files, which take up lots of space, and probably a few thousand wav files...they should fit on largest Sd card?  SD cards keep getting bigger all the time too....and talk about quiet...it seems to make sense to me!  I am envious...ENJOY

[beerandmusic]

9 hours ago, PorkChop said:

I'm confident that a clear path to optimal playback will emerge soon enough.  These Audio Linux developments look quite promising - reading with interest.

 

To be honest, i believe as far as "digital" goes an optimal playback solution already exists.

 

I mean, i can't see it getting any better (inre digital front end) than quad dsd  by our own MISKA and a $30 optimized linux distro that will work on just about any x86 architecture you have laying around....

 

now D-A and speakers and amps, those can continue to improve....but digital front end...we are there now and CHEAPLY....about time!

 

FINALLY something worth writing about.

 

[beerandmusic]

^^^ PS, i think Audio-linux should come up with a more unique name to help survivability with "NAME RECOGNITION" before others steal his thunder....he could become rich....he also should start his own thread, separate from the maze.

[DuckToller]

BaM,
I have seen the last days, that reading, thinking and creating threads about audio-linux has withdrawn your energy from actually testing it with your own ears. If I remember correctly,  I've read that you have a lot of PC material in the closet. So just do it. Won't hurt and give you easily an audible impression on your own.

I have used Foobar2000, Clementine, JRiver 19-23, AO with WS2012R, Win10Pro and WS2016,  Volumio and a Kodi fork, and from my personal experience my old CAPS Zuma with an audiophile USB card by PPANG with Uptone Audio Regen and both DACs, the klein and the iFi iDSD BL, using JRIVER23, sound best. I have recently installed all three options for AO on the Zuma, after some listening, the WS2016, even not in Core mode,  sounds best to me. While reinstalling the ZUMA, I listened with the RPI3b/Volumio/ with and  w/out Hifiberry DAC+. With standard Windows 10, without AO, the Zuma sounded much better than the volumio (with and without Regen). Feed via internal SSD on linear power from HD Plex, or a DIY-NAS via netgear switch. IMHO, SSD sounds slightly better. But this is my impression, my system, my ears, not sure it will help you to make a decision.
At last, it is all about personal preference, and you can only find out with trial and error on your system. It is your system, your ears and the configuration you like most. It is always helpful to have more than one configuration avilable to make comparisons.
I'd like to send you some courage to start doing something other than opinion fishing and discussing topics without personal experience. Make yourself open to your own first(ear)hand experience and free yourself from depending on secondhand experiences. If you feel that you need to improve afterwards, you will still have a lot of choices.
Just for your curiosity: NAD pre/power amp  BEE 275/375 with B&W 805s & 2 x XTZ 10.17 subs
Cheers Tom

[beerandmusic]

1 hour ago, DuckToller said:

BaM,
I have seen the last days, that reading, thinking and creating threads about audio-linux has withdrawn your energy from actually testing it with your own ears. If I remember correctly,  I've read that you have a lot of PC material in the closet. So just do it. Won't hurt and give you easily an audible impression on your own.

I have used Foobar2000, Clementine, JRiver 19-23, AO with WS2012R, Win10Pro and WS2016,  Volumio and a Kodi fork, and from my personal experience my old CAPS Zuma with an audiophile USB card by PPANG with Uptone Audio Regen and both DACs, the klein and the iFi iDSD BL, using JRIVER23, sound best. I have recently installed all three options for AO on the Zuma, after some listening, the WS2016, even not in Core mode,  sounds best to me. While reinstalling the ZUMA, I listened with the RPI3b/Volumio/ with and  w/out Hifiberry DAC+. With standard Windows 10, without AO, the Zuma sounded much better than the volumio (with and without Regen). Feed via internal SSD on linear power from HD Plex, or a DIY-NAS via netgear switch. IMHO, SSD sounds slightly better. But this is my impression, my system, my ears, not sure it will help you to make a decision.
At last, it is all about personal preference, and you can only find out with trial and error on your system. It is your system, your ears and the configuration you like most. It is always helpful to have more than one configuration avilable to make comparisons.
I'd like to send you some courage to start doing something other than opinion fishing and discussing topics without personal experience. Make yourself open to your own first(ear)hand experience and free yourself from depending on secondhand experiences. If you feel that you need to improve afterwards, you will still have a lot of choices.
Just for your curiosity: NAD pre/power amp  BEE 275/375 with B&W 805s & 2 x XTZ 10.17 subs
Cheers Tom

 

1 hour ago, DuckToller said:

BaM,
I have seen the last days, that reading, thinking and creating threads about audio-linux has withdrawn your energy from actually testing it with your own ears. If I remember correctly,  I've read that you have a lot of PC material in the closet. So just do it. Won't hurt and give you easily an audible impression on your own.

I have used Foobar2000, Clementine, JRiver 19-23, AO with WS2012R, Win10Pro and WS2016,  Volumio and a Kodi fork, and from my personal experience my old CAPS Zuma with an audiophile USB card by PPANG with Uptone Audio Regen and both DACs, the klein and the iFi iDSD BL, using JRIVER23, sound best. I have recently installed all three options for AO on the Zuma, after some listening, the WS2016, even not in Core mode,  sounds best to me. While reinstalling the ZUMA, I listened with the RPI3b/Volumio/ with and  w/out Hifiberry DAC+. With standard Windows 10, without AO, the Zuma sounded much better than the volumio (with and without Regen). Feed via internal SSD on linear power from HD Plex, or a DIY-NAS via netgear switch. IMHO, SSD sounds slightly better. But this is my impression, my system, my ears, not sure it will help you to make a decision.
At last, it is all about personal preference, and you can only find out with trial and error on your system. It is your system, your ears and the configuration you like most. It is always helpful to have more than one configuration avilable to make comparisons.
I'd like to send you some courage to start doing something other than opinion fishing and discussing topics without personal experience. Make yourself open to your own first(ear)hand experience and free yourself from depending on secondhand experiences. If you feel that you need to improve afterwards, you will still have a lot of choices.
Just for your curiosity: NAD pre/power amp  BEE 275/375 with B&W 805s & 2 x XTZ 10.17 subs
Cheers Tom

 

nice system...i like NAD and B&W 805's(smile).

 

Yes, i am going to give the audio-linux a "GO". 

 

[davide256]

2 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

 

nice system...i like NAD and B&W 805's(smile).

 

Yes, i am going to give the audio-linux a "GO". 

 

Its worth trying. It can't make the hardware better  but it seems to eliminate some OS/software caused harmonic defects. One of my favorite "bad' recordings

is the original "Pirates of the Caribbean" sound track. It can sound pretty raw even with Roon servers DSP to reduce output by 3 db... quite a few tracks

reach max recorded level. Audiolinux/roonserver did a better job of resolving the harmonics at that recording level without the obnoxious artifacts  heard

using WIN 10/roon server. However it doesn't make cheap endpoint HW suddenly great.  Tried Audiolinux/RPI3 as Roon endpoint last night with 

DIgione coax and USB out using LPS 1.2, (Digione required iFi 5v on RPI to boot) - the microRendu remained better. I am curious though

about how a Celeron NUC running AL in RAM with good power supply would compare... possible that might be the hardware crossover point.

Loud complex passages are the point where my system currently struggles to sound like the original.

 

[Rt66indierock]

9 hours ago, Norton said:

I think this is just your perception of “wagons to jump on” based on the latest threads, most of these solutions have actually been around and discussed on CA for some  time.

 

I thought though that the main advertised advantage of SOTM and Rendu  type devices was that they used custom audio-specific motherboards, power supplies, usb interfaces, clocks  etc, so if there is any merit in that, how could an off  the shelf consumer NUC better them simply by virtue of running  Audio Linux?

 

My personal bandwagon is replay from the built in SD card transport of my DAC - bests anything I’ve heard before.  There is also wtfplay  if you want a remarkable Linux based replay, albeit somewhat hairshirt.

 

 

Norton, great point with the SD Card. The laptop I run my office music system has an SD slot. I played with it a little for music, but SD cards didn’t have the capacity I wanted back then. Now a 256 GB SD card might have real merit in a phone with a good DAC chip in it.

[Rt66indierock]

20 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

So many wagons to jump on, but i still haven't jumped....

 

Since I have been on this site, the First popular solution discussed was Windows connected to USB DAC.

Then it was USB toys

Then it was Rendu or SOTM (pick your flavor, i think SOTM is more popular and gets better reviews)

Then it was improvements to network

Now it appears a lot of people are jumping on the audio-linux bandwagon with many suggesting it is better than all the previous solutions.

This is great since you get the kernal distro for $30 and run on just about any x86 architecture.

 

I was ready to jump on the bandwagon for the first time, because I always thought IF i was wiling to invest $1K plus (for a streamer only) that i would invest in the SOTM, but I just wasn't willing to part with that much money for a "streamer" only box....it just didn't seem like it made sense.

 

Now a $30 distro on any x86 architecture that will beat the sotm, now we are talking my language.

 

But after researching more, there are many skeptics (myself included), in what can this stripped down distro offer over any other streamer?  (e.g. a blu-ray player that supports dlna and dsd, or any of many other solutions.  Some say that moode on a pi will sound better, and others will say Volumio is free. So before I jump on this bandwagon, i started trying to figure out what would make one streamer better than another.

 

Everyone agrees that all streamers get the bits to dac with 100% accuracy, that really the ONLY thing that can improve SQ (inre digital front ends) is minimizing jitter.

 

I have to first ask if it is true, that the only thing that is sent (in addition to a reference voltage) is music and jitter, and the music is proven or accepted as 100% accurate, then the only thing remaining is JITTER that all these millions of different solutions are really trying to improve on, right?  Or is there something else we are trying to resolve for besides jitter?

 

I have asked around, and it seems, as usual, depending on who you ask, there are many different opinions from the ultra-objective, to those that rely only on subjective input, and then everyone else is in between.  Regardless of any of that let's take on those that first suggest OMG, greatest ever MASSIVE IMPROVEMENT, would they even care if they were to measure jitter (remember the only thing that exists is music and jitter as far as the dac input is concerned) and there was no jitter regardless of which solution was used?  Or if the jitter was so low, that everyone agrees that any decent dac can more than compensate for picoseconds of jitter?

 

Many of those that consider themselves objective, will suggest buying any cheap streamer is fine any decent ($1K) dac will compensate for any jitter so don't even worry about this area.  I am kind of curious about SACD players of "yester-year" that people would pay big bucks for, how the jitter compares to a solution today?  And how a high-end SACD player compare SQ wise?  Were people as crazy about which SACD player had the lowest jitter like hobbyists today that jump on every bandwagon screaming OMG massive improvement every other day?

 

I, personally, am of the thinking, hell for $30 why not try it, especially since supposedly it kicks SOTM's ass and I thought i would like an SOTM if i could budget it....but now, knowing that it is only jitter that we are trying to compensate for, and I have a marantz streamer that states they specifically designed the box to compensate for jitter, and many objective opinions suggest jitter is a known entity and has been managed for years....is it even really worth the effort, if i typically lean more toward objective opinions.  Then there are all these people trying it, and want to know which is the best nuc to use it with...i mean, does it really matter??? seriously?   Will one make a difference in jitter at the dac input that the dac can't compensate for over another?  Really?

 

Maybe i will just wait and see what the next bandwagon will be, and skip this one also....after all, it's just subjective....might as well get wooden cable lifters?

 

At least i am glad i didnt jump on the SOTM wagon to find a $30 linux distro will beat it.

 

I really don't mind subjective opinions inre the dac and beyond, but my logic tells me that we should be able to be "objective" up to the dac's input before conversion.  We should be able to measure jitter at the dac input and clearly see if one solution is cleaner than another?    Or is there something else besides music and jitter before the dac input that is not measurable?

 

Okay, I’ve been thinking about jitter since the mid-nineties for VOIP (voice over internet protocol). We’ve been measuring it since then. Archimago talks about it regularly on his blog and doesn’t consider it much of an issue. See his Raspberry Pi articles they include jitter measurements. Personally, I’ve measured it in my audio systems and it is inaudible.

 

More streamer software that you would like is open source. You can get it yourself.

 

Quiet is easy and inexpensive to do. Gamers, the scientific community and studios need quiet PCs. Gamers make the availability of quiet parts easy to source. They have volume and competition to keep prices down.  Puget Systems has good overview of quiet for their Serenity Line.

 

I’ve written about using an original Sony PlayStation 1 as a CD and SACD drive. It worked well. You will occasionally see one still used as a SACD drive at shows.

[beerandmusic]

44 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Okay, I’ve been thinking about jitter since the mid-nineties for VOIP (voice over internet protocol). We’ve been measuring it since then. Archimago talks about it regularly on his blog and doesn’t consider it much of an issue. See his Raspberry Pi articles they include jitter measurements. Personally, I’ve measured it in my audio systems and it is inaudible.

 

More streamer software that you would like is open source. You can get it yourself.

 

Quiet is easy and inexpensive to do. Gamers, the scientific community and studios need quiet PCs. Gamers make the availability of quiet parts easy to source. They have volume and competition to keep prices down.  Puget Systems has good overview of quiet for their Serenity Line.

 

I’ve written about using an original Sony PlayStation 1 as a CD and SACD drive. It worked well. You will occasionally see one still used as a SACD drive at shows.

 

Great, i am very happy you responded...I have "pretty much" the same beliefs, but am open to change of beliefs, and if you are willing to discuss, i would be extremely happy to chit-chat a bit.

 

I have read from Archimago and find very reliable and believable and have high trust iin him, so i will see what he does share inre jitter.

 

My main questions are these:

1.  If we are talking just about the digital front end, trying to get music bits to the dac with as little noise as possible, and if jitter isn't an issue, then why is there ANY difference at all whether you use an SOTM, Rendu, Audio-linux on x86, regardless of we use a celeron, i3, or i7?  or are you one of many other skeptics that believe there would be no difference?

2. Do you also believe then, that it doesn't make a difference at the resolution of the music even up to quad dsd in regards to jitter?

3. What about does it matter what power supply you use or if you use decrapifiers on the usb out or not?  I do believe that I read that Armichagelo doesn't believe the decrapifiers do anything, but possibly add more jitter (but maybe that was someone else that said that?).

4. What about other "normal" voltage noise?  Is there any noise that would cause degradation in the digital front end affecting the DACs output that is not jitter related?  (when i use "normal" voltage, i mean within mfr specs...not like a bad ps).

 

My personal opinion, CURRENTLY, and subject to change, is that jitter "may" effect SQ more than what many engineers believe, especially high speed dsd, but certainly not on the order of "OMG MASSIVE IMPROVEMENT".  I read a paper yesterday that suggested nanoseconds of jitter can impact harmonic distortion, and even Marantz suggests that jitter can afffect soundstage, so I am not 100% convinced that small amounts of different jitter "can" affect SQ, especially at quad dsd rates.

 

It would be nice if someone could point to a "whitepaper" that would suggest x amount of jitter cannot impact SQ, but anything above x amount can cause these issues....and then determine what is the minimal hardware/os spec that would be acceptable as to not affecting SQ and where to measure it. 

 

If you could answer all 4 questions as to your belief, share a white paper, or even just comment, i would be most appreciative....same to anyone else that would be brave enough to share the opinioin without fear of being jumped on....it clearly is a very debatable topic...religion is easier.

 

[beerandmusic]

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Norton, great point with the SD Card. The laptop I run my office music system has an SD slot. I played with it a little for music, but SD cards didn’t have the capacity I wanted back then. Now a 256 GB SD card might have real merit in a phone with a good DAC chip in it.

 

Not a phone, but nice portable unit....I am always looking at those, and curious how they would stand up to an external dac....

 

This looks nice == TWIN ES9018 DAC chips, 2 SD slots (up to 512gb) and supports DSD....really curious how it would sound plugged directly into an integrated mcintosh amp playing native DSD music off the sd card and battery ps.

 

https://www.onkyousa.com/Products/model.php?m=DP-X1A&class=Portable

[beerandmusic]

^^^ PS, in my thread, i don't care

3 hours ago, davide256 said:

Its worth trying. It can't make the hardware better  but it seems to eliminate some OS/software caused harmonic defects.

 

Agreed, the streamer can't make hardware better....digital front end just trying to get the music bits to the dac to do the real magic with as little noise as possible....there shouldn't be ANY "OMG MASSIVE IMPROVEMENTS" here, and this is one area that should be OBJECTIVE....i undersand DAC and everything past will always be subjective, but we need to get the digital front end to a point where it is clearly OBJECTIVE only.

[Rt66indierock]

29 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

Great, i am very happy you responded...I have "pretty much" the same beliefs, but am open to change of beliefs, and if you are willing to discuss, i would be extremely happy to chit-chat a bit.

 

I have read from Archimago and find very reliable and believable and have high trust iin him, so i will see what he does share inre jitter.

 

My main questions are these:

1.  If we are talking just about the digital front end, trying to get music bits to the dac with as little noise as possible, and if jitter isn't an issue, then why is there ANY difference at all whether you use an SOTM, Rendu, Audio-linux on x86, regardless of we use a celeron, i3, or i7?  or are you one of many other skeptics that believe there would be no difference?

2. Do you also believe then, that it doesn't make a difference at the resolution of the music even up to quad dsd in regards to jitter?

3. What about does it matter what power supply you use or if you use decrapifiers on the usb out or not?  I do believe that I read that Armichagelo doesn't believe the decrapifiers do anything, but possibly add more jitter (but maybe that was someone else that said that?).

4. What about other "normal" voltage noise?  Is there any noise that would cause degradation in the digital front end affecting the DACs output that is not jitter related?  (when i use "normal" voltage, i mean within mfr specs...not like a bad ps).

 

My personal opinion, CURRENTLY, and subject to change, is that jitter "may" effect SQ more than what many engineers believe, especially high speed dsd, but certainly not on the order of "OMG MASSIVE IMPROVEMENT".  I read a paper yesterday that suggested nanoseconds of jitter can impact harmonic distortion, and even Marantz suggests that jitter can afffect soundstage, so I am not 100% convinced that small amounts of different jitter "can" affect SQ, especially at quad dsd rates.

 

It would be nice if someone could point to a "whitepaper" that would suggest x amount of jitter cannot impact SQ, but anything above x amount can cause these issues....and then determine what is the minimal hardware/os spec that would be acceptable as to not affecting SQ and where to measure it. 

 

If you could answer all 4 questions as to your belief, share a white paper, or even just comment, i would be most appreciative....same to anyone else that would be brave enough to share the opinioin without fear of being jumped on....it clearly is a very debatable topic...religion is easier.

 

 

I'll comment more but if you're around gamer's and PCs like I am they would have found these issues and would be commenting on them  because the soundstage  would be off.  If gamer's are currently talking about it they aren't around me. 

 

I'm not going to point you to a whitepaper because all they are is marketing documents. But I've tested a Schiit Modi and a basic office PC in my office and not measured detectable jitter. I don't do much with DSD so I can't comment. There is little music I like on DSD. 

[beerandmusic]

1 minute ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

I'll comment more but if you're around gamer's and PCs like I am they would have found these issues and would be commenting on them  because the soundstage  would be off.  If gamer's are currently talking about it they aren't around me. 

 

I'm not going to point you to a whitepaper because all they are is marketing documents. But I've tested a Schiit Modi and a basic office PC in my office and not measured detectable jitter. I don't do much with DSD so I can't comment. There is little music I like on DSD. 

you will find a lot of people on this site upsample everything to quad dsd...so in that essence, all music is available in dsd (wink).

Just out of curiosity, where/how do you measure jitter?  It was my understanding (perhaps wrong) that ALL have measurable jitter, it's just a question as to if it affects SQ or not...

[davide256]

57 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

^^^ PS, in my thread, i don't care

 

Agreed, the streamer can't make hardware better....digital front end just trying to get the music bits to the dac to do the real magic with as little noise as possible....there shouldn't be ANY "OMG MASSIVE IMPROVEMENTS" here, and this is one area that should be OBJECTIVE....i undersand DAC and everything past will always be subjective, but we need to get the digital front end to a point where it is clearly OBJECTIVE only.

Curious... I equate objectivists to "filibuster" and "white paper legal tactics"... the "objective" I see is to impede discovery using dogma. Actual discovery requires diligent experimentation and an open mind. The objectivist credo is  more religion than science.

[beerandmusic]

1 hour ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

I'll comment more but if you're around gamer's and PCs like I am they would have found these issues and would be commenting on them  because the soundstage  would be off.  If gamer's are currently talking about it they aren't around me. 

 

I'm not going to point you to a whitepaper because all they are is marketing documents. But I've tested a Schiit Modi and a basic office PC in my office and not measured detectable jitter. I don't do much with DSD so I can't comment. There is little music I like on DSD. 

 

I wanted to thank you again for reminding me about archimago....I just googled archimago and jitter and found this...

 

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2016/05/measurements-odroid-c2-with-volumio-2.html

 

Although he didn't mention DSD ...i would love to have an update from him, since that blog is 2 years old and he didn't mention DSD.

 

I also found it interesting to hear that he could not find any differences in any of his measurements whether using SMPS or LPS, or using fidelizer or not. 

 

My initial logic was that I didn't believe that the digital front end could make a difference, but with so many different people reporting OMG MASSIVE IIMPROVEMENTS, and even different stereo "reviewers' suggesting one streamer sounds different than another, I started to lean a little to the left....but now after reading above, i am leaning a little more to the right again (I have always been further leaning toward little to no difference, but I still do not discount that there is no possible differences, and don't know if quad dsd makes a difference or not). 

 

If I were to believe that there is no difference whatsoever, regardless of processor, ps, or tuned os, then i would have to believe that professional stereo reviewers flat-out lie (which i can actually believe that some do), how could one device sound better or even different (e.g. rendu vs sotm), and how could reviewers suggest differences they hear.....and what about all the people in the "OMG MASSIVE IMPROVEMENT" threads?  To be honest i have NEVER heard an OMG improvement besides speakers and amps....possibly subtle differences but never OMG improvements even amongst a dozen dacs....and not even able to say i prefered one dac over another for all types of music (e.g. i liiked schiit multibit with rock, but preferred native dsd dacs with jazz, but would never say omg massive improvement of one over another)

 

Back to topic, i tend to ramble....

Anyway, thanks for reminding me about archimago...would love him to comment, and happy to find above link.

 

 

 

[beerandmusic]

38 minutes ago, davide256 said:

Curious... I equate objectivists to "filibuster" and "white paper legal tactics"... the "objective" I see is to impede discovery using dogma. Actual discovery requires diligent experimentation and an open mind. The objectivist credo is  more religion than science.

 

I see that point, but i also see subjecttist as ignorant at times, and unable to apply logic and heavily biased after the purchase.

I am not going to point my needle at 100% in either direction.

 

I guess I would say that I would buy into a subjective opinion, if there is logic behind "as to why" that i could accept in "my logic".

 

Right now, my understanding is that if there is a difference, it must be jitter, but if two kit's have same or comparable jitter, then where is the logic that they can sound different, if all there is, is music and jitter in the digital front end.  For there to be ANY difference, there HAS to be something that is measurable that is different, that I am solid on.

[Rt66indierock]

1 hour ago, beerandmusic said:

you will find a lot of people on this site upsample everything to quad dsd...so in that essence, all music is available in dsd (wink).

Just out of curiosity, where/how do you measure jitter?  It was my understanding (perhaps wrong) that ALL have measurable jitter, it's just a question as to if it affects SQ or not...

 

I measure jitter the same way Arch does. The question is can you detect low levels. I also lost interest in DSD when I found out 51% DSD and 49% PCM is still DSD from Cookie so why bother. And their are few editing tools.

[beerandmusic]

10 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

I measure jitter the same way Arch does. The question is can you detect low levels. I also lost interest in DSD when I found out 51% DSD and 49% PCM is still DSD from Cookie so why bother. And their are few editing tools.

 

You can detect low levels of jitter, the question is do low levels make a difference?  I have read white papers (not marketing), that suggest jitter can cause harmonic distortion and affect soundstage. 

 

I don't understand any of what you said inre DSD.  All the big software programs support upsampling, and tons of hardware too....hell even some AVR's are capable,  and Dolby jumped on the bandwagon too....and have for years.  I prefer native dsd to upsampled, and prefer software to hardware upsampling though...that or even convert offline and play natively.

[Rt66indierock]

18 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

You can detect low levels of jitter, the question is do low levels make a difference?  I have read white papers (not marketing), that suggest jitter can cause harmonic distortion and affect soundstage. 

 

I don't understand any of what you said inre DSD.  All the big software programs support upsampling, and tons of hardware too....hell even some AVR's are capable,  and Dolby jumped on the bandwagon too....and have for years.  I prefer native dsd to upsampled, and prefer software to hardware upsampling though...that or even convert offline and play natively.

 

Then test it yourself and see what levels impact what concerns you. 

 

What bandwagon for DSD? I was begged in early 2017 not consider DSD Vaporware along with MQA.

[davide256]

2 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

I see that point, but i also see subjecttist as ignorant at times, and unable to apply logic and heavily biased after the purchase.

I am not going to point my needle at 100% in either direction.

 

I guess I would say that I would buy into a subjective opinion, if there is logic behind "as to why" that i could accept in "my logic".

 

Right now, my understanding is that if there is a difference, it must be jitter, but if two kit's have same or comparable jitter, then where is the logic that they can sound different, if all there is, is music and jitter in the digital front end.  For there to be ANY difference, there HAS to be something that is measurable that is different, that I am solid on.

One of the reasons I stopped reading Audiogon was the other extreme, the "pointy hat" crowd.

Disagree on "measurable"... that means you have made the "assume" mistake, that you already know root cause. Anyone doing research better have a good chain of

root cause research before they claim they know how to measure.

 

Observable, repeatable, and verifiable comes first. In discovery you often have to build new measurement tools because the old ones don't apply.