Extreme dual PC computer audio setup shootout between AudioLinux and Windows Server 2019

[FelipeRolim]

3 hours ago, Windows X said:

But I later discovered one of better method than RAMOS. Making RAM Disk to contain audio apps and core Windows audio files can be quite effective and even better than RAMOS because it doesn't need to fetch RAM image of OS before loading first but can load core audio components from RAM directly. It even sound better than RAMOS concept as pure Windows environment. 

 

Ahhhh, did you read my thread in the forum and tested RAMdisk? Hahahahahaha. Just kidding. I was curious about your conclusions, because they are possibly the same ones I came to...

 

PS.: I don't use Fidelizer and I also don't use Windows Server 2019. I use Audiophile Optimizer on Windows Server 2016. Maybe I was one of the first to be able to make RAMdisk with Server 2016. I've tried and I can safely say: my current configuration is appreciably better than AudioLinux, although I haven't exhausted all possibilities. I don't know nothing about HQPlayer and Roon...

[FelipeRolim]

40 minutes ago, greenleo said:

Can you explain how to do the WinS2016+AO in RAMDisk?   I have AO and then I can try a shoot out myself.

 

 

[FelipeRolim]

If someone who doesn't have financial constraints (because it costs more) to hear a Windows and doesn't think better than this AudioLinux or any other Linux (I tried everything I could), this can only mean two things: either the owner didn't know how to properly adjust the Windows/the computer, or the person simply has no ears...

 

There can be little doubt when an XMOS interface is used midway to the DAC because this interface works very well with Linux. Normally, however, only the fact that the manufacturer provides native specific drivers for Windows already allows playback to take a few steps toward Windows (it's a trend, not a rule). Some time ago, influenced by reading (it's amazing how reading creates "needs" in people who make no sense), I tried everything. There's no success in front of a well-adjusted Windows, and my computer has been stoned for more than five years.

 

I don't say this because of AudioLinux, specifically, but because of any Linux (from the "ready" solutions - Daphile and others - to those I tried to adjust for myself). They are simply not good for audio, which I don't consider a Windows "win", since they have price (and optimization software as well), while Linux is free. I also don't write this in defense of the Fidelizer, because I don't use it. I say this because music isn't just detailed sound (which Linux has), music isn't just defined bass (which Linux has), music isn't just an excellent sound stage (which Linux has). Music needs to deliver life, excitement, have as much textures as possible, richer harmonics, and these things, Linux doesn't have. True music is the one we hear with our ears, but we feel with the body, with the heart, and so they convey us expressiveness, emotion, life. I don't like presentations that make it look like we're behind a glass, which, though perfectly translucent, still gets in the way. After years trying a lot of things, and even if I wanted Linux to play better, it didn't. So, I use Windows, which "removes the glass"...

 

And I repeat: I'm impressed to see how the internet (and especially the forums) create "needs" in people. It's the turn of the Uptone, it's the turn of the SOtM, it's the turn of the Linux, it's the turn of the NUC, it's the turn of the clocked switches, it's the turn of the HQPlayer (because ONLY DSD512 can deliver a really analog sound!). Pure nonsense. I'm always waiting for the next "discovery". In any case, don't forget: music is emotion. Feel it, don't just listen to it.

[FelipeRolim]

Hahahahahaha, I completely agree with you, but I know exatly what I listen. What I see, however, are people influenced by the media, who feel the need to have something new and, more than that, to say that it is really good. Some people don't seem to care about what they hear, but about what others say they have to hear. Others simply seek "limpidity", extreme resolution, but forget emotion, life, expressiveness. This has to exist in music, and this is my point. I don't intend to "teach" someone how to listen. This is personal, nontransferable, but it's important to be careful, because we are all capable of being influenced, by the euphoria of something new, by expectation of result, by mood, by everything. We need to be careful.

 

I know about music and much more about musical reproduction, although I know little about musical production. In all these years, no Linux has taken me even close to what I consider correct, faithful to the media, but using it on a computer. It goes against what I seek. It's an opinion, as many others have their own opinions...

 

Streamers can have excellent quality, can be very high level and extremely competitive. However, at the highest level of quality, at the limit, I don't consider that, today, a digital system works without a computer as a transport. I know many CD players, from the basic Sony to the Ayre, Audio Research, Esoteric. I think recently, computers are in a position to be ahead of them with the correct adjustments. I really believe the future is this. No ARM platforms, which don't look good either. I speak of real computers and carefully assembled, in every detail, from the inlet to the USB connection...

 

I really consider Windows far superior to any Linux, but I believe we should record this as more of an opinion, not as an affront or a destrutive opinion. The part that I really consider important is the one that deals with what to look for in musical reproduction. This seems to be being overlooked. We are all here seeking a common goal, which is the pleasure in audio. Of course, the more pleasure, the better...

[FelipeRolim]

59 minutes ago, Advieira said:

 

I think they’re talking Windows server ram mode, using Audiophile Optimizer ou Fidelizer, using Dual PC with Jplay.

 

I wonder how it sounds in a Nuc7i7.

 

 

Speak superficially as this is completely wrong. I'm talking about a completely dedicated computer, as I said, carefully constructed from the inlet to the USB output, from beginning to end. Reading what you wrote, the way you wrote, makes it seem like we're talking about any PC, any hardware (such as a notebook, a MacBook Pro, for example), which is not true. I'm writing about my point of view in the JPLAY forum, in this thread: http://jplay.eu/forum/index.php?/topic/2668-requirements-for-a-dedicated-computer/. But, it is important to reinforce: my point of view.

 

Another detail: I've been using JPLAY for quite some time. Before, I used JRiver, then I went through HySolid, and I already tested some other software, such as Album Player. All cases with superior results to the best Linux I encountered at the time.

 

I haven't had much time to try out all the software on the market, and I honestly think it's a waste of time. Testing for testing, as I see some people do (installs, puts to play and listens) doesn't allow you to achieve any result. We must give each software, on its own, conditions to deliver its maximum. Without this, no result is valid. So, only after I got to the maximum I could with various software, I chose JPLAY, and JPLAY is still showing potential for improvement with specific changes. From the moment I believe that I cannot go any further with JPLAY, I intend to broaden the range of experiments.

 

In any case, it's only important to clarify that, in the same way that the NUC has its strengths, it's still far behind of what I understand to deliver an audiophile-level computer. And if it is to have a NUC to fill up with "pendants" from SOtM, from Uptone, from Sonore, from iFi, then better build a PC yourself. I can assure that can deliver something far superior...

[FelipeRolim]

Hello tapatrick.  No, I haven't tested AudioLinux with a NUC, only with my own computer, and also didn't exhaust all the possibilities of configuration and use that it offers. However, considering the NUCs I've had the opportunity to get to know (not yet the most modern of Intel's - 7th generation and above), I believe they are still limited. Among those I've heard and an optimized Mac Mini, I believe I would opt for the Mac Mini, but would need to compare them directly. However, I speak based on what I heard, and these specific models that they indicate for AudioLinux (NUC7) I don't know.

 

I don't consider my system the best, in its entirety, and it doesn't even touch the best I've heard. However, in terms of software, I'm using what I thought best, for today. I listen carefully, and always bearing in mind that the digital sector is constantly evolving. I try to keep an open mind, but free from these "market trends"...