Shootout at the Linux Corral: AudioLinux vs Euphony

[LTG2010]

10 minutes ago, davide256 said:

having to acquire a wired keyboard would be my

method of last resort.

I think only a few NUC"s can have cmos cleared using jumper method. A cheap wired keyboard / f2 method should get you back into bios.

[LTG2010]

1 hour ago, jkelly said:

Early on - seems to have much more low frequency energy than my Al/NUC setup.

Oh cr**p I wish I didn't read that!!    😧 😁

[LTG2010]

32 minutes ago, ted_b said:

I want to take off on Larry’s comments on the other thread; that is, that it is possible that the sound of Euphony (@ $299) is matched or even surpassed by the currently-much-more-tweakable AudioLinux various parameters. Has anyone who had tried Euphony feel comfortable customizing AL parameters to try and compare beyond just out-of-box vs out-of-box? 

In theory you can do it because both are Archlinux you can tweak one to sound like the other, but there seem to be some fundamental differences also.

Audiolinux uses real time kernel, meaning output goes directly to Alsa drivers without any mixing or processing keeping the lowest possible latency. It is designed for high power processing although most of us use low power processors to good effect. ( you don't have to use a RT kernel)

It seems that audio processing and optimization is carried out with euphony to get a desired improvement in sound quality ?? If we used say euphony Kernel in audiolinux we may get a merging of sound.

Euphony doesn't offer ramroot or bridging in its current format so its difficult to offer a direct like for like comparison.

There is certainly more low frequency energy and presence to the Euphony 'sound' or if we compare that with audiolinux it could be due to the equipment used, since nothing in theory is being added. Using extreme 2 mode and specific cores for audio adds more energy to audiolinux, but still the theory is to 'add' nothing.

I use DSP to balance out an uneven headphone curve, boosting bass and adding some mid-range presence brought the 2 'sounds' closer,

but not quite the same presentation.

The similarities are very obvious to me both exhibit an open dynamic and detailed sound, more of whats on the recording.

 

[LTG2010]

21 minutes ago, ted_b said:

?  Don’t you compare on same equipment?

Of Course, on my equipment the sonic signature is the same, there is a bit more low frequency energy and general presence, with Euphony a bit more delicacy and refinement with audiolinux I don't think the difference is enough to switch from one OS to the other,

but that's on my equipment eg. on a higher powered server eg. Pink Faun the balance could be different. Maybe once the bugs have been sorted out with Euphony someone can do a more detailed comparison.

[LTG2010]

1 hour ago, Dev said:

@bobfa or anyone know if Euphony can support wifi connection ? Can I initially connect through Ethernet and then configure wifi network ?

There is no root access not sure once you've bought the software. No Wi-Fi setup in the configuration menu maybe it's work in progress.

[LTG2010]

12 minutes ago, jkelly said:

So this week I am going to do a Euphony vs AL final decision.
At this point I continue to be impressed with Euphony.

If you want to level the playing field a bit you can disable alsa mixer in audiolinux as this degrades sound quality, (its already disabled in euphony) See audiolinux server configurations thread page 13, especially if comparing Roon on both systems.

If you want to compare the stylus player, then you can use ''mpd select dac and playback from memory'' in audiolinux.

[LTG2010]

5 hours ago, Dev said:

 

@LTG2010 If you are running in Roonserver/Roonbridge combo, do you need to disable the alsa mixer on server as well ? Shouldn't disabling in the streamer be sufficient ?

I would disable both, on my setup I'm running just server to my dacs network card and the difference is not subtle. It would be interesting to hear your thoughts when you try it.