Jump to content

Euphony OS w/Stylus player setup and issues thread


bobfa

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, mikicasellas said:

I was having trouble getting network with my actual ASUS Rog Strix Z490-E + i7-10700K, the ethernet input seems to not be given the task, so when i plug a Ethernet PCIE card things got resolved, but still remains why the ethernet port on the MoBo is not working...

 

Thank you

Is it intel 2.5g Ethernet? The reason I ask is that this specific Ethernet is not supported by Euphony in the current version, will be supported in the new major update later this year. I have the same issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KATARRAZZI said:

Can anyone here using a USB to AES / SPDIF adapter behind the Euphony server?  I am considering buying a Berkeley Alpha USB to further enhance the input quality of my DAC

5FD6734D-B6F8-4523-B73B-9FC5460524B9.jpeg

I recommend Gustard u16 if you like warm sound and do not use hires (which can be a bit buggy on this device), or audio gd di-20 or di-20he, preferably with Uptone Isoregen and LPS. There are a lot of posts on those products on the headfi forum. I use the Gustard and have firsthand experience with di-20 plus external GPS clock, both with isoregen. They increase dramatically USB performance (even with Jcat XE).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone  share good ethtool command line parameters in advanced system settings? I digged in the thread and could not find. Thank you in advance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2021 at 9:24 AM, flkin said:

After testing each process cpu usage when isolated separately, seems there is significant cpu usage outside the listed processes. So I figure that isolating the listed processes from the hidden processes might be good.

 

Found that all systemd processes sound a touch better when isolated so I group them and isolate and the rest into one core too. Then the other computer process into core 0.

 

Given this, my 8-core CPU (non-hyperthreading) isolations are:

 

0 systemd 1 nfm 2 dhcpcd 2 dbus-daemon 2 haveged 2 lvmetad 2 avahi-daemon 2 gstp 3-5 stylus 6-7

Why do you give 2 cores to Stylus? I thought stylus was only the GUI? My instinct would give only 1 to stylus and more to gstp since it’s the player itself, but please let me know what you found!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, flkin said:


Honestly, I can’t remember! Chances are I looked at the cpu consumption of Stylus and allocated the cores accordingly. 

 

My approach at that time was to separate and allocate cores to the listed services that seem to use the CPU.
 

I found that after isolating all the services listed, there was still some CPU action suggesting there are unlisted services running. So I grouped these under Core 0. The only way to separate them would be to allocate another core number to the other listed services one at a time. Thus the manual allocation of core 2 items
 

Later I found that I liked systemd type items separated and I gave it core 1

Try reducing Stylus from 2 cores to 1 and see which you prefer?

Thank you, that’s useful and makes sense. Will definitely try your settings and go from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mantis07 said:

This is what I get with just Stylus running - no Roon. It seems AMD doesn't show gspt? I'm wondering what is suggested to try first? Maybe isolate stylus and go from there?

 

Thanks!

 

image.thumb.png.b4a9cc8a7bc53920b0fac5a2b62aa0d8.png

You can give a few cores to stylus, maybe 2 or 3. It is very strange that you don’t have gstp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want extreme isolation, you can use this as a template (based on 32 virtual cores):

 

0-1 systemd-logind 2 systemd-journald 3 systemd-resolved 4 systemd-udevd 5 avahi-daemon 6 systemd-timesyncd 7 lvmetad 8 dbus-daemon 9 haveged 10 dhcpcd 11 udevil 12 nfm 13 stylus 14-15 gstp 16-31

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, edwardsean said:

Well, I updated to 421 and, unfortunately, it looks like I have a minority report. I listened for several hours and went back to 102 to compare and stayed there. Why?

 

421 is missing the magic of 102....

 

I'm pausing to give ample time for heads to explode. I know, I know, if "musical" is an unhelpful term, then where does that leave words like "magical." So, let me 'splain.

 

I do like 421 better than 216/217. There is an increase in clarity and detail like 216/217, but it is smoother, without the etched brightness. Also, an increase in the definiteness of the imaging gives the render a sense of higher quality in general. 

 

However, as much as I prize precision, my goal is always a "creamy clarity." In my Dave-based system, 421 is still missing the fullness and fluidity of 102. 421 is smooth, but I still find the sound somewhat tight and small. On balance, 102 is missing 421's focus and is too diffuse, but there is simply this gorgeous analog texture and freedom of flow. It also renders with larger scale and dynamics to my ears. 

 

I know audio is often a compromise of these elements, but my favorite pieces, hardware or software, accomplish the impossibility of combining both. For me "creamy clarity" is where audio "magic" occurs. In my system, at least to my mind, 102 has more of it over 421. 

 

I very much dislike giving up the performance of 421 both sonically and in functionality.  I will try it again for a longer period of time, and see if my mind can settle into it. From experience I don't think letting it settle in my system will alter this impression. 

 

For now, I'm so glad to be able to retain 102.

 

 

 

 

 

I have to say I mostly agree with the above (as of now, since I’m not 100% decided yet). First impression you get on 421 is that it is high quality: excellent sounding, very refined, precise, with a nice/slight  touch of warmth added that was missing in the recent releases. A sense of relief that the sound came back with this version.
 

But in the end, 102, while definitely less focused and refined than 421, is fuller, more natural and coherent, in my opinion. 421 is a little bit more “hifi” sounding. 
 

421 is quite impressive sonically. But 102 is a bit more romantic and easy going - for my taste. It’s definitely worth trying both but I personally went back to 102.
 

I’m making tweaks in my system and will definitely try again 421 later on (I went twice back and forth already vs. 102) to make sure, since I do believe 421 has many good qualities and might be system dependent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, mikicasellas said:

I can't make my MoBo ethernet ports work with Euphony, i was thinking that with the new upgrade that issue was solved, is anyone having issues with this ?

This is not the major upgrade yet, only a minor one. Major upgrade later this year…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Airplay trick:

 

if you want to hear an alternative presentation of the sound, give a try to Airplay in Audio System and use your iphone to play Qobuz or Spotify on Airplay via wifi. 

 

there is a significant difference in sound vs Stylus. Yes Airplay is lossy etc but it is worth a try. You - surprisingly - might like the way it sounds.


Plus you can use the native app interface.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PavelDosko said:

Hi guys. Is there any of you who switched to Euphony of Daphile? Intended use Euphony Stylus without roon, without HQPlayer, on one PC (i7 7900, 16 GB Apacer, 128 GB SSD Samsung, HDPlexATX 400, SOTM tx USBexp, powered by HDPlex 300W - iFi iGalvanic3 - DAC Rockna Wavedream, music from NAS and Tidal ). What was the main difference between SQ Daphile to Euphony?

I switched from Euphony to Daphile to Euphony. As far as I remember, I found Daphile very impressive but a little bit less warm/organic/natural than Euphony (v102 only). Both are top notch and worth trying. And I did buy the euphony license in the end. Agree that the support is great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...