Euphony OS w/Stylus player setup and issues thread

[Joerg D]

Hello,

I go back to version 108. The sound is fresher and more open.

Jörg

 

[Tatomek7]

1 hour ago, Joerg D said:

I go back to version 108

When back to 108, did you have to ask for new registration code? I've tried to go back to 107, but new registration code was needed, as it changed with completely new installation of 421.

[Smaragdhk]

I wonder why some hear differences in sound with this update… it’s only a feature update, not a system update…

[Tokyokyoto]

I think this latest version sounds fabulous.  I insisted on keeping the older v. going back as far as 11/2020, but I mostly idled at the 02/17 release.  I decided to try the latest version and I cannot hear any negatives.  All good! 

I have a 2 computer setup and have only updated the frontend.  Sounds so good, not sure I even want to hassle with the endpoint.

One thing I noticed regarding irq that made a huge difference in my system is isolating the eth0 and eth1 on the frontend computer.

Thanks Z for the continued support with all things euphony.

[edwardsean]

11 hours ago, Tokyokyoto said:

I think this latest version sounds fabulous.  I insisted on keeping the older v. going back as far as 11/2020, but I mostly idled at the 02/17 release.  I decided to try the latest version and I cannot hear any negatives.  All good! 

I have a 2 computer setup and have only updated the frontend.  Sounds so good, not sure I even want to hassle with the endpoint.

One thing I noticed regarding irq that made a huge difference in my system is isolating the eth0 and eth1 on the frontend computer.

Thanks Z for the continued support with all things euphony.

 

Yeah, after adjusting my system, I love this build too. I also think Z is amazing at support and how responsive he is to the user base!

 

You mentioned isolating using the ethtool command. I've isolated the processing cores to good effect, but don't know how to use the ethtool.

 

I only us a single computer, does this still help? If so, what do you enter into the command line?

 

Thanks!

[Smaragdhk]

That echoes my views as well... sounding wonderful on a single 10i7NUC based system...

I haven't played yet with isolating cores or using the ethtool commands... and I do not run ramroot either.

I found running without ramroot sounder more open and with more air in the mix.

 

So I have the same question here, can anyone advise on a core isolation / ethtool setting for standalone NUC to start from and explain how further tweaks can bring the listening experience to the next level?

I found the user manual to be lacking this guidance.

[c-w]

There is an article about CPU isolation in the support system knowledge base. This should get you started.

[auricgoldfinger]

8 hours ago, Smaragdhk said:

That echoes my views as well... sounding wonderful on a single 10i7NUC based system...

I haven't played yet with isolating cores or using the ethtool commands... and I do not run ramroot either.

I found running without ramroot sounder more open and with more air in the mix.

 

So I have the same question here, can anyone advise on a core isolation / ethtool setting for standalone NUC to start from and explain how further tweaks can bring the listening experience to the next level?

I found the user manual to be lacking this guidance.

 

Look for posts from TheAttorney throughout this thread for detailed, specific information.

[davide256]

9 hours ago, Smaragdhk said:

That echoes my views as well... sounding wonderful on a single 10i7NUC based system...

I haven't played yet with isolating cores or using the ethtool commands... and I do not run ramroot either.

I found running without ramroot sounder more open and with more air in the mix.

 

So I have the same question here, can anyone advise on a core isolation / ethtool setting for standalone NUC to start from and explain how further tweaks can bring the listening experience to the next level?

I found the user manual to be lacking this guidance.

I did not find core isolation useful. But setting CPU frequency to minimum was a cleaner sound. The trade off is if you use a program like HQPlayer for extreme up-sampling,

that will require higher CPU speeds.

[ASRMichael]

1 minute ago, davide256 said:

I did not find core isolation useful. But setting CPU frequency to minimum was a cleaner sound. The trade off is if you use a program like HQPlayer for extreme up-sampling,

that will require higher CPU speeds.

It’s interesting seems there are two camps here. For me the lower the CPU frequency the more it restricts dynamics. I don’t use HPQ & run 20 cores/threads at 4.8gHz and it sounds considerably better. I suspect quality of LPS dependant. Best thing to do is try both if you can. 
 

Core isolation only works for me if you also use IRQ. 
 

I also have a NUC and tried it using 3.7 v 1.8gHz & 3.7 sounds better but do appreciate it depends where you rate dynamics in the overall SQ. 

[Smaragdhk]

24 minutes ago, davide256 said:

I did not find core isolation useful. But setting CPU frequency to minimum was a cleaner sound. The trade off is if you use a program like HQPlayer for extreme up-sampling,

that will require higher CPU speeds.

Not using Ramroot and also not using HQplayer, I let my Marantz DAC do all the upsampling to DSD256…

Pardon my ignorance, where does one change the CPU frequency on a NUC? Would that be in the BIOS?

My 10i7 is powered by a Keces 19V LPS 

[davide256]

3 hours ago, Smaragdhk said:

Not using Ramroot and also not using HQplayer, I let my Marantz DAC do all the upsampling to DSD256…

Pardon my ignorance, where does one change the CPU frequency on a NUC? Would that be in the BIOS?

My 10i7 is powered by a Keces 19V LPS 

It’s on the expert settings page for Euphony. The values aren’t intuitive, you have to triangulate using suggested min and max values and verify using the display CPU utilization option

[TheAttorney]

19 hours ago, auricgoldfinger said:

Look for posts from TheAttorney throughout this thread for detailed, specific information.

 

I should point out that, as of a few days ago, I've thrown money at my downsizing objective (to reduce box and spaghetti count) and replaced a whole line of components, including my NUC, with a posh dedicated server (see the Grimm MU1 thread). That has it's own linux-based system and is closed-box, i.e. nothing visible to adjust and no option to try Euphony on it. So it's a fond farewell to Euphony - I don't know whether to sell my fanless Porcoolpine NUC 7i7DN, or keep it as spare (anyone interested in buying can PM me to force my hand).

 

As a conclusion, my final Euphony config was:

 

* Ramroot enabled, with 8GB Apacer 2666 RAM.

* Files all pre-buffered before play (TBH, I found this less critical than ramroot, Apacer RAM, or CPU speed andcore isolation below). 

* Low CPU speed of 1.4 MHz (slighly less bright than my previous, also good, 1.2 Mhz. To the person who recently asked, you change this using the Max speed setting in Expert settings, much easier than changing it in BIOS)

* Unlike some others, I found 421 release to sound great in all departments, but the very latest release is as good if not slightly better.

* Core isolation as follows

    2-3 systemd 0 nfm 1 gstp 5-7 irq/131 4      (the full list includes the less significant irq/132 4 irq/135 3, explained in earlier posts)

 

My previous core isolation thinking was to isolate only the really important processes and let the o/s sort out all the rest. So, important to completely isolate was the primary irq, systemd, possibly nfm, and definitely gstp.

I subsequently found that over-allocating gstp further improved SQ - even if it meant sharing some cores. But not to over-do the over-allocation, so left systemd and primary IRQ (USB in my case) completely isolated. Ending up with:

 

     2-3 systemd 0 nfm 1 gstp 1-7 irq/131 4   

 

This gives such a well-balanced sound, with lots to love and nothing to complain about. If ever I should fall out of love with my new Grimm MU1, and go back to an open app and server, then Euphony Stylus will be my fist port of call.

 

[biosailor]

After three months, switching back and forth between Roon and the newly designed Audirvana Studio, I returned to Euphony Stylus and I was immediately taken by Euphony’s extremely good SQ (version 0614). I know that many here prefer earlier versions, but I was struck of the pleasant and yet detailed sound of Euphony! Neither Roon nor Audirvana Studio can truly compete with Euphony’s SQ, although the former two players might have more attractive user interfaces, ultimately the SQ should rule and Euphony beats Roon/AS by quite some margin in that department!

 

I also tend to use simpler UIs, as I am using streaming services much less. Once I like an album, I buy it and incorporate it into my library.

 

Euphony Stylus works flawlessly in my environment: Euphony on an i5 machine > Ethernet > Raspberry Pi 4B running RopieeeXL > USB to Devialet Expert 120 > ATC SCM19. Wonderfully resolving, yet not resulting in harsh treble that is so much apparent in Roon and AS.

 

Now I need to start exploring Euphony’s multitude of system optimization.

[RickyV]

12 minutes ago, TheAttorney said:

 

I should point out that, as of a few days ago, I've thrown money at my downsizing objective (to reduce box and spaghetti count) and replaced a whole line of components, including my NUC, with a posh dedicated server (see the Grimm MU1 thread). That has it's own linux-based system and is closed-box, i.e. nothing visible to adjust and no option to try Euphony on it. So it's a fond farewell to Euphony - I don't know whether to sell my fanless Porcoolpine NUC 7i7DN, or keep it as spare (anyone interested in buying can PM me to force my hand).

 

As a conclusion, my final Euphony config was:

 

* Ramroot enabled, with 8GB Apacer 2666 RAM.

* Files all pre-buffered before play (TBH, I found this less critical than ramroot, Apacer RAM, or CPU speed andcore isolation below). 

* Low CPU speed of 1.4 MHz (slighly less bright than my previous, also good, 1.2 Mhz. To the person who recently asked, you change this using the Max speed setting in Expert settings, much easier than changing it in BIOS)

* Unlike some others, I found 421 release to sound great in all departments, but the very latest release is as good if not slightly better.

* Core isolation as follows

    2-3 systemd 0 nfm 1 gstp 5-7 irq/131 4      (the full list includes the less significant irq/132 4 irq/135 3, explained in earlier posts)

 

My previous core isolation thinking was to isolate only the really important processes and let the o/s sort out all the rest. So, important to completely isolate was the primary irq, systemd, possibly nfm, and definitely gstp.

I subsequently found that over-allocating gstp further improved SQ - even if it meant sharing some cores. But not to over-do the over-allocation, so left systemd and primary IRQ (USB in my case) completely isolated. Ending up with:

 

     2-3 systemd 0 nfm 1 gstp 1-7 irq/131 4   

 

This gives such a well-balanced sound, with lots to love and nothing to complain about. If ever I should fall out of love with my new Grimm MU1, and go back to an open app and server, then Euphony Stylus will be my fist port of call.

 

Congratulations on your new purchase, I think the mu1 is excellent sounding machine. I believe the mu1 also uses a NUC inside maybe you can repurpose your apacer RAM into the mu1 if you still feel a bit adventures. Maybe ask Grimm first.

[jkelly]

1 hour ago, TheAttorney said:

This gives such a well-balanced sound, with lots to love and nothing to complain about. If ever I should fall out of love with my new Grimm MU1, and go back to an open app and server, then Euphony Stylus will be my fist port of call.

 

 

Thank you for posting these settings - they have dramatically improved my i7 headphone system in tone and soundstage. I'll give 421 a chance again - highs have an edge to me - but I'll listen for a week. TY!

EDIT: Actually 614 loaded in so I'll evaluate the latest version for a week.

[TheAttorney]

Sorry, I was typing from memory and made some mistakes in my core isolation settings, and it's really frustrating that this site doesn't allow one to edit a post so soon after writing it.

 

The final recommendation should have been:

 

       2-3 systemd 0 nfm 1 gstp 1-6 irq/131 7

 

I.e. systemd and primary IRQ are each completely isolated, with gstp over-allocated across all the remaining cores.

Which doesn't mean that other variations can't also sound great - just this this was slightly ahead on my system.

Sometimes when I've tried variations, my mind gets muddled and everything sounds much the same. At other times, this one just hit the spot, above all other variants.

[auricgoldfinger]

3 hours ago, TheAttorney said:

I should point out that, as of a few days ago, I've thrown money at my downsizing objective (to reduce box and spaghetti count) and replaced a whole line of components, including my NUC, with a posh dedicated server (see the Grimm MU1 thread).

 

Congratulations on your new server!  I know your downsizing objective has been a long-term, ongoing process.  What other changes did you make?

[TheAttorney]

2 hours ago, auricgoldfinger said:

 

Congratulations on your new server!  I know your downsizing objective has been a long-term, ongoing process.  What other changes did you make?

Well, ultimately I'd really like a single box that I can just plug my headphones into. But there's nothing on the horizon that can do that at the high level SQ I demand. So I currently have a 2-box system, MU1 to existing DAVE DAC/amp.

 

So nothing else planned until next year when Grimm add an optional DAC into the same integrated box, called MU2. If (and it's a big if) Grimm pull off the same magic with their DAC module, then DAVE's days will be numbered - because then MU2 could talk directly to a dedicated top end headphone amp that is powerful enough to drive even really inefficient headphones such as Susvara.

[edwardsean]

34 minutes ago, TheAttorney said:

Well, ultimately I'd really like a single box that I can just plug my headphones into. But there's nothing on the horizon that can do that at the high level SQ I demand. So I currently have a 2-box system, MU1 to existing DAVE DAC/amp.

 

So nothing else planned until next year when Grimm add an optional DAC into the same integrated box, called MU2. If (and it's a big if) Grimm pull off the same magic with their DAC module, then DAVE's days will be numbered - because then MU2 could talk directly to a dedicated top end headphone amp that is powerful enough to drive even really inefficient headphones such as Susvara.

 

Did you try out a Bartok? Not to get too far afield on this thread. I know that austinpop was able to get Euphony running on it.

[TheAttorney]

14 hours ago, edwardsean said:

 

Did you try out a Bartok? Not to get too far afield on this thread. I know that austinpop was able to get Euphony running on it.

I did consider the Bartok. But, rightly or wrongly, I didn't see it as a true server that can fully manage a locally stored music system. I saw it more as a DAVE rival with some networking/streaming capabilities. Not a NUC rival (as I  said, I could be mistaken - it's sometimes hard to unravel the differences between a streamer and a server). The Bartok is also a very large box and, in true DCS style, I'd have to fret whether to also get the upsampler for maximum performance - and that is another large box and cable and power cord and suddenly I'm not downsizing anymore. And the dealer that stocked Grimm/Taiko/Innuos did not stock DCS and I wanted to keep my comparisons simple. Other than all that, I would have loved to have tried the Bartok 🙂.

 

Anyway, interesting though this topic is, to keep this thread on track, I suggest any more questions about Grimm and rivals to be taken to the Grimm MU1 thread.

[flkin]

Someone here asked whether PGGB WV files can be played under Euphony and I had replied yes.

 

Need to quality that by saying low res WV seems fine but I'm having "internal data stream error" message when trying the larger res files like 32/768 or 32/705.

[ASRMichael]

2 hours ago, flkin said:

Someone here asked whether PGGB WV files can be played under Euphony and I had replied yes.

 

Need to quality that by saying low res WV seems fine but I'm having "internal data stream error" message when trying the larger res files like 32/768 or 32/705.

Hi you can’t use WV with 32bit. I got same error. Just untick the wv flac box. I also had to restart my pc to take affect. WV & Flac works with 24bit. That’s my understanding. 

[flkin]

Ah, thanks didn’t know that. 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

1 hour ago, ASRMichael said:

Hi you can’t use WV with 32bit. I got same error. Just untick the wv flac box. I also had to restart my pc to take affect. WV & Flac works with 24bit. That’s my understanding. 

wavpack (wv) is capable of compressing both 24 bits and 32bits, so in this case it could be Euphony unable to handle wv files at 16FS rates. But yes, if wv is the issue, unchecking wavpack/FLAC in PGGB to check if it works is a good idea.