Euphony OS w/Stylus player setup and issues thread

[Chopin75]

16 hours ago, Anwar said:

I am having problem with Euphony registration (not trial but proper license).  Even though my internet connection is good, Euphony keeps giving warning message about no internet connection, hence registration cannot work.  Anyone else seeing this problem?  I am using Intel NUC7i5BNH with wired LAN connection.  I was trying to reinstall the RAMroot vs official release for comparison.

Yes i have this issue with the older V2 but V3 trial I have not seen that happening, send Euphony a ticket.

[Chopin75]

3 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

If you run Stylus on your server machine, and StylusEP on your DAC-attached endpoint, you should just automagically see the DAC appear as a device in the Settings of your Stylus machine. If you don't, open a ticket. It should be working...

What is "automagically", really that magical? haha. 

Now, another dumb question, why would one bother to run and also how can one run Stylus EP while also already using Stylus at server machine?  Actually what exactly is Stylus Endpoint?  The stylus starts to play the music but then instead of going to DAC it is routed to another machine before going to the DAC ?

[Chopin75]

2 hours ago, davide256 said:

Trying to resolve an issue with wordless choral harmony, wondering what the effect would be if I upgraded from an 8i3 to 7/8 i7 NUC. Can anyone share their experience

in improvements made from like upgrade?

Have to believe problem is either there or the DAC. Will disclose the symptom later, don't want to bias any response.

Depends on what u want to achieve. Higher CPU would help reduce issues with euphony when it tries to multi-task, eg playing hi res while downloading music to the local drive, or using hqplayer for upsampling,

converting pcm—> dsd and other intense work. Sound in general improves too as long as your power supply is good and not noisy. Usually better dynamic/details.. hi res like DSD or 24/352 benefit most from the more powerful CPU. 

[Chopin75]

Off current topic,  but want to confirm that Euphony Stylus can do native DSD correct ? Can it do DSD512 ?

[Chopin75]

On 10/5/2019 at 11:24 PM, Anwar said:

I have tried DSD 256 with DoP and also native DSD with my Marantz SA-10 used as USB DAC.  However, specific to my DAC, when native DSD is used, there are some problems switching from PCM to DSD - it caused the DAC to freeze.  Adding DAC delay does not help either.  So I just use DoP since I can't tell if there is any SQ difference.

 

I don't know about DSD 512.  There is no studio recordings done natively in DSD 512.  DSD 512 albums being sold today are all upsampled, even though some companies called it remodulation.

 

Please note that the latest version of Euphony has dynamic native DSD.  email reply I received from Željko on Sept 11th:
 

"We implemented dynamic support for DSD native playback - we won't need to recompile kernel anymore in order to support DSD Native playback for new DACs.

Go to Card Info dialog and notice new UI for setting your card DSD format - click set and then power off/on the DAC or just detach and reattach it."

Hmm, I need to first figure out how to do DSD native then. I still need to upgrade my euphony to V3 ! Much delayed. 

[Chopin75]

On 10/5/2019 at 11:24 PM, Anwar said:

I have tried DSD 256 with DoP and also native DSD with my Marantz SA-10 used as USB DAC.  However, specific to my DAC, when native DSD is used, there are some problems switching from PCM to DSD - it caused the DAC to freeze.  Adding DAC delay does not help either.  So I just use DoP since I can't tell if there is any SQ difference.

 

I don't know about DSD 512.  There is no studio recordings done natively in DSD 512.  DSD 512 albums being sold today are all upsampled, even though some companies called it remodulation.

 

Please note that the latest version of Euphony has dynamic native DSD.  email reply I received from Željko on Sept 11th:
 

"We implemented dynamic support for DSD native playback - we won't need to recompile kernel anymore in order to support DSD Native playback for new DACs.

Go to Card Info dialog and notice new UI for setting your card DSD format - click set and then power off/on the DAC or just detach and reattach it."

Yah, native DSD does remodulated DSD512, whatever that means.  Now with the latest Euphony V3 I manage to do DSD native finally! And DSD512 only works with native DSD, and will try to convert to DSD256 if using DoP but it is not successful as no sound comes out. So DSD DoP indeed likely has higher content load and makes it difficult to pass through USB 2. I wonder if USB 3 would work better ?? Or maybe it won't matter ?

[Chopin75]

Hi all,

 

I am thinking of switching from SATA drive to octane drive for Euphony. 

For those using optane drive I know one can use AMD CPU but are there any specific motherboards that need to be used ? I have x370. I know from youtube it states it will work on x470. Just not sure if it can work on other motherboards too. Also, people using octane uses the PS from the motherboard or from a separate PS to the drive itself ? 

Thanks! 

 

[Chopin75]

Hi all,

 

I am thinking of switching from SATA drive to octane drive for Euphony. 

For those using optane drive I know one can use AMD CPU but are there any specific motherboards that need to be used ? I have x370. I know from youtube it states it will work on x470. Just not sure if it can work on other motherboards too. Also, people using octane uses the PS from the motherboard or from a separate PS to the drive itself ? 

Thanks! 

 

[Chopin75]

3 hours ago, FelipeRolim said:

Good morning everyone. After much delay, I finally decided to try Linux which is the new "darling" around the world: the Euphony Stylus. Having tried the massive majority of free and paid Linux (Daphile, Archphile, Runeaudio, Volumio, Jaguar Audio Design, AudioLinux, among others, including even the most basic ones like KODIbuntu), and failed to try programming since from begining a Linux that was superior to Windows in music playback, I bowed to the testing of the internationally commented Euphony Stylus as the best available. It costs nonsense €249.00 (I find it ridiculous to be a Linux), but for all I heard, who calls it "best of the day" is, in fact, right.

 

After much reading to verify the best method of tuning, I used the setting indicated by most users as being superior in sound quality. To do this, (i) loaded the operating system into RAM, (ii) set the buffering of songs to RAM, and (iii) used Stylus mode, which, among others available, has apparently outperformed Roon in native mode and Roon combined with HQPlayer. The Stylus interface is extremely simple, but, because I already passed Roon's free trial, I opted to try Euphony exclusively in Stylus mode.

 

It's the best "finished and ready operating system" I've ever experienced. It's far superior to AudioLinux and any other because it doesn't have that overly clean, polished "tinny sound" that is typical of Linux, which "stageophiles" and "bassophiles" love. Euphony may be the only Linux I've known since I learned how to properly configure a Windows which I really liked. Still loses, by a good margin, to Windows Server 2019 Datacenter Core Mode (17763.593) with Audiophile Optimizer v. 3.00, JPLAY FEMTO and Minority Clean X installed. In direct comparison, Euphony still denotes some dryness and harmonic poverty, while Windows Server 2019 delivers much richer, fuller sound. It's a much more beautiful and organic sound. The voices are correct, which doesn't exist with Linux. So while it's less exhibitionistic than the others and doesn't appeal to excessive clarity to create a false sense of detail and definition, it still has the same timeless inaccuracy that is common to Linux. It's amazing how explicit it is.

 

To hear “audiophile music” sound doesn't easily denote many deficiencies without instant and direct comparison. However, to hear “ordinary music”, which doesn't always have a great deal of attention in recording or (re)mastering, Euphony makes things a little less comfortable but still easily audible.

 

But what struck me most, and I haven't noticed in any other tests I've done, either with free or paid operating systems, is that Euphony limits the music dynamics. The system loses articulation and cannot reach high levels of sound intensity, as required, for example, in Hugh Masekela's Stimela songs and Harry Belafonte's Mama Look a Boo Boo. It sets a clear limit, as if the amplifier clipped, which doesn't exist with Windows and even with AudioLinux. I was intrigued, because never, in an operating system test, did this feature catch my ears. I can't vouch because I don't know the specifics of the project and intend to use the 30 day free trial to exhaust any possibility of improvement of Euphony, but the feeling I got after hours of listening was that in an attempt to "tame" the typical Linux sound that I critique, reducing glare and highlighting in the early harmonics, the developers eventually inserted some algorithm or hit that, while making the overall sound more palpable, limited the articulation, the dynamics.

 

I believe the transport has favored the performance of this Linux, but it's a fact that, for those who don't have the opportunity to draw a direct comparison between a well-tuned Windows and Euphony Stylus, it performs very well. What's more, for those who don't know how to tweak Windows with a deep degree and/or want something that is simple to install, configure (takes less than 10 minutes), play and forget, it's the best I've ever had opportunity to meet. It plays well and needs very few adjustments. Just not cheap.

 

By the way, any other tips for improving the playback level? Thanks.

Interesting findings, as linux based system supposedly to be best for audio (at least for a finished product), but perhaps endless personal tweeking on windows can achieve same or better effects (ironically some audiophiles would not even talk to someone who still uses windows or Mac!). I am not computer savvy and I hate windows (maybe also a bit personal, as I am Mac fan) so there is no way for me to do windows with then endless pain of difficulty in finding/loading drivers. (yah, I am rather computer illiterate) . Regards the euphony OS you have, are you still testing the OS using trial version on a USB thumb drive? If so that is quite inferior to using a SSD. It appears that octane drive works best with Euphony OS. The registered paid version is also a bit more stable and so is better than the trial  version.   100% buffer is also important.  I also find Ecache helps a lot if you don't have internally stored music on the SSD.

[Chopin75]

12 minutes ago, FelipeRolim said:

 

Thanks for the contribution, Nenon. I believe my subscription is out of date. I tried Euphony on both computers I have, the Core i3-8100T, with 16GB DDR4 RAM, and the i7-4785T and 16GB DDR3 RAM. In both cases, taking care to have the JCAT USB Card FEMTO as output. Both computers, when running Windows, work much better with TurboBoost turned off (i3 doesn't), just like Hyper-Threading, C-States, and other elements. I did not make any changes to the BIOS, but it was interesting to comment on it. I'm still in the 30 day trial, and I will try to get as much Euphony as possible. It will have to evolve a lot to overcome Windows. Thanks for saying, I will try it on the weekend.

 

 

Thanks for your comments. As I said: (i) loaded the operating system into RAM, (ii) set the buffering of songs to RAM, and (iii) used Stylus mode. I still have some things to try, so tips like Nenon's are very welcome. I'm going to experiment with changing the processor clock this weekend, and reactivate some features of the motherboard and processors.

I see , thanks! Now just to confirm, are you using USB Stick to load the OS to RAM ? This reminds me that I am not sure if SSD makes a big difference with RAMroot (I have not tried RAMroot) but per these guys here, optane + RAMroot works best. 

[Chopin75]

Well at least now we Euphonians have a goal to beat Windows ! (personal grudge against Bill gates, hehe).  I suspect it is possible that there needs to be a match between the SW and HW for each system. I am not doubting windows based system and there has been others who have shown Win to be just as good or better. In the past it makes sense for those already using windows to continue to work with it. For me a Mac user has nothing to do with Windows, so a fresh new Linux based system, easy to use, makes sense. Besides, euphony will continue to improve and reduce any bugs etc. For windows, you are on your own. I still believe that euphony has a great future, esp with the continuous development they have and customer service is excellent.  

Also I suggest when testing the win vs euphony,  that one should mention what music files they use, e.g PCM 24/96, active upsampling  or not,  DSD256, DSD512, DXD etc.... these affect the sound a lot, as a system that plays 24/96 well may suck at DXD/DSD256 simply SuperHIRES requires more CPU and gets noisy....  I would avoid sample conversion e.g PCM-->DSD and vice versa. this adds more factors involved. 

[Chopin75]

2 hours ago, Nsxturbo said:

I loaded Euphony into RAM, which is available on the trial version and of course I used 100% buffer. not sure why loading to RAM from Optane would make a difference?

The trial version and using USB stick can both negatively affect sound, surely without Ramroot but even with Ramroot there is still processing in the USB stick, unless u do the complete app loading into Ram and then pull out the stick, but u then cannot do cache and would rely on pulling music from off site which can degrade sound. Ideal way is to put the OS in a SSD, as the euphony is designed to do, and since Sata is slower and may be noisier an M2 drive via PCle may be optimized way. I presume u are running win on M2 drive, which is already an advantage. I don't know if these factors would give such significant negative effects. 

[Chopin75]

3 hours ago, Nsxturbo said:

Hey Chopin75 and austinpop(Rajiv)

 

Thank you very much for the additional insight on some Stylus tuning tips. I will give them a try. Also, I probably for my own piece of mind purchase, will purchase the license, just to make sure I’m getting the most out of Euphony. At our level of reproduction every little change seems noticeable. I know I’ve recently gone optical between my USB DD converter into the M-Scaler and dual BNC to optical and back from it to the Dave (OptoDX) and a second optical out of the M-Scaler to my digital crossover for my mid bass and subwoofer amps, So no doubt that RF, EMI, leakage currents, all play a large part in computer playback based systems. 

PC tuning for specific hardware and software is definitely part of the puzzle, even if it there seems to still be trade offs from one setting to another! I expect that my learning curve for tuning streamlined Linux based software will be way quicker than Windows  !

 

 

Hmm, you have an interesting setup so that could be important. what exactly is this M-scaler ? An galvanic isolator ? but not is not a DDC ? The optical input to DAC definitely helps in reduce EMI/EMF  etc. I also use an optical  USB cable with great benefits but I have no galvanic isolator so my system is sensitive to noise from the server so I use power cable filters as well to counteract AC noise. I probably need a better LPS too.  It is possible that certain gear HW won't match a SW.Let's say if euphony OS prefers a simpler system it may end up working better without M-scaler (which looks like some hardcore upsampling device) for eg. I for e.g has taken my own igalvanic device after switching to Euphony OS on dedicated PC (but before I was using a MacBook that requires iglavanic isolator). 

I also took out a tube buffer as it clouds the sound after switching to balanced output on my DAC. Is it possible M-scaler matches Win better ? Maybe win running low res and then switched to HiRES in Mscaler works nicely. Running low res on the PC actually generates less noise than hi Res.  

What would happen if you run DSD256 (most demanding for CPU) without M-scaler ? (I presume M-scaler cannot do DSD ?)

Or DXD (24/352) directly to DAC.  Removing certain parts of the chain can unmask certain tings for the better or worse in SQ....

Maybe you can try moving components around ??

[Chopin75]

Hi all,

 

I am trying RAMroot for first time. After rebooting,  what does "safe root fs to disk" mean?   Thanks!

 

Adrian 

[Chopin75]

Also I am unable to undo the Ramroot despite rebooting after disabling it ?!   SO I am stuck with RAMRoot.  I have about 30% RAM used now with RAMroot. I am not sure if there is a lot of improvement esp I can't go back to non-RAMroot to compare! 

[Chopin75]

18 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

I had the opposite problem, after loading and rebooting the message was "ramroot will be enabled after reboot" and it was repeating time after time. You need to open a ticket with Euphony. In my case Željko fixed the issue with remote, there was something with USB stick.

He fixed it remotely but did tell me to press "Safe fs to disk" before rebooting and that should reboot back to non-ramroot. I have not tried that yet. I am still doing non-RAMroot. I am not sure if my system the Ramroot would work fine. It was not sounding good yesterday when I play DXD, which I think is because of its large memory.. It occupies 28% of memory with DXD and with 24/96 about 22%. I have 8 GB. Maybe I need to burn in my RAM. It has always been only 5% used. So I suspect RAMroot may not work well for large files. However, I would later increase my RAM to 16 GB using the acclaimed Apacer ECC RAM. I think then RAM quality becomes very important running RAMroot.  It may also be I have not upgraded my Euphony V3 properly. Somehow I am still stuck with parts of V2 config, It is weird. He says I need to reburn the entire OS and erase everything in the SSD including the music.  I have 1 TB of music though all are backed up. He said I can backup via network and then reload the music. I think I will just burn it onto an optane drive as everyone is praising that. The M2 drive us much  faster and supposedly more quiet. It has been a pain to upgrade to V3. Problem with Euphony is it can be a bit buggy. But good thing the support in general is very good to excellent. The development is also quite progressive,  

[Chopin75]

2 minutes ago, bobfa said:

I have been using V3 for quite a while and have not had any issues like you are describing.   I never had V2!.

 

Many of us are using the Optane devices that are 32GB.  I do not know of others trying the larger ones to even comment on them.  I found that any SSD even the NVME variety do not sound as good to me.    I do not know what your machine is but ECC RAM  will not go in a lot of machines!   I think that the testing of the Apacer RAM was NON-ECC, but I have not been following it closely.  I have the ECC variant on order, we will see if it actually works on my motherboard!

 

I would not make any assumptions about file size  and sound quality.  I am less than enamored with keeping music on theses servers to try and keep the system properly up to date, backed-up, etc..

 

*** It really sounds to me like you need a fresh start.  I think your install is broken.  Sorry.

 

Bob

I am thinking of doing Octane 64GB, so I will have a bit more cache space.  I have Ryzen so hopefully it should work on ECC RAM! I am in same shoes as you, got the ECC on the group order. What is your MB again ? I have the x370 

[Chopin75]

Looks like RAMroot is behaving better now, and sounding quite nice, likely better than regular, but I did do something to my transformers/conditioners that may have helped.Will see how it goes.I have not done A/B as I am afraid I will screw up again with not able to go back to regular non RAM. 

[Chopin75]

49 minutes ago, FelipeRolim said:

I downloaded the latest version of Euphony and restarted the experiments. I set it up as I had done before and added the suggestions colleagues left on the topic. Improved, but aspects that don't relate to what I wrote that Windows is superior. That is, it continued to play incorrectly from the timbre point of view, without the same dynamics and articulation of Windows and with a remarkable poverty in textures and harmonics. With the monitor connected to the computers, I tried everything without success. It was the last time I tried a Linux.

Sorry, remind me again, are you doing euphony RamBoot from USB stick ?  How do you run windows again? Is it inside a  M2 drive or other drive ? 

[Chopin75]

3 hours ago, FelipeRolim said:

 

Hello. Unfortunately my testing period with Roon is already gone. At the time, I had tried Roon against JPLAY FEMTO, and I considered Roon worse in sound quality. Either way, even better, I'd never pay the price for its lifetime license.

 

 

I didn't understand your question exactly. On my computer I use only Windows Server 2019 Datacenter in Core mode, Audiophile Optimizer v. 3.00, JPLAY FEMTO and Minority Clean, all running from RAM, besides making over dozens network and BIOS adjustments. Thus, the SSD works exclusively for transporting music files. But, let's leave that to when they open a specific thread.

 

The big thing is that in my experiments over the years I've never been able to make the network connection between two computers outperform one computer alone while relying on a router or switch to do the IP and network management work. That is, neither bridge connection, router, nor switch played better than a single computer. What the bridge connection does is simplify the path and allow only one cable, but still has absolute dependency on the router for network management. So these "standard" Linux provided to us don't work as well. But, once I learned how to set it up correctly, without the computers relying on the router's DHCP anyway, then both Windows computers started playing substantially better than anything I experienced. I think one of the secrets is on the network, but only one of them, and there's much more behind it, such as the manufacturer-specific Windows drivers.

 

 

I don't use M.2 because I consider the SSD, with 5v linear power supply and audio grade SATA cable deliver better sound. I tried the internal and external storage. Since Windows is loaded into the RAM from a .vhd file, I can easily swap it through GRUB4DOS.

 

I'm far from saying that I know how to teach someone how to set up a computer. Adjustments are personal and depend on a number of factors. But in my case, I've achieved something very interesting over almost 10 years experimenting. The fact that Linux has few possible tweaks can help, but it is also a limiter when trying to get the most out of a computer. So, or the user is committed to an "easy ride" solution (Euphony is the best alternative I've experienced with this bias), or an effectively audiophile solution. In this case, personally, I prefer Windows, which to me sounds at the top level.

 

To see how there's a difference: I tried several frequencies of the Core i3-8100T processor. Between 3.10GHz and 2.40GHz there's no sonic difference using Windows. But, with Euphony, using 3.10GHz plays better, as Nenon suggested. Therefore each case is very particular. It's not easy to get the most out, so, I like to have a lot of adjustment variables. I don't spend days or waste time testing more than listening. Adjustments have been occurring gradually over many years and many more hours of listening. That's why I won't waste time on a Linux anymore.

I see, the Euphony is best optimized using SSD SATA (with external LPS) or as some people prefer Optane M2 drive connected directly; without external LPS, so to have fair comparison you need to load Euphony onto your SATA (which you should NOT do as it would erase your Win!) So basically u need another identical SATA SSD drive that is same as one you use for Win and then run Euphony on it. This I think may make a big difference as compared with Euohony on USB stick or running on other external drive. Running RAMroot still matter  s regards to the SSD as there is still retrieval of file/programs etc from the OS in the SSD even if the music is not even in the SSD. 

I am also not sure if running RAMroot is best for Euphony as it depends on your HW, e.g for me, right now RAMroot is not as good as running regular but then that is because probably I have large music files and not even RAM memory. Or maybe I need separate LPS to RAM ??.. 

[Chopin75]

10 hours ago, motberg said:

Hi, thanks for the comments - are you doing any upsamping with Euphony?

 

I need find time to install the trial and test without having to travel for work during the trial, but want to try mainly for sampling to DSD...

I remember some comments that Euphony's own upsampling to DSD was very good, on par with some HQPlayer filters.

For this test, I will use my Win10 box using a 25W i5 (10A/19V with HDPlex DC-DC + 10A/12V to CPU), but easy enough for me to upgrade to one of the known power configurations if moderate success with the preliminary setup which is ready to go.

 

(note Win10 is absolutely no comparison to WinServer...I have 2 PC's with Win10 Pro and 2 with server versions, and the server OS is a completely different environment to my experience)

Hey the euphony uses embedded HQplayer to upsample or switch from PCM—>DSD. I don’t think the stylus itself can upsample dsd, or do conversion to DSD unless I am just not aware that it now can (with the V3). The audiogd R7 plays native dsd really nicely now with euphony that i don’t feel the HQplayer has any benefits. The dirty noise of DSD256 is gone. i can also play native DSD512 from euphony though it eats up lots of RAM so 100% buffer cannot be done. Per euphony programmer guy there is a bug he needs to fix for DSD. BTW, your USB bridge is amanero or F-1 ? It needs new fw to play DSD512, and the F1 needs a faster clock 40..hz i think.
 

oh make sure u have a latest V2 board and at least TDA fw for the DSD as this works much better now with R7

[Chopin75]

2 hours ago, motberg said:

Thanks for the additional comments...

 

The system where I like to try Euphony will be a single PC to Gustard U16 i2s -> Gustard A20H (AK4497 x 2)

I have a native DSD512 classical sampler, and from the brief listening I have done so far think this DSD idea may be something to try for classical. I have also tried the older version of HQPlayer upsampling PCM to DSD256 which sounds promising. I would need to do upsampling for most my files, probably to DSD 256. The Gustard setup is currently seriously popping with DSD though Windows,  so I am hoping Euphony maybe can help with that... the AK4497 generally has some nice attributes as implemented in the Gustard DAC, so I really hope I can fix the DSD popping one way or another. I did give Euphony a very brief try a while back and liked the interface and easy installation, but not evaluated the sound. I heard a r2r DAC with Volumio in my system and that offered a nice sound, different, but complementing, my normal Windows Server setup* with JPlay. I should be able to have a chance for my serious Euphony test later this week - so will report back how it goes and if it offers any help with the DSD popping.

 

Big thanks to everyone who posts here. It seems the Euphony developers are considering these comments and testing/implementing various ideas.. It is pretty expensive, but for someone who does not relish the opportunity to become a Linux expert, such a relatively mature product could be considered money well spent (I follow every AL thread here also... have no idea half the time what they are talking about... jejejeje)... All these Euphony posts and comments are greatly appreciated as they can seriously help potential users get the most out of the evaluation period.    

 

Quick question, my full library is on an external 4TB USB WD Red HDD drive (LPS, Intona, Matrix H USB card, good USB cables). Almost the entire 4TB is full... would it be better to use another drive for the test, maybe a small internal SSD? I am worried that indexing the entire 4TB may be difficult. Or maybe I can point the Euphony indexing to only a single particular folder?

 

*I have another setup for PCM, with 2 PC WINServer to an Audio-GD 8xPCM1704UK NOS DAC that is just perfect for prog and classic rock .. no need to touch that setup currently.. that (NOS7) DAC is very special and I am feeding it with a M10 clock / U16 via i2s also.. It sounds great with upsampled PCM as well as all native rates. Due to problems I have had with JPlay, I want to try changing this setup to HQPlayer, (server and endpoint)... but if Euphony works well on the Gustard (hopefully DSD) system, then will give it a try on the Audio-GD PCM system also. If I cannot fix the popping of the Gustard stuff, then will change the DSD side back to Audio-GD r2r with Euphony.

 

I would not recommend using the 4TB, apart from being too large but that by burning then Euphony image you would erase all the music. Even if you can partition it to just burn the image on there and keep the rest of the music stored it is too risky. Besides, it seems like using a formatted or completely free drive seems to work better. I even have difficulty upgrading my euphony V2 to V3 and would need to erase entire drive (I have not done that yet) to make it work properly.   You can use the USB thumb drive to do a test trial or better still since you are doing heavy duty upsampling, use an internal  SATA SSD drive,  probably 64 GB would be adequate, with this size you can load music from your 4TB  you need to play on Ecache, and also has room to store some music on the SSD.  I burned my trial image with the SSD attached as an external drive on my Mac, easy to do. 

For the PC you need lots of RAM if you were to do DSD upsampling. I have 8 GB and it is adequate but I can't run RAMroot properly, as it sounds worse since with RAMroot playing HiRES I would have > 30% RAM used and that seems to be too much. 

So I imagine you need to stay away from RAMroot with upsampling to DSD512 ! Running DSD512 from my own classical sampler can work fine but only on non-RAMroot mode as it causes freezing with RAMroot (no RAM!) I imagine at least 16 GB for native DSD512 and probably 32 GB for upsampling to DSD...

 

I strongly advise you to test R7 with upgraded V2 board (if you have) and using their latest FW, it cures the pops and DSD noise, and even with my older FW now, the DSD sounds quite amazing, better than PCM for sure. But I was testing using native DSD files and Stylus/ Euphony. I am not impressed with Embedded HQplayer on Euphony. Maybe you are more expert in adjusting the filters. (I can't be bothered figuring that out!) 

 

The popping is less with native DSD on euphony compared with DoP but with HQplayer I seem to get pops all the time. 

 

[Chopin75]

For a while I find running RAMroot on euphony & stylus actually makes the SQ worse. So now I have upgraded my RAM to ECC Apacer  still at 16 GBm and now with RAMroot the SQ has improved quite a bit mainly with better sound stage and more clarity. Has anyone found out too that a better RAM makes the Ramroot better ? I was using G.Skill before.  

[Chopin75]

1 hour ago, Lukasluis said:

 

The NUC does not support ECC RAM however reducing from 16GB to 8GB (removed 1 8GB-stick) resulted in more smooth presentation. I'm using Kingston HyperX CL14 RAM, RAMROOT-enabled.

I use the AMD/Ryzen CPU and MB which supports the ECC.  I am actually going the opposite direction to need more RAM. I have found that large files suffer from SQ due to not having enough RAM. Though using Apacer seems to have resolved this issue. nonetheless 156 GB is not adequate to play DSD512 and in general I have huge files due to listening to classical music with tracks lasting up to 30 min! So DSD256 and DXD takes up lots of ram such that I am having issues when running in Ramroot + 100% buffer on Euphony OS/stylus. I am likely to do 32 GB RAM in future, which if I use Apacer ECC, I don't think will make SQ worse. 

Supposedly using all 4 rails of the RAM would be better than occupying 2 rails with same total RAM. 

So. I will do 4x 8 GB (already using 2x 8 GB) = 32 GB

2x 16 GB would be cheaper but may not work as well, though it allows 4x 16 GB in future!! Such large RAM might indeed affect SQ as it may perhaps strain the LPS, not sure..

[Chopin75]

12 hours ago, bobfa said:

I would like to suggest that we do not speculate but listen and report please.

I am not sure if using ECC RAM would inject more noise as one increases the numbers of RAM. It may be very efficient and noise free. Once I get hold of 2 additional RAM and test them I can report (but they are not cheap!!)  My desire to expand RAM size is mainly due to me running out of RAM when playing DSD512. For now the APacer ECC RAM running RAMROOT is very nice indeed. Will see if I swab back using the old G skill RAM tor run Ramroot again the SQ is work again or not.