Euphony OS w/Stylus player setup and issues thread

[flkin]

22 hours ago, StreamFidelity said:

 

I'm not sure if Apacer with ECC should be built into computers without ECC. They have disadvantages because of the high latencies:

MHz: 2666 CL: 19
Calculated nanoseconds: 14.25

 

And they don't have a heat sink.

 

There are good alternatives, for example G.Skill RipJaws V black DIMM kit 16GB, DDR4-3200, CL14-14-14-34 with 8.75ns. I consider low latencies to be one of the key factors behind high SQ. But everyone may see it differently.

 

I don't think that latency is the only reason for high SQ. It's actually pretty complicated with some of these ram factors other than CL contributing as well: tRCD, tRP, tRAS, tRC, tRFC

 

I had the G.Skill DDR4-3200 ram (latency 8.75ns) in my server before switching to Apacer industrial, ECC, unbuffered, unregistered DDR4-2400 UDIMM (latency 14.2ns) and it was a big step up in sound quality after tuning. I wrote about it and about the RAM factors here:

 

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/43629-pink-faun-216/?do=findComment&comment=1073511

 

True, the G.Skill came wrapped in heat-fins but you can add your own heat sinks to RAM. Some are pretty 😎 looking too... pictures and details in the link above.

 

[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.

[flkin]

Ah, thanks didn’t know that. 

[flkin]

Željko's aware of this issue already and has suggested he will look at it in the future. Unfortunately I can't try 24 bits as my demo has already expired. Perhaps later in the year when I have more time I will get a new computer/storage and make the move. I've made a bunch of 32bit wv files for trying in Euphony but I'll just have to wait until Euphony's updated before I can test them.

 

I wonder how much overhead there is to decode a 32/768 wave pack file?

[flkin]

12 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

It should be easy enough to convert .wv files back to .wav files, no? @Zaphod Beeblebrox?

Yes that works, just that I’ve run out of storage space already and with my antiquated computers everything is a chore. 😅
 

Actually I’ve been trying PGGB wav tracks 24/32 bits, 8fs and 16fs combinations but in wav format will have to be few tracks at a time only with lots of administrative downtime in between. To date still working to get that large improvement others are talking about.  
 

11 hours ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

Yes: How to convert WavPack (.WV) files

 

dbpoweramp decompresses wv files to wav in the Mac just fine actually. Very simple click of button process. 
 

I wonder if Euphony would be interested to incorporate PGGB real-time upsampling into their player? I understand that PGGB is ready for sometime like that. Everything would be much simpler then. 

[flkin]

13 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

You have the Vinnie Rossi DAC 2.0 module right? And it has XMOS on USB, and supports up to 16FS, correct? Hmm, that should be a good candidate for PGGB.

 

We can take this over to the PGGB thread, but one quick question: I hope you were trying PGGB with the NOS mode set to ON? I would expect so, else the whole point would be lost.

Yup, using the VR DAC2 in NOS mode. ZB did mention that he expected good results with this DAC and although I do hear some changes it’s not much. 
 

Thanks for following up 😄, let’s  continue this under the PGGB thread. 

[flkin]

9 hours ago, edwardsean said:

it's readily available from the transport controls by either a 5 second press on the play button or right clicking on it. Perfect!

 

Yeah it would be better if that pop up calculated the remaining time on the playlist rather than the entire playlist duration. 
 

Also pressing the power button supposed to cancel the disconnect but instead switches of my streamer! 
 

Work in progress..

[flkin]

Guys, just want to ask whether any Euphony users are experiencing balance issues. I have having balance problems past few months and haven’t been able to troubleshoot it to any specific hardware issue. During discussions with another Euphony user, who is facing the same problem, seems there is a chance that it might be caused by the Euphony program itself. Wondering if anyone else here is facing the same issue as us?

[flkin]

Repeat

[flkin]

1 hour ago, walloon said:

Hi flkin,

 

I had this problem a while ago, left speaker produced no or low sound but raising the volume on the amp or the DAC fixed it. I tried to swap cables, enable/disable by-pass on the DAC, go direct to the amp etc. but I've never been able to figure out what was really causing the issue.

 

I almost forgot about this as it has "magically" disappeared. Now that you are mentioning the problem could be related to Euphony, it may have disappeared since I use Roon with Euphony or with one of the latest Euphony release. 

 

What release are you running? Do you use Roon?

 

Problem started around after the Jan update or so I think. My balance would sometimes move to the right side but usually the bass would more more than the treble. 
 

And mostly only after say 10Min of playing. But sometimes it wouldn’t happen at all. A power off of DAC and preamp would solve this issue if left off for around 3min. Any less and the bal issue would remain. 

I never thought it could be related to Euphony and though it was my preamp. But this would be the third user that faced the same problem. 

 

It seems to be better now but still occurs with the Jun version just less often. Could it be software related? 
 

[flkin]

Let’s see if anyone else has issues then I’ll gather the data and ask Željko about it. 

[flkin]

Which version of Euphony did you use for the comparison? 
 

Did you happen to try the older 1102 also?

 

I agree that the latest Jun version doesn’t correct the Apr version which to many here sounds worse than the 1102 (nov 2020) and Jan version. 

[flkin]

1 hour ago, Anwar said:

 

I use the latest version 20210614.

 

The issue with not using the latest version is that we will be prompted to upgrade to the latest version, can't disable that.

True, but only if you enter into Settings. Otherwise the prompt doesn’t pop up. Of course you won’t get the latest changes too but to me the 1102 sounds far better than the latest 0614 which I find less engaging, more digital with a smaller soundstage
 

Based on memory alone do you have a comment about the older Euphony versions (Jan 2021 and before) compared with the Win10/Hysolid?

[flkin]

16 hours ago, ASRMichael said:

.. I also see the amount of kit you have “gathering dust” some amount of resale value there…

 

The problem of selling dust gathering stuff is to realize the real loss of value! I’d rather deny that and just hang on for now … 😆

[flkin]

4 hours ago, Anwar said:

I have updated from 20210614 to 20210716, and the other partition has 20201102.  Based on my quick comparison, this latest feature update (took < 1 min) improves SQ, back to 1102 sound.  I will do more critical listening and will report back.  I hope others can share their listening impression too.

 

Exciting news if the latest 0716 sounds like the 1102 version!  Will test now and confirm this soon…

 

update - 0716 update is not available to me while on 1102. Only the 0421 version. Which might mean that one has to move to 0421 first then onto 0716 in steps. 
 

Or perhaps just wait a day or two for the update to appear.

[flkin]

Ok, I bit the bullet and tried the 0716 from 1102. Luckily Euphony still allows me to return to 1102 from the menu.

 

Historically this is the software sequence and my recollection of the sound:

 

• 1102 - sound good, enveloping and not harsh. Bass slightly loose, details a little less than optimal. Long term listening comfortable. Harsh recordings play nicely.
• 0102 - from recollection, better than 1102 (haven't used 0102 in a long while). I think a touch more details? I recall this was the version that allowed me to stop using HQP to help with focus. After this, it was bit perfect playback only.
• 0216 - from here onwards, the sound is more detailed, focused but less organic. It's a complete change in character. Euphony is less Euphoric! There was a bug so it was replaced by 0217 the following day.
• 0217 - because of the quick replacement of 0216, there is no way to return to 0102 anymore after going to 0217. For those that stayed with 0216 meant that you could return to 0102 using the menu function. For me I couldn't and had to load 1102 from a fresh USB installation and from here, 0102 wasn't an option. Comparing 1102 to 0217, I much prefer 1102.
• 0421 - from recollection, I prefer 0421 to 0217. Less digital sounding and more relaxed. But still prefer 1102.
• 0614 - After swapping back and forwards between it and 1102, still prefer 1102 which plays nicely with most genres of music.
• 0716 - Not much difference with 0614. Still prefer the less shouty 1102.

 

In my system, 1102 brass has the perfect balance of hardness and smoothness/body. Horn-like. Orchestras play in a huge soundstage and envelop you in the sound rather than leaving you a spectator. But it could do with slightly more texture and slight tightening of the bass.

 

So sticking to 1102 for now. 

[flkin]

6 hours ago, di-fi said:

Really fascinating how you recap all the different Euphony versions. When you mention regarding 1102 “Bass slightly loose, details a little less than optimal”, it makes me wonder what/if other Euphony versions improve on this specific feature? 

I assume for you that would be the ultimate Euphony version (and it’s ok even if that’s only for July 2021 ;-).)

In other words, what version did you like more with a tighter base, and what version has details optimal?  Or did you not hear that yet with previous versions? 

That would be great feedback (for Z). I am aware it is system dependent but I would love to hear that specific version.

Cheers flkin and may the music be with you!

 

Thanks, @di-fi it's all about the music in the end 😄

 

I found that from 0217 (ie February) onwards, focus and bass tightness was more than the earlier versions - but when does it end? I find that with 1102, when the image of say a singer is right in front of you and palpable, does one need more focus? The bass in a live jazz session is naturally unfocused, you can't hear the edges of the instrument like you can with a brass instrument. So do we need tighter bass? That's why I think any valuable improvement would be more towards the texture and micro details. And perhaps a touch tighter bass. Not to say that 1102 is defective in anyway, I find it really good already. Say in Sara Bareilles' "Sittin' on the Dock of the Bay" in her Live at the Variety Playhouse album, the micro details of the audience in the background is almost as loud as her singing and 1102 is resolving enough paint the illusion of the soundstage so well you're almost there at the performance. But at the same time, during the loudest part of the song, her voice doesn't come across as overly hard or stinging. The high tone has just the right amount of energy, bodyweight and reverb. I don't get this balance with Euphony versions later than 1102. 

 

Audio memory is a fickle thing but from memory alone the version after 1102, the 0102 (which is unavailable to me) had the best balance. Please keep in mind that this is only true in my system. Željko knows my opinions, I haven't been silent about this. He was very concerned after the negative comments of 0217 from people here.

 

5 hours ago, k27R said:

Yes thanks so much for your assessment. Did you try changing core isolation strategy with each of the versions? Or is that not enough to overcome the sound of the Euphony version?

 

Yup, all my comparisons were after trying core isolations and ramroot. Tried to optimise each to the best I could before deciding which I like best. The 1102 I am using today is with ramroot but without core isolations. Sometimes with HQP but mostly not.

[flkin]

On more thing to add, HQPlayer must be running for the access to work.

[flkin]

My best of both worlds is to use both simultaneously :

 

- Stylus for playback

- Roon for music discovery and finding albums/tracks.

 

I set up Roon on a on a different server. When I find streamed files I want to play in Roon, I just add to the Roon database and it appears inside Stylus automatically at the top of the list. If I don't want to keep it, I simply delete from either Roon or Stylus and it disappears in both apps.

 

On an iPad, you can run Roon in full screen mode and Stylus as a slide in app, so they are both visible at the same time.

[flkin]

On 7/21/2021 at 1:12 PM, flkin said:

Ok, I bit the bullet and tried the 0716 from 1102. Luckily Euphony still allows me to return to 1102 from the menu.

 

Historically this is the software sequence and my recollection of the sound:

 

• 1102 - sound good, enveloping and not harsh. Bass slightly loose, details a little less than optimal. Long term listening comfortable. Harsh recordings play nicely.
• 0102 - from recollection, better than 1102 (haven't used 0102 in a long while). I think a touch more details? I recall this was the version that allowed me to stop using HQP to help with focus. After this, it was bit perfect playback only.
• 0216 - from here onwards, the sound is more detailed, focused but less organic. It's a complete change in character. Euphony is less Euphoric! There was a bug so it was replaced by 0217 the following day.
• 0217 - because of the quick replacement of 0216, there is no way to return to 0102 anymore after going to 0217. For those that stayed with 0216 meant that you could return to 0102 using the menu function. For me I couldn't and had to load 1102 from a fresh USB installation and from here, 0102 wasn't an option. Comparing 1102 to 0217, I much prefer 1102.
• 0421 - from recollection, I prefer 0421 to 0217. Less digital sounding and more relaxed. But still prefer 1102.
• 0614 - After swapping back and forwards between it and 1102, still prefer 1102 which plays nicely with most genres of music.
• 0716 - Not much difference with 0614. Still prefer the less shouty 1102.

 

In my system, 1102 brass has the perfect balance of hardness and smoothness/body. Horn-like. Orchestras play in a huge soundstage and envelop you in the sound rather than leaving you a spectator. But it could do with slightly more texture and slight tightening of the bass.

 

So sticking to 1102 for now. 

 

A while ago, I wrote above that I liked Euphony version 20201102 best. That has now changed.

 

For various reasons, I decided to do a full reinstall of my downloaded copy of 20201102 from a USB drive. Boot from the USB and choose to install/repair current installation in the streamer. That went smoothly but my playlists stopped working. Reaching out to Željko, he said to try updating to the latest version and see. That I did and my old playlists worked again. I didn't have this issue before during moving from 20201102 to the current 20210716 but that was simply doing a toggle/reboot from the Euphony settings and not via a complete reinstall.

 

Looked like I had no choice but to stick with the 20210716 version. 

 

However, the sound character changed. I earlier felt that 0716 was too hard sounding and not organic enough but now it's organic but yet detailed - a step better than the old 1102. I now believe that my Euphony installation from a series of updates over years 2020/21 corrupted some files. But a fresh reinstallation and update repaired that and now shows what the latest version of Euphony 0716 is capable of. And it is good.

 

Don't do updates to software while Ram Root is being used. I think it was this that caused my issues.

 

At the time I was doing this software switching, I upgraded my pre-amp from Vinnie Rossi's LIO-DHT to the current L2i-SE. Not sure if this has anything to do with the sound changes but it might have contributed to the better organic sounds. Whatever, 0716 sounds very good in my current system today.

 

[flkin]

3 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

I don't have an installation of Euphony to refer to at the moment, perhaps someone here can answer these questions.

1) In a system with more than one storage drive, does Euphony show those as one pooled drive, or separate drives?

 

2) Is it possible to direct Stylus to play to an installation of HQPlayer elsewhere on the network rather than the embedded version included?

For storage, Stylus can show both - pooled under the main albums and under Files shows the files separately in the drives pointed to

[flkin]

8 hours ago, ngocpham said:

Could you please show me how to set up like this? Thanks so much!

I have Roon on my Synology NAS and Euphony Stylus on another computer

Say you use an iPad to control your music, are you able to run both Roon and Euphony on it? If so you’re already there. Only Euphony needs to be playing in your main system while Roon’s Storage just needs to point to Euphony’s database or wherever you keep your local files. So Roon sees everything Euphony sees. 

 

And when you need to find streaming music, just switch to Roon. After finding the album add it to favorites. Switch to Euphony and the favorite will show as the last added album. 

[flkin]

On 10/9/2021 at 1:59 PM, PavelDosko said:

OK

for me Euphony Stylus  no filters, no oversampling, no Roon, no HQP = best SQ of my Rockna Wavedream

 

good luck

 

My experience with upsampling over the years has been varied but mostly positive. Good way to enhance details but not easy to find a consistent setting that worked for all types of music. I found it necessary with Euphony until around the end of 2020. 

 

However with the latest version of Euphony/Stylus 20210716, HQP upsampling or PGGB files aren't adding much to the sound in my system. Playing files in their native resolution to my NOS DAC seems to sound the best now. Very natural with full details and harmonics already. PGGB files and upsampled files sound sharper and over tightened without adding more details in my system. Recently the only upsampled files I do like are NativeDSD DSD512 files upsampled off-line with HQP Pro. Still natural sounding but they don't come across as a whole lot better than NOS files. 

 

A big step towards sounding natural came with my pre-amp upgrade to the VR L2iSE from the already excellent VR LIO-DHT, some QSA fuses and some Bochinno RCA connectors. It's easy to forget that the streamer isn't the only part of the system that matters. It's astonishing how much echo, reverb and ambient sounds there are in recordings, audible without upsampling and sometimes almost as loud as the music itself. 

[flkin]

Using the QSA purple analogues - 2 in power amps and just ordered 1 for the preamp (only the pre section of the L2iSE) after testing with a QSA blue and there is benefit. They differentiate between analogue, digital and sub fuses but I’m not aware how they are different. 
 

I experienced a large step up in natural sound after the initial power amp switch. Thanks to @AngeloVRA for the heads up about these fuses. 

[flkin]

I’ll reply privately @auricgoldfinger
 

I wonder when the next update of Euphony is coming? It’s been a while…