Euphony OS w/Stylus player setup and issues thread

[di-fi]

On 4/11/2022 at 8:10 AM, Billgates307 said:

i have the 20200712v3.img 

would that help you?

Thanks for the offer, I went through comparing 3 for a while. I thought 108 could be worthwhile but I rather not try any other and move on. Besides I am putting together a new server, so plenty other priorities to make that work.

[di-fi]

1 hour ago, dc-audiogeek said:

a number of features that haven't been enabled yet

Great! Features like?

And what about features that are enabled? 
Take your time and let us know please.

[di-fi]

Sounds promising Euphony v4. I might try ‘upgrade’ over the weekend. I did not read all of it but where exactly do you go to download these different Euphony v4 beta versions? Link please?

Thanks for sharing.

[di-fi]

8 hours ago, dc-audiogeek said:

Just go back a few pages in this thread or go to the Euphony Audio site to get the beta.

I have been there. The only file to download : 22020527beta. I got that one because someone here kindly posted a link.

My question is about :  different Euphony v4 beta versions you seem to talk about. Thanks for the reply anyways. 

 

Maybe someone else knows where to download these different Euphony v4 beta versions?

[di-fi]

22 minutes ago, dc-audiogeek said:

Not sure what you're looking for exactly beyond the responses you've received, but maybe one of the other kind folks here can explain it to you...or you could just take the time to read through the thread.

 

I did read back and you just said : 'Upgraded to 0602 and the shutdown issue is fixed.

Makes me wonder where did 0602 come from?

And before you mentioned: 

Version 601 beta is out but it keeps crashing my server and endpoint. I ended up reverting back to 0527.

And before that: Heads up! Beta version 4.20220528 released.

 

No worries. Thanks

[di-fi]

35 minutes ago, dc-audiogeek said:

 

 

Did you look at the post right above mine? It’s pretty straightforward, eh? I copied it here for you.

If you don't understand my question, don't get upset. My question is open for everyone, not only for you. It's a forum after all. 

[di-fi]

8 minutes ago, BCRich said:

Right on the Euphony Home page is the link to download version 4. I used Belana Etcher to burn the image to my USB Thumb drive, set up your computer to boot from it. Once it is up and running you have to go thorough the process of completing the installation. Once that is done go to settings and expert setting and under Update Channel select beta. From here on in any updates that are published you will have access to. Good Luck and Enjoy!

Mike

Great, very clear. I feel ready now to start this weekend. Look forward to it. Thanks

---

 

https://hdinfo.box.com/shared/static/xozg17k2dqk15olfl60hilequgb3y4jb.gz

 

 

[di-fi]

10 hours ago, dc-audiogeek said:

BCRich is much more patient than i am. Good on you, kind sir.

When we use a forum it's always good to be patient. It's about sharing experiences so others can advance as well. If you do not want to be bothered by questions, you are not obliged to answer. Someone else certainly will.

It was a long wait for v4, finally it's there. Enjoy v4, and just let us know every now and then and try to describe what it means to you soundwise, compared to V3, if you don't mind.  No obligation but I would be glad to hear about improvements and learn more.

Cheers

[di-fi]

Hi all,

I agree Euphony’s current subscription proposal is a little hard to take today for current users. Very unfortunately communication about this major change has been almost non existant, and even today’s only email about the issue is a bit clumsy written including ‘scrapping’ the V3 (this needed a more elegant solution but not doing this would double the valid licenses, they do not want you to have two for the price of one). 

Today Euphony seems to struggle selling what they are good at. I think everyone agrees Euphony came to a complete different level of sound quality in 2 years thanks to financial and technical support from many here and elsewhere. 

 

If it seems impossible to maintain Euphony R&D without additional financial support in the next years, what will be next?  Reading the different totally understandable reactions please consider this: When you purchased Euphony in the last two years for €250 that was a version that none would keep on a drive today. The real value is in the various updates (and the customer support) because we did not know then what amazing sonic advancements were possible within an audiophile quality music player. Only todays version V3 is the one you want to keep, if…

 

As said, the then € 250 fee covered the Euphony licence purchase and also the R&D and upgrades resulting in V3 and more recently the launch of V4. To credit the full licence amount to a user to continue does not make much sense. It has been wisely spent because it gave users the benefit of an evolving player and limitless support for roughly €10/month during 2 years (that is in my case so I am aware there could be exceptions).

 

If the today’s version V3 is the one you like to keep you can. It came a long way.

 

If you prefer to use Euphony V4 instead you just got offered to take a subscription of €5 / month for one year. You can stop after the first year. If you like it you can continue for €10 / month the years after.

 

I admit it is a different way of ‘owning’ Euphony, but added to Tidal, Netflix, Qobuz, Roon and other monthly subscriptions it does not sound so bad. Especially the first year for €5 / month I will give it a try, knowing I won’t look back to V3.

 

Give it some some time, you do not have to decide today, V3 still is very good. I just hope you can see this in an other way because I think the users here are valuable for Euphony as Euphony always has been valuable to them. 

[di-fi]

I agree, and communication is an art. If you are excellent in developing an audiophile player, you are not necessarily excellent in mass communication or even business development.
In individual communication I always had a very responsive Željko on the other side. In my two years of usage I went through many, many versions of Euphony as discussed here on Audiophile style through the years.

I trust and support Euphony’s good work and good intentions based on my experience and what I have been reading here. 
As said, for €5 / month I will give it a try, knowing I won’t look back to V3.

[di-fi]

23 minutes ago, StreamFidelity said:

There are two crucial differences:

 

1. Roon still offers the lifetime license in addition to the subscription model:

 

2. Streaming services like Tidal, Netflix, Qobuz have to pay for the broadcast content. That can only work with a subscription model. Roon or Euphony only provide the software to play. 😉

1) Interesting, maybe Euphony could offer a lifetime subscription? I think think they are still figuring out things. It will bring more important cash-flow in the company, if that is what they are looking for of course. 

2) I only tried to illustrate the financial aspect of €10 a month. Today we all have many of those commitments at the same time. Also the €120 a year sounds more expensive than €10 a month, I am trying to see it in a more positive way.

 

 

[di-fi]

1 minute ago, PavelDosko said:

... V3 was sold as an unlimited license, how can you continue to trust the company that they won't come up with other sales models after a year?

My understanding is you can keep V3 unlimited if you do not upgrade to V4. You mean you would prefer keep V3 but only with support?

[di-fi]

On 7/22/2022 at 5:23 PM, Johnseye said:

 

 

This wasn't shared with me by Euphony, but since you've done it I will ask for the same.  Thanks for the info!

 

Please just let us know, so users still in doubt will understand all V3 users are eligible for V4 for the 12 month offer, regardless the hardware. However if you stay with V3 you have to keep it installed on the same hardware because there will be no more driver updates.
I am sure this will work as you intended, good luck.

[di-fi]

On 7/28/2022 at 12:56 AM, Johnseye said:

 

I asked if I could transfer my v3 license to the new server before upgrading.  Here was what I was told...

 

"please send this request via support.

https://euphony-audio.com/hesk/

You need to open a support ticket about your problem!"

Thanks for sharing! If you did open a ticket, and that is the way to go, it should have been answered by now. Except that I understand they are very busy these days.
The ticket system just allows them to track communication regarding your specific help request.  

[di-fi]

1 hour ago, Antanas said:

Why am I saying this.
When buying version 3, there was an agreement that if after the release of a new version of the software, the old version will be supported even if the user does not want to upgrade, or he upgraded, but then decided to return to the old version. But as it turned out, after the release of version 4, they refused to support older versions. Thus they deceived users.

I am attaching a fragment of the correspondence with the support department:

 

"Hello. 

if I subscribe to version 4, can I revert to version 3 if I decide not to renew my subscription to version 4?"

 

On 2022-07-20, at 17:23, contact <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,

 

"If you have Stylus 3 license you can use without time restrictions on your present hardware which is (obviusly) compatibile with Stylus 3.

New hardware will be incompatibile with Stylus 3 and so it cannot be supported any more.

Buying version Stylus 4 gives you support for 4, not abiltiy to maintan Stylus 3."

 

Regards, Robert

Dear user, we know all that. As Euphony has confirmed with everyone (and obviously also to you):

a) Keep v3, don’t change hardware and you’ll be good to go. That’s what you paid for.
b) Or go with v4.

You can not have both.  Maybe it makes you feel better but please do not complain here in front of an audience. It won’t change anything. Here it is about exchange of audio experiences. Please respect that. Come back here often and you will have a much better idea which one to choose.

Thanks!

[di-fi]

10 hours ago, Smaragdhk said:

 

I just tried Ramroot

Ramroot sounds congested and less air around the instruments

 

10 hours ago, Smaragdhk said:

 

The quest continues :
 

Hi Smaragdhk, you happen not to detail your setup. So i wonder did you try different RAM modules/ are you willing to?

and if so which one stand(s) out?
Maybe different ram discussed here in the past could give more air and less congestion?

[di-fi]

12 hours ago, di-fi said:

 

Hi Smaragdhk, you happen not to detail your setup. So i wonder did you try different RAM modules/ are you willing to?

and if so which one stand(s) out?
Maybe different ram discussed here in the past could give more air and less congestion?

Found a pic of your NUC, Maybe Apacer instead of Timetec SODIMM? (unless you changed since)

[di-fi]

6 hours ago, Smaragdhk said:

 

I looked into Apacer RAM before but it seems hard to find…

I’ve added my audio system details in my profile… I’m quite satisfied with the current sound running Euphony off the Femto M.2 drive. Detailed and dynamic with very open sound stage. That’s why I mentioned running Ramroot is probably counterintuitive since now all audio is cached via the LPS powered Femto M.2 drive rather than from RAM… 

I doubt that changing to Apacer RAM and running ramroot would be superior to what I’m hearing now. If someone has a spare Apacer RAM stick I’m more than happy to try out and report back.

Hi, I have no proof of course, expect that I always use Apacer in different servers and players myself. But a computer will not run ram-less, hence my thinking. Many times 1+1 equals 3, its the synergy that lifts up the total.
looking at your setup, its the cheaper Timetec SODIMM that does not seem to fit in (anymore). I do not want to push, just a suggestion, but you could purchase Apacer SODIMM DDR4 2400 4GB CL17 Tc=-40...85°C for under 60 euros , nothing compared to a Femto M.2. Its a trial and error I admit. I can pm a supplier link if you are interested. Happy listening. 

[di-fi]

9 hours ago, Exocer said:

I have Apacer ram and a Femto nvme powered by external lps. I have decided to leave ramroot off fwiw.

Any particular reason you have Apacer RAM, or is it there because it’s just …there? I am asking because maybe over time with alternative buffering methods the system partition stays on NVMe M2 or other. In (only?) that configuration the once so popular Apacer ram (remember group buy and more?) is maybe not so beneficial any more?

 

In other words are Euphony users NOT using ramroot (that much) anymore in 2022? And if so in what configuration exactly?

[di-fi]

6 hours ago, Exocer said:

I had it years before the femto nvme existed. It made sense to ramroot with apacer samsung b-die based ram modules back then. Other Samsung B-die ram modules sound good as well.

Thanks, just trying to catch up here. For who want's the best today with Euphony. RAM is not important as long as you use M.2 Femto and no ram-root? That's all you need SSD wise (if it can fit all your music files)

[di-fi]

30 minutes ago, Exocer said:

I’m not authorized to approve that train of thought. I dont have ordinary ram to compare with.

 

Also, the Femto SSD I’m using is for OS only. The impact to SQ is larger than you’d expect. For storing music, I use a fairly standard Intel 670P. There is a 1TB femto SSD that may sound even better than the 670P. I have not tried it.

 

Worth noting, the Femto NVMe without external power sounded much more natural and resolving than my Intel 900p back when I compared the two running Euphony V3.

Thanks! Some questions, if you do not mind:

 

Femto M.2 configured with Euphony OS only , no ramroot, cache enabled* or not?

No music stored on Femto SSD (let's say a selection of favorites) for a sound quality reason?

When you explain you did not try the 1TB TLC, because it could/should be inferior?

Any reason to believe storing music files on a separate 1Gig Femto M.2 and OS on the smaller PSLC drive could improve (ignoring the $$). Or if one would have OS and music on two should they both be the smaller PSLT drives? 

----

 

* Just to be clear about cache and it's location according to Euphony website: Option 'Use cache' is a convenience option which will make a copy of any song added to the queue from external resources (mounted USB drives or network shares) and put it in a special /data/Music/E_CACHE folder.

 

Included this from zzyzxphile website:

[di-fi]

Hi,

 

Still, understanding even the minor details, or a judgement of their relative importance helps potential users like me make up their mind. If you do not hear or see it it is difficult to understand how exactly the SSD is integrated in your and other users setup. In the meantime I also found the thread on AS where some of you discussed M.2 Femto a little more than a year ogo. Also very informative if it was only for example the cue for the proper angle power connector to connect to external power.

 

My thinking was, using the cache since it resides on the M.2 Femto could/should give additional benefit. Hence my question. Since the effect of this SSD seems quite substancial maybe someone else reading here tried a second M2 Femto for music storage or as comparison or someone maybe tried caching the music in a partition on the OS drive?

 

Thank you for taking the time & happy listening.

[di-fi]

On 8/21/2022 at 3:39 PM, Exocer said:

For storing music, I use a fairly standard Intel 670P. There is a 1TB femto SSD that may sound even better than the 670P. I have not tried it.

Just to verify, you used Intel 670p and not 760p, as the one compared to Femto M.2 in the diagram above?

[di-fi]

3 hours ago, Exocer said:

 

Sorry if I annoyed you with my questions. As said, thank you for your answers. I’ll transfer my question also to the appropriate Femto M2 thread.

[di-fi]

4 hours ago, bos3812 said:

I had two streamers with Euphony V3, the more complex Asus WS C246 Pro motherboard with Xeon CPU, Apacer Ram and Intel Optane SSD and a cheap Gigabyte GA-IMB1900TN motherboard with build in J1900 Celeron processor and standard RAM and SSD. To my big surprise the cheap motherboard sounded a lot better. Less electric noise is probably the cause for the better sound.

Hi, thanks for sharing. To put this in perspective. When you say regarding V4: 

 

I tried the new kernel version and in one word: WOW!! The first thing I noticed is that the new version is a lot cleaner. Because it is cleaner you can hear more detail. It has more air, a better soundstage, more depth but it also sounds more organic. This is not a subtle change but IMO huge.

 

You tested V4 (installed on SSD) on the cheap Gigabyte GA-IMB1900TN motherboard with build in J1900 Celeron processor and standard RAM and SSD? And it beat hands down V3 installed on the Xeon board/Apacer/Optane  combination? Did you try with or w/o ramroot?

 

I am asking because I am comparing two similar set-ups in V3 and only one will go to V4.