Euphony OS w/Stylus player setup and issues thread

[flkin]

12 hours ago, bos3812 said:

I still have the problem that Roon can't find Stylus. Robert promised me he will look into the changes of the latest Roon update and will come back on it. Am I the only one or are there more Euphony V4 users with this problem? I also have a streamer with V3. This streamer doesn't have this problem. The question is if it is software related or didn't the installation of V4 go completely well?

 

5 hours ago, Tatang said:

I have same problem as yours. Still cannot connect Roon to euphony, Roon sees euphony but can not connect. Thats why i migrate to stylus at the moment, which i experienced the uplift in SQ but Roon interface is much more user friendly. Please update me if Robert already fixed this Roon integration. Thanks

 

I have no issues playing the Roon + StylusEP option. This is the Roon inside Euphony not from outside. First time running it, took a long time for Roon to update but eventually succeeded. Thereafter, no issues. Sounds terrible but works fine for me.

 

Normally I run Roon outside my streamer in a separate system but point it to the same database as Euphony. This is not for playback, only for file discovery so I can find info on albums/performers etc. and also see what I have in my joint Local/Tidal/Qobuz database. I then return to Euphony to play the files. A little cumbersome but works well especially for the case when I find the online version of the album I want to hear in Roon and add it from there, it appears in Euphony as the top album (sort by last added).

 

I control my playback on an iPad with both Euphony (primary playback system) and Roon (info only second system) showing at the same time to get best of both worlds.

[flkin]

Same thing happened to me. Took a long time and several tries. Eventually the update completed. During the update, there is no indication that anything was happening. 

[flkin]

Something really strange happened when I was testing the sound of different USB cables attached between my streamer to the DAC. I found I couldn't get a consistent sound when switching between cables and upon further tests, using just one USB cable, found that Euphony v4 (4.20220729) sounds different with different boot techniques.

 

When v4 seem unstable and required a reboot, I used to just press the front power button and after a few seconds my streamer would shut down. Rebooting a few seconds later with another button press. One would have thought this was a standard reboot that would fully reset the streamer but it isn't. A removal of the power cord from the streamer for a few seconds and pressing the power button a few times before reinserting the power cord makes a better sounding reboot! 

 

And I have further found that after the PC (power cord) reboot, one has to restart Stylus under Audio Systems menu to make the system stable. A reboot alone isn't enough. So the process of

 

1. Powerchord remove reboot and

2. Restart Stylus under Audio Systems menu

 

makes my streamer under v4 sound more consistent. And I managed to continue my USB cables tests which ultimately reconfirmed my earlier findings using Euphony v3.

 

 

Take away - Euphony v4 is highly unstable and at most alpha software. For people that just wants a music interface to work, this isn't for them. If you are willing to live with half the functions not working properly or consistently but want that glorious v4 sound, then v4 might be worth the trouble.

 

[flkin]

10 minutes ago, Smaragdhk said:

I would like to keep cho the same findings with reboot process, I also follow same process @flkin mentions above to get consistent sound.

 

after each reboot I almost always get the same nagging error requesting to restart the app again… anyone else has this too?

 

 

Yup I used to get that too from time to time. Also errors relating to connection to internet.

 

But (power chord remove reboot + Stylus restart after) seems to have solved that. For how long, I don't know yet.

[flkin]

24 minutes ago, Holzohr said:

Strange, the trial seemed very stable to me. I was about to upgrade both Euphony server and endpoint but missed the Paypal option so I stopped.. lol.

 

Each time something goes wrong I swear at the program. Then it works and the sound is just so good, makes the stress worth it... 😅

[flkin]

On 8/3/2022 at 1:29 PM, flkin said:

I will have a chance to compare Euphony v4 with Win10 IoT Enterprise LTSC / JPlay (Custom ISO) both installed internally in the same streamer this coming weekend. The streamer is built by @Anwarand will be on demo in a HiFi show in Kuala Lumpur from the 5-7 Aug.

 

Not easy to get a comparison for this - most streamers are usually optimised one way or the other. And Win10/JPlay setups might not have been tuned well to get the max sound achievable, but that will not be the case here. Thanks Dr.Anwar for setting this up!  😄

 

Looking forward to hearing the differences between the 2 setups and plan to report my findings here.

So I was able to hear Euphony v4 side by side a custom Windows IOT with JPlay Femto. Each was installed into its own separate SSD in Dr.Anwar’s self made streamer through a Harbeth stereo pair with 3 self made subwoofers. 
 

Doc was kind enough to take precious show time to setup and exchange SSDs for the comparison. The Euphony was using ramroot and JPlayFemto kernel streaming. I brought a list of 6 high res tracks I’m familiar with but there was no streaming setup as apparently it didn’t sound good so we had to use local files only.

 

This is what I wrote to Doc after the show:

 

” The sound of your show setup is very different from what I’m used to in my own system. Also perhaps our target sound is a little different too. Natural sounding and imaging is what I look for. 
 

Despite using tracks I’m familiar with, what I heard was so different from my own memory of the music that I found it difficult to compare the nuances of the different OS setups. Nevertheless the broad strokes I take away from the session was that your Win/JPlay setup seems less harsh in the upper mids and higher frequencies while maintaining details. But the bass was loose and not present at the lowest frequencies. Nevertheless, as displayed in your show, setup, I prefer your Win/JPlay software over Euphony. 
 

Euphony sounded harsher in comparison with the bass tighter but till not touching the lowest registers.

 

I still can’t conclude overall that the Win/JPlay software is better than Euphony as the Euphony defects I heard is not present in my own system under Euphony 0729 with ramroot. Not a trace of harshness, soundstage wider than the room boundaries and tight bass playing down to 30Hz clearly with texture. (* at least with normal tracks and lower with demo tracks) “

 

I asked to purchase a copy of his software setup to compare in my own system but Doc said he couldn’t do it due to licensing reasons. So my quest to compare JPlay Femto with Euphony continues.

[flkin]

Željko was in touch to say he’s figured out the cause of the recent instability - to do with Qobuz responding in ways not anticipated before and thus his code having issues. 
 

Hopefully this will be resolved in the next release and we’re back to Euphony working well again. 
 

 

[flkin]

[flkin]

44 minutes ago, RichardK said:

Is this available already as a stable release? I do not see it. The beta did not fix the Squeezelite issue for me

 

The above is the recent beta release. Doesn't seem to be any new stable release yet.

[flkin]

It’s beta so things won’t totally work. Like Tab edits used to not work but now just crashes Euphony. 

[flkin]

33 minutes ago, Tatang said:

I tried kernel 5.18 which is the latest.....but in my system i still prefer kernel 5.14.2. Kernel 5.14 is more musical, bigger soundstage and less harsh

Totally agree. 5.14.2 is best in my system for same reasons. 5.18.0 is too digital sounding. 

[flkin]

2 minutes ago, PavelDosko said:

Someone here asked a while ago about comparing the SQ Euphony V4 with another solution. Also because I am dissatisfied with the way Euphony treated existing V3 customers, I tried the JCAT solution, namely Windows Server 2019 + JPLAY Femto. In my setup SQ JPLAY the Femto test version outperformed the V4 in terms of detail in music, tone decay, front-rear space, and overall analog sound. A lifetime license of JPLAY Femto with further innovations costs 150 Euro.

 

Did you do any optimisation to the WinSer19? Or just used it as is?

[flkin]

22 hours ago, PavelDosko said:

It's been a bit quiet here, do you have any new knowledge about the V4 version?

 

Not knowledge but something interesting I discovered under Euphony v20220905/5.14 kernel. For me 5.14 kernel offers the best sound - great focus, details and texture but over time I’m finding it slightly less musical than I would like. A touch tiring after many hours of use. Of course this is system dependent and there may be other ways to adjust for it but I’ve found a way from inside Euphony v4 - the use of HQPlayer. I’ve been using HQP on and off for many years but have always found it to be a two edged sword, offering focus and detail at the cost of hardness and loss of organic feel. Not anymore, under Euphony v4 HQP seems to offer detail with an organic musical presentation. 
 

Select the Stylus/HQPlayer option under audio systems (2nd from top) and using the HQP v4.30.3 with the following settings. These work for me but it would depend on each system and DAC. Also upsampling works best under NOS conditions. 

HQP website configuration:*
Output mode - Auto

PCM - Sinc-Mx, TPDF, 768 (if possible)

SDM (DSD) - Sinc-Mx, ASDM7, 12288000 (DSD512 if possible)

 

Euphony expert settings:

Governor - schedutil or low power equivalent

core isolation - nil (HQP allocates its own cores)

 

This adds a holographic, musical presentation to Euphony v4, kernel 5.14 and moves it another step better. 
 

A little tricky to get it set up and the HQP interface is still a little buggy but for the sound, it’s worth trying. Already tried this in two other systems and both confirm the improvement heard. 

* from inside a web browser click the blue button “HQPlayer web ui”

[flkin]

In Euphony v4 you can upsample using HQP or Euphony’s own upsampler. The latter is easier for sure but I didn’t get the same results. 
 

I’ve described the HQP way in the post above - the main difference in v4 is the config page of HQP has to be opened as a separate web page by pressing the HQPlayer Web UI button. And this is only possible when trying from a webpage version of Euphony (Euphony.local). 
 

But if you just wanted to launch HQP without making any setting changes, just switch to and select HQP as the output device. This is only possible if the DAC is connected and on. 
 

Not as easy as in v3 for sure. 😅

[flkin]

Perhaps best to try and listen for yourselves the kernels offered. I found 5.18 not to my liking at all. Enormous amount of details and too tight. 5.11 too blur especially in the bass. For me 5.14 was the best compromise but needs some tweaking to optimize the sound. To each their own I guess. 

[flkin]

Using Stylus alone connected to USB DAC, v4 is currently pretty stable for local and streaming files. For HQPe, local files are fine but not yet for streaming files. Here it plays only a single file then stops. For both Tidal and Qobuz. 

 

This is unfortunate as the HQPe in Euphony v4 sounds very good. 

[flkin]

On 10/7/2022 at 11:48 AM, flkin said:

Using Stylus alone connected to USB DAC, v4 is currently pretty stable for local and streaming files. For HQPe, local files are fine but not yet for streaming files. Here it plays only a single file then stops. For both Tidal and Qobuz. 

 

This is unfortunate as the HQPe in Euphony v4 sounds very good. 

Turned out that after updating to the latest Euphony beta and updating to the HQPe 4.30, the problem went away. 
 

Playing streaming files through HQPe is working as expected.

[flkin]

11 hours ago, BCRich said:

New Beta released btw…..

 

Been working with Z past few days on an obscure gapless playback bug that affects both Stylus and HQP playback. Bug might be obscure but pretty serious because the effect on a playlist of different resolutions is that fast forwarding, reversing and switching tracks has issues. Not immediately but repeatable. Switching off gapless solves the problem and since gapless is only necessary for an album of the same resolution, this won't be an issue. Hopefully this beta has solved it.

[flkin]

Just a heads up about using HQPe in Euphony.

 

After a season of music and switching off the DAC/Pre/Power, the CPU usage shown in Euphony drops to low as expected. However for my AMP CPU (8 cores) a single core unexpectedly jumps to 100% usage after a few hours and stays at 100%. The issue is simple to resolve - the usage can be stopped by restarting, rebooting or switching Audio Systems.

 

My installation of Euphony is with Linux kernel 5.11 with HQPe 4.30.3.

 

But it's easy not to notice this and overnight a single core in the CPU might become overstressed and overheated. At the very least, its lifetime shortened. So anyone using HQPe inside Euphony should be informed and take the necessary precautions. As a preventative measure, I have chosen to switch audio systems after each use and switch back to HQPe at the start of a session. After checking my logs, Željko has noted the issue and suggests it's to do with the 4.30.3 HQPe version. His planned solution is to find time to update to a later HQPe version.

 

Another suggested solution by Z:

 

"Stop command for HQplayer - you have to hold CTRL (or SHIFT) when you click Play/Pause button in Euphony - then instead of sending 'pause' command to hqplayer Euphony will send 'stop' command - which should in theory prevent hqplayer from any latent background processing." This is only possible for those controlling Euphony from a computer.

 

In the meantime just be aware of this issue.

[flkin]

3 hours ago, di-fi said:

Hi @flkin,

I did not mind reading your complete audio setup in your profile and I only quote the very first line above (so yes I made it through the end 👂and it was worth it!).
I try to get the whole picture of your hardware setup WITH the music(files).
The whole audio setup seems isolated except for one wifi connection. I suppose you exclusively listen to local files to exploit the Euphony buffering. But where do these files come from? SSD in the PF server? 

My question:

For music listening I understand you do not use any switch of any type to isolate your listening room because you isolate with wifi. But did you ever try if any type of Buffalo, Etherregen and so on as discussed here (many reviews) did have any effect on your listening experience, maybe before using wifi? And with a super steady wifi connection nothing can beat it (fiber)? But does this wifi connection only serve the second setup for exploring and exclusively the first setup to connect with a tablet to the Euphony server?

 

Just trying to understand the music flow in your setup and the relation or benefit of isolation through the only wifi connection. A short answer or link (if you posted earlier) will do.
Always a pleasure to read your experiences.

Cheers,

Paul

Hi Paul @di-fi

 

Not so sophisticated actually, I built my hifi room without a LAN wall socket when I was using CD playback and so had no choice but to use the WiFi method! Haha 😆 But turned out that using WiFi would be my preferred method of connection anyway for isolation reasons.

 

In my earliest experiments with ethernet connection I had my Orbi wifi router connected to a complex network of reclocked devices including a SOtM DSG105 switch w/clock mod. This was their early switch attempt prior to their current sNH-10G. I found the reclocked switch helped a bit. At that time I was using the SOtM sMS-200 as the NAA. Later I moved to a reclocked EtherRegen feeding my Pink Faun 2.16x but I was one of the rare people that found it didn’t help my system making it more detailed but at the same time harder sounding.
 

Now my LAN system is a WiFi Orbi (powered by SOtM sPS-500 into a 5A Stammhein HPULN through a 16 strand PoE cable of my own design) direct to the Pink Faun streamer via the SOtM dCBL-CAT7, iSO-CAT6, dCBL-CAT7 LAN cable set. I’m pretty sure this isolates my system sufficiently to make the LAN connection sound the same as local files (separately powered internal SSD). 
 

Reason for this is that Euphony buffers streamed files as well as local files. Both Tidal and Qobuz up to 2 files in advance. So the playback is effectively bit perfect local from RAM. I haven’t tried again with v4 but when using Euphony v3, I couldn’t tell the difference when I disconnected the LAN cable from my Pink Faun during streaming or local playback indicating that the cable wasn’t causing any issues (leakage currents or otherwise) that I could hear. So there wasn’t any need to try to do further isolation. 
 

I wrote about this here in a long winded, rambling post. My Euphony buffering observations are at the end.

[flkin]

Hey Paul  @di-fi

 

I’m not sure if Euphony v4 still buffers 2 tracks of streaming files as over time. I’ve noticed that Qobuz files take longer to play or skip. I suppose it’s time to test again. I’m pretty sure HQPe through Euphony doesn’t buffer total files, more like only 2-3 seconds or so from the way my hardware drive access led blinks. I once asked Z about letting HQPe have access to the buffered track for skip ahead and good sound reasons but he said he’d rather let HQPe do it’s own buffering. Jussi has the opinion that a large buffering is not good and might even affect smooth wifi access on other devices in the home and prefers to use a trickle method. Personally I’m not convinced a full download of small track sizes will affect the rest of the home at all. 
 

The hardware stuff I’ll reply privately as it’s getting off target. 

[flkin]

Latest Euphony v4 under Stylus and HQPe seems stable enough to use (I didn't test all the functions like Roon and NAA) and is quite a step up from v3 sound wise. But playback from Stylus under all 3 offered kernels is not quite the sound I'm looking for. I find 5.11 chubby sounding, 5.14 and 5.18 are both good but overly digital sounding. But then comes HQPe. With that combination, I'm finding both 5.11 and 5.18 sounding glorious depending on the filters/dithers used. Presently I am using 5.18 kernel with some of the simpler filters/dither of HQPe 4.30.3 and I'm getting much of the details and tightness of Stylus but with a warmer analogue sound. 

 

One is always tempted to use the most advanced latest/greatest options in HQPe but I'm finding that the simpler options are the best sounding. 

 

And since this is an Euphony thread, I would mention that I've also compared Euphony/HQPe with the stand alone HQPe with it's own bootable OS (hqplayer-embedded-4.32.5-x64avx2.7z) booted from a USB drive and front end controlled by the HQPDcontrolv4 app from my iPad/iPhone. The HQPe OS is intriguing since I only want to use HQPe and wondered what it would be like to just have HQPe running without Euphony in the background.

 

The result is yes HQPe alone is pretty amazing sounding. It's like moving to a 4K, high contrast, high definition video from standard 1080p. Also the HQPDcontrol is a good free app and arranges local files in a way that allows fast and quick finding of albums/tracks. The handling of playlists and Qobuz files is another matter though and can be improved.

 

But after a week or so of testing, I'm feeling tired of the nature of it's sound. Returning to Euphony/HQPe was a welcomed move, enough details to create the "being there" effect and analogue enough to make it sound musical. Furthermore, the Euphony interface is more advanced and allows Tidal streaming. HQPe stand alone cannot do Tidal at this time. 

 

I'm thinking its a pro/con situation. Both options has merits but presently, I'm preferring the Euphony/HQPe package.

[flkin]

On 11/3/2022 at 3:42 PM, Yiakubou said:

I've also settled with HQP running on Euphony (kernel 5.18) as I've found it slightly better than having HQP on Jussi's image. Then I've also settled for some time with filters that are quite old (poly-sinc-ext2 and NS4 for PCM) - I know this is DAC dependent, but I've been using these filters over 2 very different DACs. Only recently I got DAC with AK chip that can do DSD bypass, started using HQP's DSD modulators and that sounds best to me now.

 

And yeah, if using HQP, I wouldn't mess with buffering, core isolations or whatever other expert settings. Let HQP handle it on its own...

Your findings are similar to mine. I’m finding the 5.18 kernel works best, and the ext2 and NS4 filters do sound amongst the best settings. In my own AKM system, my favourite PCM settings are with even simpler filters - IIR with TPDF. But there’s a little trick to make it all come together. The AKM is a 32bit chip but it sounds better with soundstage closer and larger when forced to use 24bit. And upsampled only to 192 max. I’m still keeping PCM files and DSD files separate. For DSD, I like settings of FIR, WIDE and the ASDM7EC modulator combo upsampled to DSD128.

 

HQP has a high number of settings and to find an optimal combo is so difficult. I’ve spend years looking! But in general, I’m getting the most analogue sounds when using the less advanced settings. If you value organic sound over detailed precise sounds the above is where you can start. Then fine tune from there.

[flkin]

21 hours ago, Yiakubou said:

.. I've found out after some time that I get the best sound just using Euphony Stylus / Stylus EP in bit-perfect mode via USB direct to DAC. After so much time playing with HQP and deliberating which filter combo sounds best lol! On the other hand it's a kind of relief as I don't need to be neurotic about HQP filter settings anymore.

..

 

Coincidently, I have found the exact thing too! After spending countless hours fussing over HQPe settings, I also have found Stylus with 5.11 kernel sounding best in my PF. The options offered in HQP is a strong distraction for those of us that love optimising. I'm enjoying music more without it.

 

Did Zeljko make some background changes to the kernels without informing us? I could swear it sounds better now that it did before.

 

So back to the bit-perfect cycle, no more upsampling .... for a while anyway

[flkin]

2 hours ago, BCRich said:

I have tried the latest Beta 20221028 numerous times; I use HQPe and it is not working properly for me either. Similar Track/Buffer playback issues.

I think I submitted a Ticket but never got a response. Reverted back to the most recent stable release.

Mike

Try switching gapless playback off