Jump to content
IGNORED

Euphony OS w/Stylus player setup and issues thread


Recommended Posts

I went back to Stylus version 108 with my Summus because I thought 421 sounded a bit dull in comparison. Streaming directly to my DAC via Ethernet sounded better than the Summus on version 421, more lively. Version 108 and direct Ethernet still sound different, with Ethernet having a little more liveliness but a little less focus and refinement.  I may flip back to 421 and compare again. I would love to have a version of Stylus that's a clear winner sound-wise. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, dc-audiogeek said:

I went back to Stylus version 108 with my Summus because I thought 421 sounded a bit dull in comparison. Streaming directly to my DAC via Ethernet sounded better than the Summus on version 421, more lively. Version 108 and direct Ethernet still sound different, with Ethernet having a little more liveliness but a little less focus and refinement.  I may flip back to 421 and compare again. I would love to have a version of Stylus that's a clear winner sound-wise. 

Hmm, what is your DAC? That may be the way to go moving forward. By removing Euphony/Summus means 1 less component to thinker on. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dc-audiogeek said:

I went back to Stylus version 108 with my Summus because I thought 421 sounded a bit dull in comparison. Streaming directly to my DAC via Ethernet sounded better than the Summus on version 421, more lively. Version 108 and direct Ethernet still sound different, with Ethernet having a little more liveliness but a little less focus and refinement.  I may flip back to 421 and compare again. I would love to have a version of Stylus that's a clear winner sound-wise. 

 

I think we'd all like to help Euphony achieve the best possible sound, at least the one that holds the most broad appeal. It seems to me that it would be helpful if we could find consistency in our feedback across systems. 

 

So, can I ask you to elaborate a bit. Are you saying that 108 is more "lively" than 421 which is more "dull"? If so, can you be more specific as to what you mean by dull and lively? it's hard for me to interpret 421 as sounding "dull" in general terms. 

 

Thanks!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going back to an item raised a while back in this thread so posting again to get the latest. While I use Qobuz as my main music streaming service, I do have a Deezer Hifi subscription that I am mainly using on my phone. Deezer has a lot of music Qobuz does not have, so while Qobuz became my main music service in my main setup, I keep Deezer. 

 

A few days ago I discovered Deezer Hifi is now supported on LMS. I would like to test Deezer Hifi on my system so need to get this working with my Euphony server/end point (same machine). I can run LMS on my Synology NAS (looks complicated as I need to tweak stuff) or potentailly grab a RPI and run it there. 

 

Any recommendations are welcome

Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks, After tweaking the rest of my system, I am now focusing on the music server. Some of these topics may have been discussed earlier, but it is very difficult to parse through and figure out what the best configuration is. 

Here is what I currently have.

 

* Roon running on a NUC

*SoTM NEO is the Roon end point

*NEO to SoTM Tx-USB Ultra

*SoTM Tx-USB Ultra to DAC

* SoTM ethernet switch

 

NEO, Tx-USB Ultra and SoTM switch are all clocked by an external Mutec Ref10 SE120. An Uptone Ethergen is on it's way to compliment the SoTM switch. All of the above are powered by Farad Super3 LPS. Sablon Ethernet and USB cables.

 

 

Here is what I want to optimize further.

*Replace NUC with a music server that has sCLK-EX for the external 10Mhz Mutec clock

* This server will be a Euphony server

*It will be powered by a Farad Super 3 LPS

 

 

Here are my questions.

1. Is it possible to run Euphony server and Euphony client (Stylus) in the same box?

2. If one above is possible, is a separate Euphony stylus client away from the Server better in terms of sound quality?

3. Can the SoTM NEO act as a Euphony client without having to run Roon in the Euphony server?

 

 

Is there some other configuration I should try?

 

I appreciate any pointers and suggestions. Opinions are completely fine.

Thanks,

Jai

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Help needed?

 

I updated my Asus Rog Bios today. All went well. Configured bios to what it was before. 
 

When I set my CPU frequency to say 4.6. Then hit temp/cpu. My frequency is jumping about all over the place, from 0.7ghz to 4.6ghz. It never done this before, it was fixed at 4.6ghz. 
 

Is this normal? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tokyokyoto said:

Thanks Tokyokyoto and auricgoldfinger. I am actually thinking of this one https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813132833?quicklink=true

and this one https://www.newegg.com/core-i7-7th-gen-intel-core-i7-7700/p/N82E16819117727?quicklink=true

See any issues with the above?

I would like your insight into these questions please.

 

1. Is it possible to run Euphony server and Euphony client (Stylus) in the same box?

2. If one above is possible, is a separate Euphony stylus client away from the Server better in terms of sound quality?

3. Can the SoTM NEO act as a Euphony client without having to run Roon in the Euphony server?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jbm_2021 said:

Thanks Tokyokyoto and auricgoldfinger. I am actually thinking of this one https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813132833?quicklink=true

and this one https://www.newegg.com/core-i7-7th-gen-intel-core-i7-7700/p/N82E16819117727?quicklink=true

See any issues with the above?

I would like your insight into these questions please.

 

1. Is it possible to run Euphony server and Euphony client (Stylus) in the same box?

2. If one above is possible, is a separate Euphony stylus client away from the Server better in terms of sound quality?

3. Can the SoTM NEO act as a Euphony client without having to run Roon in the Euphony server?

 

 

I don't see the power consumption for the ASUS.  The i7 is rated at 65W.  A 19v Farad will only give you 57W, so I don't think it will work with the i7.  This is not my area of expertise, so others may want to chime in.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jbm_2021 said:

1. Is it possible to run Euphony server and Euphony client (Stylus) in the same box?

 

Yes

 

2 hours ago, jbm_2021 said:

2. If one above is possible, is a separate Euphony stylus client away from the Server better in terms of sound quality?

 

I believe the answer depends on the server configuration.  For example, having everything in the same box is likely to work better on a higher powered server.  With a NUC, a 2-box solution may sound better.

 

2 hours ago, jbm_2021 said:

3. Can the SoTM NEO act as a Euphony client without having to run Roon in the Euphony server?

 

 

Can you install Stylus EP on the NEO?  If not, then I don't know how it would be compatible unless I am missing something.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ASRMichael said:

Help needed?

 

I updated my Asus Rog Bios today. All went well. Configured bios to what it was before. 
 

When I set my CPU frequency to say 4.6. Then hit temp/cpu. My frequency is jumping about all over the place, from 0.7ghz to 4.6ghz. It never done this before, it was fixed at 4.6ghz. 
 

Is this normal? 

 

I suspect something changed in the default settings with the new bios. So even if you have a fixed core ratio, other parameters might be making it behave like a turbo with a ceiling of 4.6ghz. They employ all sorts of crazy algo to save power, which is what normal folks want but audiophiles want it to run like crazy 🤪

 

What is your CPU power bios settings ? Some c-states, speed shift and speed steps comes in the way. Try disabling them and see if that works.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jbm_2021 said:

Thanks Tokyokyoto and auricgoldfinger. I am actually thinking of this one https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813132833?quicklink=true

and this one https://www.newegg.com/core-i7-7th-gen-intel-core-i7-7700/p/N82E16819117727?quicklink=true

See any issues with the above?

I would like your insight into these questions please.

 

1. Is it possible to run Euphony server and Euphony client (Stylus) in the same box?

2. If one above is possible, is a separate Euphony stylus client away from the Server better in terms of sound quality?

3. Can the SoTM NEO act as a Euphony client without having to run Roon in the Euphony server?

 

It looks like the Asus Motherboard you picked doesn’t have a Pcie expansion slot so If you want to use an upgraded nic or usb card (or both) you will need a pcie to m.2 adapter which isn’t ideal. Either way, the Farad should power the 65 i7.  I have one powering an 65 i5.

 

I think most are using stylus with a single pc.  I have both full and endpoint Euphony license and have run both single and bridged setups.  I agree that if you are using lower power pc’s, ‘bridged’ is the way to go.  That being said, I have never had or felt the need for an optimized high power system running Euphony because I don’t do any up/down sampling.  Imo having more cores/threads is better than higher speed and power, and that running a low power two pc bridge mode setup will give you the most options and best results.......if no upsampling is going on.

 

Once you have everything setup and have gone through the learning curve it will be easy to switch to any combination of player/streaming service, etc. you want.  My preference is listening to locally stored files and Qobuz streaming.  I have a Roon subscription but hardly ever use it these days. 
 

My setup is Fios (copper) > Mikrotik/Mikrotik (fiber optic) powered by Keces 8 > SOtM 108 sw. > Jcat NIC/Mitac ph-12 mbrd > NUC 8i7/SOtM usb > DAC.  Everything is powered with dedicated Farad, Uptone JS-2 or Keces P8 psu’s.  Everything is clocked with Mutec 50 ohm.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very happy with this latest change to my Euphony NUC server, with the exception of some remaining "hot sauce" occasionally in the upper treble, sound is very close now to

the relaxation of playing vinyl.

 

 

Regards,

Dave

 

Audio system

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Tokyokyoto said:

It looks like the Asus Motherboard you picked doesn’t have a Pcie expansion slot so If you want to use an upgraded nic or usb card (or both) you will need a pcie to m.2 adapter which isn’t ideal. Either way, the Farad should power the 65 i7.  I have one powering an 65 i5.

 

I think most are using stylus with a single pc.  I have both full and endpoint Euphony license and have run both single and bridged setups.  I agree that if you are using lower power pc’s, ‘bridged’ is the way to go.  That being said, I have never had or felt the need for an optimized high power system running Euphony because I don’t do any up/down sampling.  Imo having more cores/threads is better than higher speed and power, and that running a low power two pc bridge mode setup will give you the most options and best results.......if no upsampling is going on.

 

Once you have everything setup and have gone through the learning curve it will be easy to switch to any combination of player/streaming service, etc. you want.  My preference is listening to locally stored files and Qobuz streaming.  I have a Roon subscription but hardly ever use it these days. 
 

My setup is Fios (copper) > Mikrotik/Mikrotik (fiber optic) powered by Keces 8 > SOtM 108 sw. > Jcat NIC/Mitac ph-12 mbrd > NUC 8i7/SOtM usb > DAC.  Everything is powered with dedicated Farad, Uptone JS-2 or Keces P8 psu’s.  Everything is clocked with Mutec 50 ohm.

 

Thanks a lot auricgoldfinger and tokyokyoto for the insight! Is there a motherboard you can recommend that has PCIe slots for the NIC and USB card? It also needs to have a way so a single sCLK-EX board can be used to power the system clock (board) as well. Basically the system, NIC and USB.

 

Looks like Euphony benefits from threading rather than frequency scaling from what you just described. Will keep that it mind. To save on cost, I am thinking of a single box solution as the sCLK-EX cost quickly adds up for 2 box solution. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2021 at 11:41 AM, davide256 said:

Just ordered this Apacer RAM, doubt I can make use of the higher speed (3200 ) in an 8i7BEH but if it  behaves better for audio, thats what matters. Will

report on results, this is more available than the lower speed Apacer DDR4 SODIMM (2400)

 

https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/908-D22.27261S.001

Is this the industrial grade? Can't tell from the link

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2021 at 1:50 AM, davide256 said:

Mehh... I'm looking for lower electrical noise feeding back into the PS bus and screwing with USB out. Speed isn't relevant unless I use

HQPlayer and using HQPlayer in NUC USB out server creates its own noise issues.

For less digititis in my system, I set my CPU frequency to the I/O Bus clock frequency of my RAM. For my DDR4-2400 RAM, the clock speed is 1.2Ghz so I set my CPU speed to 1.2Ghz.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Lukasluis said:

For less digititis in my system, I set my CPU frequency to the native clock frequency of my RAM. For my DDR4-2400 RAM, the native clock speed is 1.2Ghz so I set my CPU speed to 1.2Ghz.

What is the default speed of your CPU?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jbm_2021 said:

What is the default speed of your CPU?

My NUC 8i7 has a native CPU frequency of 2.7Ghz and Turbo up to 4.5Ghz. I also tried 2.4Ghz which is the double data rate of the RAM but I prefer the sound with with the 1.2Ghz single data transmission per clock cycle. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Lukasluis said:

My NUC 8i7 has a native CPU frequency of 2.7Ghz and Turbo up to 4.5Ghz. I also tried 2.4Ghz which is the double data rate of the RAM but I prefer the sound with with the 1.2Ghz single data transmission per clock cycle. 

BTW, I'm using a pair of HyperX Impact low latency RAMS. I tried the Apacer slow RAMs but I felt a lot of inner details and air are lost plus PRAT is much better with the fast RAM. The Apacers made the music boring in comparison. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lukasluis said:

My NUC 8i7 has a native CPU frequency of 2.7Ghz and Turbo up to 4.5Ghz. I also tried 2.4Ghz which is the double data rate of the RAM but I prefer the sound with with the 1.2Ghz single data transmission per clock cycle. 

CPU frequency and memory frequency matching does not add up to me. There are so many factors that kick in when it comes to bottlenecks. The bandwidth of the memory lanes have direct impact on latencies. Just by matching CPU frequency to memory frequency will not mean much unless it is purely by accident. Just my thoughts based on prior experience.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jbm_2021 said:

CPU frequency and memory frequency matching does not add up to me. There are so many factors that kick in when it comes to bottlenecks. The bandwidth of the memory lanes have direct impact on latencies. Just by matching CPU frequency to memory frequency will not mean much unless it is purely by accident. Just my thoughts based on prior experience.

 

It mean much to my ears. Same findings on both Euphony and Windows servers that I have. 3 machines, 2 different Players, same findings. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lukasluis said:

My NUC 8i7 has a native CPU frequency of 2.7Ghz and Turbo up to 4.5Ghz. I also tried 2.4Ghz which is the double data rate of the RAM but I prefer the sound with with the 1.2Ghz single data transmission per clock cycle. 

I also found that 1.2GHz sounds best on my 7i7DN, which has a base speed of 1.9 GHz and Turbo 4.2 GHz.

I came to this conclusion purely by listening and only later realised that my Apacer RAM was running at 2400 Mbps, and did wonder if this was coincidence or not.

 

More recently, with my last core isolation changes, as posted earlier, I found that slightly higher speeds of 1.4 and 1.6 also had their advantages and there's currently no absolute winner. But here's the weird thing:

 

Although each of the speeds within my 1.1-1.9GHz test area were fractionally different, there was a consistent theme that the even speeds (1.2, 1.4. 1.6, 1.8) were more vivid/dynamic and the odd speeds (1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 1.7, 1.9) were slightly softer and smoother. Apart from over-imagination, I can't think of an explanation for this, but I'm pleased that I can change the character of presentation so easily. Overall, the vivid speeds win for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...