Jump to content
IGNORED

Computer Storage - Best Practices


Recommended Posts

I think we need to dive a little deeper into the storage problem and try to understand what is causing the harshness or other differences people are hearing before deciding which media is best.

 

A file is a file. It would be identical no matter if it is stored on a SSD, HDD, USB stick, NAS, or something else. So what makes one storage media worse than another?  My guess would be it's the retrieval process of the file. Some storage medias generate more noise than others. SSD must be falling in that category. And I am not ignoring sandyk's post or saying that HDD generates more noise than SSDs or vice versa... I am also not saying that the noise id the main problem, just suggesting that the problem is probably somehow related to the file retrieval process.

 

If the only problem is only during the file retrieval process, we "should" be able to copy a file from let's say a SSD drive to the RAM, shutdown the SATA controller and play the file. And if there was any harshness, it should disappear, right? Unless of course there are other factors here. And I have no doubts there are... But this should not be a difficult test from someone to do with AL in ramroot. Another test we could do is copy the same file to RAM multiple times from different sources and compare. I would gladly do that if I manage to replicate the harshness issue. Bought a Samsung SSD to try it. 

 

Also, I wonder if writing a file to a noisy storage device has any effect. And I don't mean effects on the music you are playing while writing the files but later, when you play that same file. Does it make a difference if I RIP my CDs to a SSD, or HDD, or USB flash drive? Locically, the process of writing a file should not matter. And just the retrieval of the file should matter... I can't see any logical explanation how the noise could be attached to a file, because it was stored on a SSD drive for example. You do a md5 checksum on that file and a file that was stored on a USB stick (or even memory), it would be exactly the same. So the only way I can explain the difference in sound would be something related to the retrieval process while playing the file.

 

But who knows, people still can't explain why two cables with the same technical specs (i.e. resistance, capacitance, etc.) sound different. And probably 95% of the world thinks we are crazy and this is a placebo effect. But let's not talk about cables here. My point was that in the digital audio world things are probably exponentially more complex.

 

Industry disclosure:
https://chicagohifi.com

Dealer for: Taiko Audio, Conrad Johnson, Audio Mirror, and Sean Jacobs

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, sandyk said:

If you have say a 3M long USB-A -to USB-B  cable , try plugging a USB memory stick into that and copy the ripped file from SSD to there, then see if you can hear the degradation with the USB cable.

 

Interesting.... So, are you saying that if you copy the file from the SSD via the 3M long USB cable to a memory stick, and copy the file from the memory stick back to the SSD (as a second copy of the original file) and you play both files from the SSD, you hear a difference? 

I did not think there would be difference, but if people are telling me there is I would certainly give it a try. It's an easy test to make.

But playing one file from my SSD and the other from the memory stick via the long USB cable would be an extremely unfair comparison. So I would rather see the copied file back on the SSD and played from there. 

And, yes my system is very resolving, and I can easily hear differences on my speakers... actually my speakers (system) are more resolving than my HD800 headphones. 

Industry disclosure:
https://chicagohifi.com

Dealer for: Taiko Audio, Conrad Johnson, Audio Mirror, and Sean Jacobs

Link to comment

I am absolutely sure there will be difference if you play one file from the SSD and the other from a 3M USB memory card. I don't even need to test that to believe it. 

However, copying a file through a long USB cable to a memory card and back to the SSD and hearing degradation when played from the SSD would be a real eye opener. Not that I don't believe it. Those days are past. I might be a little sceptical at the moment, but I have seen a lot of things in our high end audio world that don't make any sense but make an audible difference. 

That would also mean that if we care about high quality digital, we should never download tracks from places like HDTracks, unless they ensure us they use good power, cables, storage, vibration isolation, and everything else that could potentially make a difference. And even then, what about the ISPs this traffic is going through?!? None of them are using audiophile switches/routers and linear power supplies. We would need a "master" FLAC/WAV/AIFF/whatever delivered on our special media, copied directly from the master server.

Industry disclosure:
https://chicagohifi.com

Dealer for: Taiko Audio, Conrad Johnson, Audio Mirror, and Sean Jacobs

Link to comment
2 hours ago, jabbr said:

5. NAS

 

I am 100% confident that employing a NAS running ZFS with a good RAM buffer, and connected by a good fiberoptic Ethernet switch, that assuming the NAS is reasonably decent, that there will not be SQ effects of the hard drives, nor will the PSU supplying the NAS be audible.

 

Indeed I have compared 10Gbe Intel x520 cards with special Solarflare NICs as well as Connextx-4 100 Gbe Mellanox NICs and these on the NAS "sound" the same. (do you know what the jitter specs on a 100Gbe NIC have to be in order to hit that eye diagram? ;) )

 

http://forms.solarflare.com/Media/Default/PDFs/Platforms/Solarflare_SFN7322F_10GbE_Adapter_Brief.pdf

https://www.mellanox.com/related-docs/prod_adapter_cards/PB_ConnectX-4_EN_Card.pdf

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ethernet-products/converged-network-adapters/ethernet-x520-server-adapters-brief.html

 

http://uk.tek.com/dl/65W_28494_1_LR_Letter.pdf

https://www.evaluationengineering.com/test-issues-techniques/article/13007997/100-gbs-physicallayer-testing-tips-and-tricks

 

It seems like a lot of people agree with that here. Especially those who use JCAT network cards and/or audiophile switches. I think that option goes to the top of the list and might be the best (sounding) option for large music collections. 

 

@jabbr - any recommendations for a decent NAS? 

I believe @austinpop uses a 4 bay Synology NAS.

 

From what I see so far, people tend to prefer (in that order):

1. NAS. JCAT Net / audiophile switches make that option even better. 

2 - a. An external USB HDD with external power supply. Adding an external USB card could be an improvement. 

2 - b. USB Tower / SDXC cards / LPS

3. HDD

4. SSD

 

Of course there are as many opinions as people, so not to start a debate, especially knowing that a few people think SSD is better than HDD. But that seems to be the general consensus so far. I did not add Optane as it's not available in Terabyte sizes yet. 

Industry disclosure:
https://chicagohifi.com

Dealer for: Taiko Audio, Conrad Johnson, Audio Mirror, and Sean Jacobs

Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
48 minutes ago, moriez said:

@Nenon any progress or update?

 

I was patiently waiting for you guys to finish arguing :). But it would be nice to go back on topic.

 

I have been waiting for various parts, so I can perform different tests. Most orders are arriving next week, some will take longer. But I will post any updates worth mentioning. 

 

Industry disclosure:
https://chicagohifi.com

Dealer for: Taiko Audio, Conrad Johnson, Audio Mirror, and Sean Jacobs

Link to comment

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...