Computer Storage - Best Practices

[sandyk]

21 minutes ago, Dutch said:

 

Just as an FYI; in this case Romaz referred to the JCAT NET card, so the network interface card.

 

Agreed, however the question still stands , as many members use the JCat USB cards, some with Low noise Linear PSUs too.

 

Quote

https://jcat.eu › Shop › HI-END PC AUDIO ACCESSORIES

1. Cached

EUR 435.00 - ‎In stock

Audiophile USB Audio output for USB DACs & USB-to-S/PDIF converters. Top quality military grade linear regulators and filters eliminate noise interferences from a PC and guarantee superb sound. ... Femto Clock Technology (Crystek CCHD-957) lowers jitter below measurable levels.

 

[Dutch]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

 

Agreed, however the question still stands , as many members use the JCat USB cards, some with Low noise Linear PSUs too.

 

 

 

I’m afraid the USB cable still matters, also with the JCAT USB cards. I’ve seen many write this and it was also the case with the rev. 1 JCAT USB card I’ve owned.

 

In this case Romaz was specifically talking about a three PC setup (NAS-server-endpoint) with the NET card in the server. His finding is interesting and I will try to confirm, I have a NET card en route  to me.

[Nenon]

Has anyone done any experiments treating the SSD drive with EMI absorber? I am wondering if that makes any difference in SQ.

[alfe]

On 3/27/2019 at 9:21 AM, sandyk said:

 

 Because they are driven by a  motor powered by a not so highly stable power supply,   they are also far more likely to have an increase in Jitter when playing Audio files compared with an SSD.

However many members appear to like a little added  Jitter .

 The varying power demands by the motor will also reflect back into the main power supply area.

 

 

More jitter ??

You say that because you have an SSD 😉

[Ralf11]

maybe he says it based on not understanding how buffers work

[numlog]

its not hard to believe the HDD output does have more jitter in controlled conditions, but must differ in how it reacts with the rest of the PC i.e less jitter (or other sound influence) on the final output at speakers/headphones 

[Richard Dale]

1 minute ago, numlog said:

its not hard to believe the HDD output does have more jitter in controlled conditions, but must differ in how it reacts with the rest of the PC i.e less jitter on the final output at speakers/headphones

I find it impossible to believe that bulk mode USB has more jitter than something else because bulk mode USB isn't some kind of real time thing.

[numlog]

Just now, Richard Dale said:

I find it impossible to believe that bulk mode USB has more jitter than something else because bulk mode USB isn't some kind of real time thing.

just edited that

[sandyk]

57 minutes ago, alfe said:

More jitter ??

You say that because you have an SSD 😉

Hi Al

 I have both, but I prefer the sound of the same file stored on both mediums from an SSD powered via the internal +12V rail using a +5V output voltage regulator into a John Linsley Hood designed PSU add-on (A.K.A. " Ripple Eater")  with a simulated capacitance of >2FARAD and <4uV noise.

It is more revealing without added harshness, but admittedly I may have also been able to gain a similar improvement if I powered the HDD via a dual +12V and +5V JLH, as I do for improving the performance of the LG GGW H20L that you designed.

Incidentally, yesterday I revisited the ripping performance of this BR writer using the JLH PSU and with the same tracks ripped  by this writer and the later  BD-RE BH10LS30 which was using the normal +12V and +5V supply, and  there was simply no contest with the LG GGW-H20L rips sounding markedly better, just as Martin Colloms confirmed way back in 2011 when using the markedly improved low noise  +12V and +5V JLH power supply.

 

Kind Regards

Alex

[sandyk]

31 minutes ago, numlog said:

its not hard to believe the HDD output does have more jitter in controlled conditions, but must differ in how it reacts with the rest of the PC i.e less jitter (or other sound influence) on the final output at speakers/headphones 

 

 Perhaps it's not fair of me though to compare the performance of an SSD when using a low noise regulated +5V supply which improves isolation from the main supply , compared with an HDD using the normal SMPS +12V and +5V supply ?

[numlog]

Maybe not, but it seemed the HDD did not respond as much to the same PS improvements as SSD when compared (briefly). Most of distance could be closed and the SSD honestly sounds preferable,  yet the HDD still seems to have better overall detail retrieval compared to SSD.

 

Replacing external crystals on HDD PCB with low jitter XO is next thing on to-do list, to see if some of the performance limitations can be overcome with a mod like this, if the limitations could mainly be bound to the mechanics or the older electronics built to a lower jitter spec

 

[sandyk]

12 minutes ago, numlog said:

yet the HDD still seems to have better overall detail retrieval compared to SSD.

 

Added Jitter may sometimes give the appearance of an increase in HF detail.

 This is well documented by others, including Barrows from Sonore.

 

Jitter.

This is a quotation from Bob Katz, well known recording & audio mastering engineer posted here www.digido.com/audio-faq/j/jitter-better-sound.html

After an engineer learns to identify the sound of signal-correlated jitter, then you can move on to recognizing the more subtle forms of jitter and finally, can be more prepared to subjectively judge whether one source sounds better than another.

Here are some audible symptoms of jitter that allow us to determine that one source sounds "better" than another with a reasonable degree of scientific backing:

It is well known that jitter degrades stereo image, separation, depth, ambience, dynamic range.

Therefore, when during a listening comparison, comparing source A versus source B (and both have already been proved to be identical bitwise):

The source which exhibits greater stereo ambience and depth is the "better" one.

The source which exhibits more apparent dynamic range is the "better" one.

The source which is less edgy on the high end (most obvious sonic signature of signal correlated jitter) is the "better" one.

And a reply:
The better one, and it is better, is also easier to listen to. . . less fatiguing. I would also add to this that the low end just "feels" bigger and more solid. This is perhaps a psychoacoustic affect more than a measurable one. It may be that the combination of a less edgy high end and greater depth and width makes the bass seem better.

All of this makes sense if thought of in terms of timing (that is what we're talking about isn't it ;-]). With minimal jitter nothing is smeared, a note and all its harmonics line up, the sound is more liquid (a term probably from the "audiophile" crowd but one which accurately describes the sound none the less), and images within the soundstage are clearly defined.

Now some extra points:
- listener fatigue is reduced or completely eliminated
- the sound can be turned up higher without any distortion being evident
- the sound can also be turned down lower & the full dynamics are still retained but at a lower volume

 

 

[numlog]

I was under impression the jitter generally resulted in a ''muddier'' and less fatiguing sound like the HDD, but with reduction in resolution/detail. 

Whats described there sounds even more like the SSD, which does give the impression of better clarity (HF detail) but with less smoothness and HDD capturing stereo image more accurately with a better balance of low mid high detail. 

 

 

[sandyk]

Jitter results in a more fatiguing sound, and may also give the appearance of a larger than life soundstage.

 Barrows did a good write up on the effects of Jitter several years ago. Perhaps you can ask him via a PM  to repost it again ?

 

Quote

Replacing external crystals on HDD PCB with low jitter XO is next thing on to-do list,

There is no point in doing this unless at the same time you markedly improve the stability and the noise level of it's power supply. Even a markedly improved power supply may help with typical Xtal Oscillators.

 Also, be wary of too much additional capacitance on the output of the Xtal Oscillator if not directly replacing the existing . Many don't like >15pF of output capacitance.(see Spec Sheets)

[moriez]

On 3/27/2019 at 5:09 AM, Ralf11 said:

you mis-spelled unreal

 

On 3/31/2019 at 4:01 AM, Ralf11 said:

some excellent Rioja ---> Gran Reserva??

 

 

somebody should buy up some fiber equipment; stamp Audiophile on it; add Bubinga wood panels and go to town...

 

17 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

maybe he says it based on not understanding how buffers work

 

That Ralf. Again.

 

Apparently some are so used to your posts they're not giving any attention. Super admirable but I'm not that zen and because I see you doing it a lot let me ask something with best effort to not be judgemental or offensive. Do you make these type of remarks in real life when you're in a group of people like colleagues or family as well? Oppose and scoff at most, add or construct little? Do you even realize this behaviour strongly resembles that of a very young child who makes her presence known when grown ups are talking? It's plain annoying what you're doing Ralf and really really needs work man. The option to simply quietly move on if a topic isn't for you is always available. Frankly, why admin is so loose for so long is beyond me.

 

Apologies for the off-topic everyone. Had to say in some thread.

[numlog]

15 hours ago, sandyk said:

There is no point in doing this unless at the same time you markedly improve the stability and the noise level of it's power supply. Even a markedly improved power supply may help with typical Xtal Oscillators.

 Also, be wary of too much additional capacitance on the output of the Xtal Oscillator if not directly replacing the existing . Many don't like >15pF of output capacitance.(see Spec Sheets)

This is after hearing the comparatively small impact the improved PS made, which is still in use now. The assumption/hope is the internal clocking performance is a significant bottleneck here.

 

[numlog]

1 hour ago, moriez said:

 

 

 

That Ralf. Again.

 

Apparently some are so used to your posts they're not giving any attention. Super admirable but I'm not that zen and because I see you doing it a lot let me ask something with best effort to not be judgemental or offensive. Do you make these type of remarks in real life when you're in a group of people like colleagues or family as well? Oppose and scoff at most, add or construct little? Do you even realize this behaviour strongly resembles that of a very young child who makes her presence known when grown ups are talking? It's plain annoying what you're doing Ralf and really really needs work man. The option to simply quietly move on if a topic isn't for you is always available. Frankly, why admin is so loose for so long is beyond me.

 

Apologies for the off-topic everyone. Had to say in some thread.

agreed,  it seems most of the hard-leaning objectivist's have to bring an air of hostility when dealing with these kind of discussions.

[Ralf11]

The problem is the dissemination of BS to unsuspecting newbies.

 

I am hardly a hard-leaning objectivist, but I am a scientist.  You will find similar comments form engineers and others who know what they are talking about.

 

But I am sorry if I harshed your mellow - Good Luck on finding a Safe Space (to quote another scientist).

[numlog]

who are these newbies that manage to come here and avoid the other 95% of the internet (including half of this site, courtesy of your valiant efforts) that agree and perpetutate that ''bit are bits''? I think the people  here all already know what they hear is ''wrong''. you are free to waste your time though, 10000 posts later

 

[Ralf11]

I hope you enjoy your anti-5G rally.

 

and what does moriez-muffy have against Spanish wines?

[sandyk]

2 hours ago, numlog said:

who are these newbies that manage to come here and avoid the other 95% of the internet (including half of this site, courtesy of your valiant efforts) that agree and perpetutate that ''bit are bits''? I think the people  here all already know what they hear is ''wrong''. you are free to waste your time though, 10000 posts later

 

 

 At the dawn of the CD age, many Audiophiles sought out the original Japan and West Germany pressed CDs, because they sounded much better than the multi generational  copies of the Masters used by the local CD manufacturers , DESPITE having the same data in most cases .

 Even in the USA , certain pressing plants were preferred by discerning Recording and Mastering Engineers because their pressings simply sounded better !

[kumakuma]

31 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 At the dawn of the CD age, many Audiophiles sought out the original Japan and West Germany pressed CDs, because they sounded much better than the multi generational  copies of the Masters used by the local CD manufacturers , DESPITE having the same data in most cases .

 Even in the USA , certain pressing plants were preferred by discerning Recording and Mastering Engineers because their pressings simply sounded better !

 

Fortunately, as Barry Diament has said, these differences disappear once the CDs have been ripped to disc:

 

Quote

Whether commercial CD, “special” material or process CD or a fine CD-R, my experience has consistently been that extraction to computer and playback from there (as a raw PCM file in .aif or .wav format) gets me the true sound of the master.

 

 

[sandyk]

1 minute ago, kumakuma said:

 

Fortunately, as Barry Diament has said, these differences disappear once the CDs have been ripped to disc: 

 

 

 

 

NOT with the discs that I sent Barry !!!

[Hugo9000]

42 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

NOT with the discs that I sent Barry !!!

I just sent you a monstrously large PM, which good sense will tell you not to bother reading (  ) but I thought I'd tell you here that it was written sincerely and not mockingly in any way.  Not that you owe me the time to read it let alone reply.  haha!

 

Sorry to the OP for the OT post!

 

(Any mocking in the PM or in this post is directed strictly at myself, if that isn't clear.)

[sandyk]

18 minutes ago, Hugo9000 said:

I just sent you a monstrously large PM, which good sense will tell you not to bother reading (  )

 

 If I had good sense I would find a way to ignore those that try to provoke me, but like many other people I hate to leave their attacks unanswered as it makes it look like I have no answer to their attacks, and casual readers may then accept that they must be correct, and that I am full of shit.