Computer Based Music Server vs Digital Player

[losingmyreligion]

 

 

"If SonicStudio gets it together with the next release, who knows? :)"

 

 

There's always the hackintosh.

 

I believe that's the best option for addressing the noisy (IMO) Apple hardware, if you must use Amarra, iTunes, or other OS X programs.

 

clay

 

[Paul R]

I admit, I have never tried running a Hackintosh. I probably should. But on what hardware?

 

A typical PC is if anything, noisier than a typical Macbook or Mini. At least, I think that is so. I meant that electrically, but it is also true for audible noise.

 

I didn't think the little Atom boards would handle the load for MacOS, especially as MacOS currently really wants an i5 to run on with lots of memory.

 

-Paul

 

 

[losingmyreligion]

 

Check in with antipodes_audio.

 

He posted in this thread:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Best-DAC-ever-heard

 

The two of you were discussing his hackintosh.

 

clay

 

 

 

 

 

[Mark Powell]

"A Mac is a veritable cesspool of noise"

"Windows machine...noisier than a Mac"

"Linux best"

"These stripped down servers are quieter"

 

I spent thirty years as an IBM mainframe systems programmer. Right down on the bare metal. Often in machine code. Lower still. Yes, noughts and ones. We even ran 'em slowly sometimes, so we could see what was going on using several oscilloscopes.

 

All these machines now use the same Intel processor(s), or a clone. The memory is the same, the power supply is the same or similar, and so on. The hardware does not 'know' what it is running. It is running its instruction set, but it does not know that either. Nor that somewhere above is an 'operating system', and higher still, an 'application'. It can only run its instruction set, and an operating system can do nothing other than cause the processor to run its instruction set.

 

Therefore, at the risk of laying myself open to the reply "We didn't think cables made a difference either", I propose that as the hardware does not even know that there is such a thing as an operating system, it does not matter what you run, stripped down or not. The cable situation is not, I believe, related.

 

 

 

 

[crisnee]

Aren't there companies that license and/or produce interface software for audio companies? I'm pretty sure I remember that J. River's parent company is in that business and produces this sort of software for many companies.

 

And as to DPs being in their infancy. Not at all. They've been around for quite a few years, particularly at the very low end (price wise). And these are rather complex in that some of them play all kinds of formats, not to mention, films, surround sound, graphics and access the internet. It's just that they're not geared toward the hi-end, nor even audio in particular.

 

I bought one (just to experiment with and because it was very inexpensive and seemed more geared toward audio than most) made by what seems to be a fairly small Chinese company. It not only is a solid product but has a relatively good interface and sounds very good. I now use it more than my "good" player because I don't have to fire up the computer and it sounds just as good, if not better.

 

-Chris

 

[mwheelerk]

Of course the topic on Computer Audiophile is based on digital players for music targeted for use in home systems and playback at audiophile quality levels and I would say again they are indeed in their infancy with regards to product development and market (audiophiles) penetration.

 

[Audioseduction]

Chris, just curious, do you purposely turn your PC off when not using it? As you can see in my signature I have a purposely built Win 7 64bit PC dedicated as a music server appliance and is on 24 hours a day 7 days a week like my preamp. It is VERY convenient as whenever I want to play music I just select a track off my Android tablet and in a few seconds it starts playing any time of the day. Also I can say I feel its performance is a reference level play back unit. I had a 10K$ Esoteric SACD/CD player as a referance. I have been building PC’s for many years.

 

[4est]

Nice to see you posting again, welcome back!

 

I wholeheartedly agree with your feelings about Macs and their associated issues. I am curious about whether or not you have observed any differences in file types with your Auraliti?

 

If you would please, I'd love some input!

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Appliance-servers-and-WAV-vs-AIFF

 

[barrows]

I am not sure what you are talking about? A lot of this discussion is about purpose built hardware, and a lot of this hardware uses, or can use, mobos/processors which are many times less powerful than a typical off the shelf Mac or PC. As such, the power supplies needed, and used are entirley different-some of these machines can run on less than a single watt of power.

Many computer audiophiles have found that decreasing processor load improves sound quality, the current, best, explanation for this is that less processor load results in less power (current) running through the computer, with the result of less RF generation. None of this has been "proven", but the anecdotal evidence, and experience of many people sharing their results, is pretty strong in supporting the belief that less power consumption in the computer will result in less RFI, and better sound.

This is a pretty strong argument in favor of using a computer hardware/software set up which uses less power (watts), and certainly these purpose built linux machines achieve exactly that.

 

[zorbs]

 

Interesting thread and one I've been seeking the answer to as well. My experience thus far:

 

I started with a Linn Majik DS streamer a few years back. Fantastic device and very convenient to use. Then, someone bolted a Naim Dac onto it's SPDIF output and it was a huge improvement (although not perfect). Realising the internal DAC could be bested, I tried others and ended up with the Chord QBD76.

 

Reading this site made me wonder whether the DS could be beaten as a transport, although I was sceptical that a DIY solution could better a factory product. Plugging in a laptop and Musical Fidelity V-Link was about the same level if not slightly ahead of the DS so I took the plunge and built a CAPS2.

 

The CAPS2 is significantly ahead of both DS and Laptop with V-Link in every area with no downsides. Dynamics, resolution, timbre, drive, soundstage - all without sounding even the remotely harsher. The only updside of the DS or V-Link combination was that the colouration in the bass added some perceived richness to vocals, but this was hardly accurate...

 

With CAPS2 I'm running JRiver 16, using memory play and WASAPI Event Style into USB input of DAC. The upshot is that there is no WAN activity during replay or even reading from the internal SSD. I'm very impressed.

 

Putting things in perspective, I've also tried an Naim NDX streamer. Great device, but very much improved by an external DAC (both Chord and Naim). I've also heard the NDX against the new Akurate DS streamer and preferred the latter greatly. More weight and much rounder, less analytical sound. The NDX seemed harsh and a bit thin by comparison. NDX with Naim DAC was slightly better than Akurate though...

 

So, in conclusion the DAC's and transports in the streamers can be improved at the Majik/Akurate DS and NDX level. For the money the computer transports are suberb value and very flexible if you don't mind the extra work. Only test I haven't done is comparision of CAPS2 as a transport against NDX or a really good CD as transport! But then I would imagine a Sonore or similar dedicated music server would be better than a CAPS2 as well...

 

 

[losingmyreligion]

 

 

"...pretty strong in supporting the belief that less power consumption in the computer will result in less RFI, and better sound."

 

I agree with Barrow's sentiment here, as it correlates perfectly with my experience, including shutting down one of the processors in my G5 PowerPC eons ago.

 

I would like to point out, in the interest of fair and balanced reporting, that some have reported sonic improvements (on Macs only as far as I know) from (continually) upgrading to the fastest possible processors, maximum memory, etc.

 

I've not tried this personally, but my theory for improvements is:

 

When the machine is basically idling, the noise footprint is likely at it's lowest.

 

Personally, I'm a big fan of "less is more" approach.

 

clay

 

 

 

 

 

[Paul R]

My IBM background is starting to show here. I am getting to the point of thinking there are at least two separate subjects in this.

 

(1) The player - the part that runs software to take the data stream and turn it into music. This part is very sensitive to power, and low powered devices seem to work better.

 

(2) The Server - the part that manages the library and sends the data streams to the player or players. This part seems to benefit hugely from more and more processor power. Note that this part of the system can also transcode music from say, ALAC or FLAC to PCM and stream it on downline to the player. It can also, and most importantly, be physically separate from the player device(s).

 

(3) Storage - disks. It makes a difference where the disks are and how that DASD is connected to the server. If you have the disks separate, connected over an iSCSI link or something, it doesn't much matter what kind of drives they are or how noisy they are electrically or otherwise. They have no effect on the sound. If they are embedded in the player, then low power super quiet SSD drives can and do have a big effect on the sound. If embedded in a physically segregated server, I don't see where they have much effect at all, except in terms of backup and such.

 

I am beginning to think the trick is to segregate the player as far as possible from any interference, and depend upon the network, and the inherent isolation of the network to enforce that segregation.

 

I'm also find that downstream isolation is damn important too. My Proton, isolated from power nonsense as it is, does a fantastic job. A Rega Dac picked up so much noise in our system it was painful to listen to. Conversely, a blinking $249 (on sale) Emotiva XDA-1 DAC, probably because it is well isolated, is very listenable, and performs in our systems far better than it has any right to. (Or I just like it's Delta-Sigma goodness. That's possible too.)

 

I cannot for the life of me explain to my own satisfaction why a cheap Monster power filter would make so much difference in the sound of our system, nor why eliminating wall wart power supplies for external disks, and isolation supplies behind a second Monster power supply makes any difference at all. Worse, I cannot explain why some inexpensive power cords can make a difference. But it does.

 

I begin to be convinced that power supply issues really have the most long term effect on the sound of system - far more than anything else.

 

And I also theorize that the effects are additive. A small effect at the source, another small effect in the cables, another small effect in the DAC, and yet another small effect in the preamp, amp, speaker cables, and speakers can add up to a large bit of ungliness in one's ears.

 

I wish I could prove most of that. At the moment, I have to qualify it all with "seems to me" or "in my current experience" or "in my opinion."

 

-Paul

 

 

 

[realhifi]

From your last post I'm thinking you are on the right track.

Why is it that some manufacturers of high quality Hifi recommend that you start with them and end with them? Because they know how and if those little "additive" pieces add up.

They are "their" additives (or lack of) so they KNOW how a SYSTEM sounds when all put together.

 

Seperate the noise makers from the sensitive parts by, as you put it: "segregate the player as far as possible from any interference". Makes sense to me.

 

I'm with you on this one Paul.

 

PS.

To some other posts bemoaning lack of experience with computers in the hifi segment of manufacturing.

 

I think it's total BS that some think that there aren't any hifi complanies out there that know diddle about computers and programming, noise, software, etc.. I know of a few that were propeller heads from pretty much day one (and this is going back 40 odd years for some of them) and know computers and their oddities and foibles quite well. Some have used micro processors and programming for years and years in both their manufacturing AND their product operation and are now applying solid research and programming savvy to computer music playback with great results. Some of the computer guys here need to get out a bit more I think.

 

[Mark Powell]

I was actually talking about electrical noise, which I perhaps did not make clear. There have been comments here about one operating system being in some way inherently noisier than another. One said Windows is inherently noisier than the Apple OS, another said the opposite. But given that all operating system code does is make the processor perform a string of operations chosen from the fixed processor instruction set, which is the same on all machines, it is 'impossible' (dangerous ground) for OSX to create more electrical noise than Windows or vice versa.

 

On power supplies, low power devices, electrical isolation between 'logical units', physical layout, etc. fine. But not operating systems. I am not familiar with the Intel instruction set, but the IBM mainframe processors have about 300 instructions. I imagine the small Intel processor we use have about the same. Doesn't matter, that is all they can do.

 

[Paul R]

but the IBM mainframe processors have about 300 instructions

 

You missed a decimal place (or a few decades - modern IBM mainframe (zSeries) processors have closer to 1500 instructions, at least as detailed in the POP. Every generation adds a few hundred. I'm not sure if that count includes the grande instructions or not, may be more.

 

-Paul

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mark Powell]

I retired about 11 years ago, and moved to 'management' (it improved my pension) about 7 years before that. So my info is well out of date!

 

Regards

 

[losingmyreligion]

 

"There have been comments here about one operating system being in some way inherently noisier than another. One said Windows is inherently noisier than the Apple OS..."

 

No one's comments have been directed at just the OS, as far as I can tell. I certainly never assumed or intended as much.

 

For the reason you cited, and just general common computing sense, I'm surprised anyone would think that an OS would literally be the source of noise.

 

Looking at your examples, you cited use of the word Mac, which usually refers to the hardware, whereas OS X refers to the OS.

 

Another example you quoted - "Windows machine" - clearly does not refer to the OS, but rather the hardware.

 

"stripped down server" is not obviously referring to an OS, although it implies Linux to me personally, and vice versa, a usage of Linux (to describe a music player) in the context of this thread (which is about computers and music players) implies (to me) a stripped down server using Linux as the OS.

 

Perhaps there are other example that better make your point?

 

If so, point taken. We could all be more careful with terminology in a discussion about such a nascent topic.

 

clay

 

 

 

 

 

[crisnee]

I turn it off for various reasons, although I will usually let it "sleep" once or twice between reboots. It's a relative pain because I can't access it with a remote, have to go over to it to play music--use the keyboard and such, not good for when you're lounging.

 

I use the system for audio only, most everything is disabled including network and wireless of all kinds, all in the name of purity. I use XXHighend which can be fussy when it comes to other things going on, and it's best to reboot the system regularly to keep "stuff" from happening.

 

Even with all the above, the simple DP comes very close in sound (I do use a linear power supply with it), maybe because it is simple, no utility computer parts add their noisy signature.

 

-Chris

 

[crisnee]

Not so fast. After writing my post yesterday, it suddenly came to me that I've been on this trail for quite some time (yes, I sorta forgot).

 

About ten years ago I owned a TEAC DP. (I think it was TEAC but maybe I'm confusing...) Whatever, it was a DP for audio only. It was in the form of a typical audio component, 17" wide etc.. It included a cd player/ripper, a hdd, a small lcd screen and a remote. It sold for less than $500. It was a real pain to use because it used USB 1.1 for file transfers (that should show how long these things have been around) and the lcd screen was too small to see from across the room. Nevertheless it was a bona fide audio only dp player.

 

I also owned another thing called a Ziova, 6-7 years old? It played flac files from dvds and usb devices among other things. It was an Aussie company that went down under, or under anyway, a couple of years ago.

 

The only reason DP players are in there infancy is because no one has thought to grow them. They were stillish born in other words.

 

If you think about it, an enlarged Ipod, hdd on the outside instead of inside, a remote and a video port to a monitor instead of the onboard display and you'd have a good starting point for a quality audio DP. No infancy involved, all growed up already. Apple, Cowon, Microsoft, that Japanese High Quality portable (can't think of the name) they all have the basis for a great basic player, they just either haven't thought about it, or don't think it's a worthwhile idea.

 

In my mind it could become the next commodity music player, like the cd player was/is. A little interface device, just attach your music laden hdd.

 

-Chris

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Miska]

If you think about it, an enlarged Ipod, hdd on the outside instead of inside, a remote and a video port to a monitor instead of the onboard display and you'd have a good starting point for a quality audio DP.

 

That's quite close description to the system I'm personally using. Small computer with FW attached external HDD and audio going out to an external DAC.

 

Control is with 23" capacitive (multi-touch) screen on top of the rack, or alternatively over network. GUI is designed specifically to touch screens - large enough controls and scrolling without scrollbars. (many applications not designed for touch use are really painful in this kind of setup, like Spotify)

 

A little interface device, just attach your music laden hdd.

 

I'm more and more moving to a NAS as a storage. It is located in a different room using gigabit ethernet. Wiring is not a problem either since the apartment has built-in CAT-6 wiring.

 

I see it more convenient way for updating and adding more content, even while listening music, without hassle with carrying and plugging HDDs around.

 

 

[losingmyreligion]

 

"I begin to be convinced that power supply issues really have the most long term effect on the sound of system - far more than anything else."

 

 

Welcome to the party.

 

Here, have a drink from the punchbowl:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Lengthy-Primer-AC-some-thoughts-reducing-computers-impact-yours

 

try not to spill any, it's strong stuff.

 

 

clay

 

PS, for your Proton, be on the lookout for the eventual release of Pat's new USB thingy - providing clean AC power and galvanic isolation from the computer - will be called the Cleaner, from AR-T.

 

http://ar-t.co/PRODUCTS.html

 

 

 

 

 

[TS1972]

Hi Mark

 

Just caught up on skimming this topic; Mark, I have a complete list of parts, prices and suppliers for you if you would consider building this amazing sounding audio PC

 

I built mine a few months ago and love it. Rather than spend the £200 or so on the USB, PCI filter card I bought a used TTI laboratory power supply. That just made all the distortion disappear! I was just left with what seems like a quieter presentation of the music, it’s beautiful. Friends and Family are impressed. I may even upgrade the PSU with a shielded Belden cable and upgrade the mains fuse.

 

Send me a private mail and I will send you the list

 

 

[crisnee]

I had a NAS/Squeezebox3 setup for a while. Although I loved the idea of the Squeezebox and the NAS, in reality it was a pain in the butt.

 

They'd drop connections regularly and I'd have to hassle, sometimes for hours, trying to get them to see each other again. The NAS wouldn't sleep when it was supposed to and Windows (Vista and before at least) are the pits when it comes to networking and stuff going wrong. Not to mention that on that network moving files, backups etc., was painfully slow. So I finally sold the Squeezebox (lousy/buggy software too).

 

I just like the argument that quality minimalistic hardware makes for the best sound, and I also want the player I use to play my "best" music files to be foolproof--not to be forced to fool around with networks or tweaks to get it to work correctly, or at all. Of course, that doesn't mean you can't also run an all house system from a Server or NAS.

 

-Chris

 

 

 

[Miska]

The NAS wouldn't sleep when it was supposed to

 

My NAS is a simple normal Linux box, it doesn't "sleep" at all, ever. But it of course does adjust it's power consumption based on load.

 

I don't know about Squeezebox, since I've never used those, but I don't have any more problems with networks than with anything else. And network is anyway needed of all kinds of things varying from smartphones to game consoles.

 

Not to mention that on that network moving files, backups etc., was painfully slow.

 

With gigabit ethernet the speed bottleneck is normal HDD, and it's twice faster than USB 2.0 afterall. Not so much maybe with SSD or 10/15 krpm HDDs.

 

and I also want the player I use to play my "best" music files to be foolproof

 

When I wake up the player from sleep it automagically restores network CIFS connections to the NAS.

 

 

[crisnee]

When I wake up the player from sleep it "automagically" restores network CIFS connections to the NAS.

 

Did you mean "automagically?" or was that a typo for automatically?

 

Either way I like it. Unfortunately, I didn't have any auto Magically. It would have been magical if mine always woke up and played; I never would have gotten rid of it, because it was fun when it worked smoothly.

 

-Chris