Jump to content

airguitar

  • Content Count

    90
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About airguitar

  • Rank
    Freshman Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. airguitar

    Can you improve on this NUC spec for Roon and W10?

    All interesting - but my question earlier which is sorta bugging me right now is, will streaming Tidal via Roon first, from which the NUC takes on board the processing overhead - after which its sends the stream via Roon's optimized RAAT protocol to the sMS-200 Ultra as an end-point, theoretically sound better than streaming Tidal directly from the sMS-200 itself locally?
  2. airguitar

    Can you improve on this NUC spec for Roon and W10?

    That's interesting - so in theory if I stream Tidal directly from the sMS-200 it 'theoretically' should sound worse than streaming Tidal from the NUC (which does the processing) - then from the NUC the Tidal stream is then passed on to the Roon Ready sMS-200 using the more optimised Roon RAAT protocol? That would be interesting if true, because I don't bother using Roon for any streaming services directly from the Internet - instead I use the appropriate plug-ins from Squeezelite served on the sMS-200 if you know what I mean. Perhaps someone can clarify this understanding for me. I like to get the most from what I have.
  3. airguitar

    Let's talk about SOTM SMS-200 ULTRA

    I'm not saying Wi-Fi sounds better than Ethernet - if you cannot connect via Ethernet directly then I would say that a Wi-Fi connector is your next best option instead of those noisy power-line adapters.
  4. airguitar

    Let's talk about SOTM SMS-200 ULTRA

    I have the sMS-200 Ultra and I personally use a Wireless Connector - like this Wireless Connector- and not a Wi-Fi extender (extenders are worse). I would not use a powerline adapter because they generate noise on the mains. My Wi-Fi connector works perfectly. I would recommend you buy and excellent wireless router to strengthen the link to the Wireless connector - see Auralic's recommended list here: Auralics Recommended Wi-Fi Routers
  5. airguitar

    Can you improve on this NUC spec for Roon and W10?

    That's a very powerful NUC configuration you have there... that sort of power is completed wasted on just Roon - are you also running Windows 10 on this computer (which is my intention if possible). It also gets my goat a bit that the even more powerful (but not on Roons list for support) Intel® NUC Kit NUC8i7BEH costs only a little more than the NUC7i7DNHE
  6. airguitar

    Can you improve on this NUC spec for Roon and W10?

    That's really informative thank you. My Roon endpoint equipment will be sMS-200 Ultra with sPS-500 power supply - so I don't want to let the side down by streaming from a computer which may downgrade sound quality (if that's possible?). Currently, I am streaming Tidal direct from the LMS server installed on the SoTM device itself - which is fine - but I've heard that Roon may improve the sound quality further (somehow) - so I would like to experiment. Never heard of audiolinux (I have heard of Daphile though).
  7. airguitar

    Can you improve on this NUC spec for Roon and W10?

    Anyone ? please ....
  8. I am putting together a computer which incorporates an approved Roon NUC, and is also powerful enough for me to dual boot into Windows 10 and perform flawlessly with very good speeds. This is my list so far: The NUC: Intel Nuc Baby Canyon Nuc7I7Bnh 2.5In (on the Roon supported list) Storage: Samsung (MZ-V6E250BW) 250GB EVO PCI Express 3.0 x4 NVMe Solid State Drive (nice and fast - plus enough storage to dual boot Roon Core and W10) Memory: HyperX HX424S14IB2K2/16 Impact 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) 2400 MHz DDR4 CL14 SODIMM 1.2V 260-Pin Memory Kit (responsive memory and abundant). I would expect a stunningly fast compact PC when running W10, and I know it's more than enough for Roon Core on a dual boot config. Can this be improved upon?
  9. The only reason why I mentioned dual boot was to ensure that Roon performance at its highest quality by using its own operating system ensuring I get the best sound to the sMS-200 Ultra. But if there is no difference - then Windows is better for me.
  10. I wouldn't mind hearing your suggestions in case I tread down that path despite my grumbles about having something else to worry about and tune to perfection. My SoTM sMS-200 ULTRA is already about as good as you can get when it comes to streaming, it's also Roon Ready, so would I need an equally good Roon Core so as I don't put a weakness upstream before delivery to sMS 200? Anyway, a suggestion to compliment my sMS200 ULTRA would be useful as reference to me later when, and if, I think it's going to beneficial to have another box in the house. If it doesn't cause any sound degradation, it would be good if the Roon Core could also be a general office computer too - perhaps 2x SSD's, one booting cleanly into Roon, and the other Windows 10. Anyway, whatever you think.
  11. Another reason why I would like to avoid using Roon if possible is that I would be concerned about buying an optimised high quality audiophile server which some say can affect the quality of the streaming from Roon. How much of a headache and pain that would be! To have to worry about another computer and how clean and optimised it should be to deliver music perfectly to the Roon Ready Streamer. I know some don't believe it makes a difference, but others do, and it opens up debate. I mean, just look at this example https://darko.audio/2018/08/roon-labs-nucleus-review/ I don't want to be going down that rabbit hole. It's bad enough finding a quality hi-end streamer without having to also worry about a hi-end Roon server too.
  12. wklie I see Roon has many benefits such as upsampling - but what does upsampling give me beyond red book hi-fi quality sampling - is there a point in filling in the missing bits by padding in more bits aka upsampling? If it does then great - I would just like to understand the benefits of upsampling something that's already hi-fi quality. Does it for instance make the DACs life easier for example? Room correction looks interesting I guess. MQA benefits of the first unfold (like the Tidal client itself can achieve). However for me - my main concern was the possibility of improved sound quality using RAAT above and beyond anything else. However if Tidal streaming directly from the cloud negates the need for RAAT to improve things then it does not matter.
  13. I've never thought about using Roon before because most of the time I stream music direct from Tidal, or perhaps Qobuz - so I don't see the point. But it would seem that Roon has a protocol called RAAT which improves streaming stability (and I stream over Wi-Fi) - especially and perhaps only to Roon Ready devices (not just Roon endpoints) - so my question is, should I use Roon for an improvement in Sound Quality, because I don't need the pretty GUI, convenience or DSP of Roon? Even though I use WiFi I currently have no issues or dropouts that I am aware of, but wonder if Roon's RAAT technology improves matters further especially where it counts most - Sound Quality? Or maybe I am missing the point somewhere - help me understand. Here are some things that Roon to Roon Ready devices do (oh with Meridian they have a similar product called Sooloos) ..... Audio devices must own the audio clock. Many other protocols get this wrong, including AirPlay. It's not possible for two clocks to agree perfectly. Letting the DAC control the pace of streaming removes the need for a clock-drift-compensation mechanism that is bound to increase cost, decrease sound quality, or both. Stable Streaming over Ethernet and WiFi networks. We take this for granted in 2016, but it's easier-said-than-done, and a huge set of implementation choices are driven by this requirement.
  14. Auralic say they prefer wireless as not having a physical connection reduces noise potentially generated by a router, so perhaps the Bluesound is not so much optimised for Wi-Fi. Anyone tried this with an Auralic Mini (discounting the other manufacturers do who not recommend Wi-Fi)? Auralic Mini Wi-Fi vs Auralic Mini Ethernet? Here the full explanation from Auralic (sorry I've just found this article): https://support.auralic.com/hc/en-us/articles/205863078 Also this from Auralic " The circuits of wired and wireless connections inside Lightning device have been designed for the same high performance. They should sound the same theoretically." Therefore I would assume that if you plan to buy a solution where you need Wi-Fi because Ethernet to your Hi-Fi rack is not possible - stick with Auralic who do not shun Wi-Fi as a connectivity option - in fact they treat is as an equal all things being considered and properly set up.
  15. I'm not sure you are on the right discussion - this is about the pros and cons of Ethernet or Wireless connectivity and how it affects (if at all) sound quality.
×