austinpop

Hi rando, Which choice are you referring to - my Mahler 4th favorites, or my last post on Kullervo? I must be missing the context, but I'm struggling to parse these 2 sentences. Please remind me what this is referring to?

Hindi speakers can have a chuckle at the name of the male chorus.

These two:

Please see my post #493 just above yours, where I gave some more detail. It helps to get some terminology straight. On the HW side, a processor chip comprises: Cores: From Intel's website: "Cores is a hardware term that describes the number of independent central processing units in a single computing component (die or chip)." The i7-8650U chip in the NUC7i7DNBE, for example, has 4 cores. HW Threads (hyperthreading): each core can have one or more HW threads, which are independent execution units, but they share some resources on the core, like L1 and L2 caches. The i7-8650U has 2 HW threads/core, or a total of 8 HW threads. On the OS side, it sees logical CPUs, as presented to it by the BIOS. When you set your BIOS to Hyperthreading (HT) ON, it presents 8 HW threads to the OS, which sees 8 logical CPUs. With HT OFF, it only sees 4. So since you booted with HT ON, Euphony OS sees logical CPUs 0-7, which correspond to physical cores 0-3. I hope this, along with the previous post, help with your understanding?

Have now listened to this a few times, and it's risen to my top 3 versions of the Mahler 4th. Sofia Fomina's singing is absolutely lovely, and Jurowski goes on my already-long list of contemporary conductors to keep an eye on. Excellent recording as well.

Visiting my daughter in Seattle in October, and will be seeing Thomas Dausgaard conducting the Seattle Symphony, playing a program of Bach and Mozart.

Sure. Here is an example. This is on a 6 physical core/12 logical core machine, with HT enabled: 0-3 RoonServer 4-7 gstp 8-11 This allocates: logical cores 0 to 3 (physical cores 0-1) to default (i.e. everything else) logical cores 4-7 to Roon (strictly: all proccesses whose name contains (see below for an example) the string "RoonServer" in the fully qualified path) 2103 /opt/RoonServer/RoonMono/bin/RoonServer : 4-7 2114 /opt/RoonServer/RoonMono/bin/RoonAppliance : 4-7 2115 /opt/RoonServer/Server/processreaper : 4-7 2188 /opt/RoonServer/RoonMono/bin/RAATServer : 4-7 logical cores 8-11 to StylusEP (strictly: all proccesses whose executables match the string "gstp" in the fully qualified path) I always ensure I allocate all the HW threads in a core to the same workload, to avoid L1/L2 cache contamination

I'm not sure to what you're referring when you say "distributed" vs. "monolithic" setup. Let me clarify. My current music server HW is standalone, i.e. I use a single DAC-attached machine. So my point about grazing had only to do with software. When I'm grazing, I use "Roon+StylusEP," running on the one machine. For serious listening, I switch over to Stylus, which also runs on one machine. If by distributed you're referring to Stylus on the server and StylusEP on the endpoint, I don't use that mode obviously, since that requires 2 machines. Stated differently, on a single server, there is no such thing as "Stylus+StylusEP." Is that what you're asking, or did I misunderstand your question?

It's always interesting to read about how people have optimized their system. It's usually not practical to try everything, so these reports are fascinating, and it's great to hear how much people are loving the sound quality. Keep 'em coming!

Squeezelite buffers are only used when you run Squeezelite, not with StylusEP. The latter manages its own memory, so that's why the memory utilization is much lower. Since you're running a NUC7PJYH, which has the Pentium J5005 processor, that does not have hyperthreading, you're limited to 4 CPUs. You could try: 0 gstp 1-3 (CPU 0 for default, CPU 1-3 for StylusEP), or 0-1 gstp 2-3 (CPU 0-1 for default, CPU 2-3 for StylusEP) Play with these and other allocations and see what you think.

Whether or not one runs a standalone or distributed (server+endpoint) topology is a matter of choice. There are pros and cons to doing so, and it's up to people to decide if that's what they want to do. The point under discussion here is whether the software enables you to do either. Most music software does. Examples: Roon Core + Bridge, LMS + Squeezelite, HQPlayer + NAA. Stylus was originally designed to be monolithic, and it was until recently only an option on a standalone machine. The repackaging of Stylus occurred in two steps. People like me who liked the SQ of Stylus, but were addicted to the UX (user experience) of Roon, were asking Željko if there was a way to make Stylus as a Roon endpoint. This led him to repackage the player portion of Stylus - i.e. StylusEP - and make it accessible using the SlimProto protocol used by LMS and Squeezelite. Having done so, he took the next logical step of enabling remote endpoints on the server piece of Stylus. As regards licenses - yes, if you want to run a server+endpoint, then the server needs to run with the Euphony Server license, and the endpoint with the endpoint license (cheaper).

If you run Stylus on your server machine, and StylusEP on your DAC-attached endpoint, you should just automagically see the DAC appear as a device in the Settings of your Stylus machine. If you don't, open a ticket. It should be working...

Sorry - no.

Please specify your use case. Are you running this as a StylusEP endpoint? Or is it a standalone server running Stylus? The process "stylus" runs both the music server and the overall web UI, so you see it running even in an endpoint machine. If a music server, then you want to give stylus some dedicated CPUs. If an endpoint, you can lump it with the default. You could try and compare these (remember each physical core has 2 logical CPUs, i.e. HW threads): 0-3 gstp 4-7 < -- this may be good for endpoint (physical core 0-1 for default, core 2-3 for gstp, i.e. the player part of Stylus 0-1 stylus 2-3 gstp 4-7 < -- this may be good for standalone (core 0 for default, core 1 for stylus, core 2-3 for gstp) Beyond this, feel free to experiment. This relates to the issue in the NUC7i7 BIOS with the existing kernel. On the NUC7i7, the max CPU setting does not seem to "take" beyond the base frequency. Whenever Željko updates the kernel, this will then get fixed.