Matt .. room first, agreed. I think that might be where we started.. As for waiting a year or so for the next gen of servers, well I suspect that might be like waiting for the next best of any tech.. next year there'll be next year and on and on :-) |
Just to keep a conversation going while I continue my burn in....
I did a quick search for current music servers
Here are my requirements:
-must be a fully self contained unit or system (ie. not dependent on a computer to store the data).
-must have USB and spdif digital outputs, fully hi-res supported
-must be from a company that will still exist in 5 years (I think this is the biggest challenge right now)
-must be obviously well designed and well made with quality parts and a well implemented/well dampedm chassis.
-must connect to the network so I can pull data/files off of my Mac
-must connect to network so i can access on-line services like Tidal.
-must have a simple well laid out App to control it.
-strongly prefer it does NOT have an internal DAC.
Here is a lost of what I have found:
YFS - HD-ref3 (this is basically a purpose built PC in a PC chassis)
Lumin S1 with L1 library/storage
Antipodes DX
Aurender W20
BMC PureMedia
Any opinions? Any experience? Any thoughts.
My only 2 thoughts are these:
1) Whatever I would buy will be essentially worthless 2 years later since it will be very very quickly woefully outdated.
2) None of the current major players really have a product like this yet. Why is that?? |
Oh. And the Auralic Aeris is an intriguing product that I have been eyeing for 6 months. At only $1600- it's very tempting. I'm just not convinced it will improve upon what I have. In fact, I can't really see how it would do anything more then add an unnecessary box between my Mac and my DAC.
I'm watching on the 'gon for one. When it shows up, I'll bite. It's worth a try I guess. I would rather just go for a full on music server then a media streamer though..... |
Sorry. As I think about it more, I guess the disadvantage to having a dedicated server is that you need to move your data/library every time you replace/upgrade your unit versus using a media streamer that just pulls the data out of a static folder that lives on your computer.
I just have a hard time believing that the sound wouldn't be better if it was stored on solid state media within the actual device....
I honestly don't know what's better.... |
Matt be sure and run some live acoustical analysis in your room rather than just using the canned mathematical analysis from the different acoustic treatment vendors. It does make a difference. |
Matt, ok, I am going to do it, Told you so matt!, all those that undermined me to look like I do not know what I was speaking about earlier in this thread when I said how many hours the Esoteric K-01 player takes to do total burn-in of this unit, one word, Fxxx oxx!, do not ever doubt me again!, as you can read what matt is doing for hours of burn in for this unit, I am absolutly correct! |
Matt,I am sorry for my prior post, but you remember when those few posters bashed me and tried to make me appear to be a fool, and question my exsperience as a well seasoned audiophile when I told everyone on this thread how long the Esoteric K-01 took for total burn-in of the unit?, the above post is only directed to those who belittled me, Not to anyone else, they know who they are,they deserve what I said to them above! |
Yeah, you're a legend in your own lunchbox Audiolabyrinth. Real cool. |
Matt the Aries has a firmware update due out in a day or so that will allow for Local USB use.. You'll now also be able to just hook up a USB drive directly to the Aries. As far as sound quality goes I'd certainly expect a unit with Femto Clocks and an external Linear power supply to out perform a computer. If nothing else it's got a way better from factor, and it's got lots of internal horsepower for upgrades in firmware. And Auralic is spending big money on programmers to make thing work as they should.. |
Goose is right. Do the scans with a good mic. What I have found is that minimal acoustic treatments, including sidewall absorbers, rearwall scattering(diffusors) and a couple of bass traps is about right. Anything more is overkill. Then apply the EQ with Amarra. This will make a bigger difference on bass resonances than any treatments.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Erik - the advantage of the Aurilic Aries IMO is the Ethernet/network interface. If it uses a minimal Linux kernel to generate and output USB, then it may sound better than a computer, maybe not. All of this effort to reduce jitter in the source device is unnecessary if the output is S/PDIF, AES or I2S. The issue here is generating USB to make it compatible with USB DACs.
The best way to do Ethernet is to go directly to I2S and avoid the S/W and H/W overhead of USB entirely. This is what my new "Interchange" module does. Interchange can be swapped in to replace any of my Async USB interface modules, on my Off-Ramp converters or Overdrive DACs. It gives you wired Ethernet direct to I2S, supporting up to 384kHz and double DSD, just like the Aries. WiFi can be added with an external device, but I suspect most will use it wired. It is DLNA, so some of the extra features of the Aries are not supported.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
In an effort to obsess about something else while waiting for my esoteric to burn in, I have jumped into a nice obsession about the current state of high end music servers. The ones I listed seam to be at the top of their game for under $20k.
I have, of course, read several glowing reviews of these products. But, as I suspected, I have also read many threads on many different forms (as well as a review of the current top dog W20 from Aurender by the infamous Seaman Eben, himself, of 6moons) that state quite flatly that these $10-$16k purpose built music servers don't sound any better then a well set up, power supply upgraded, music specific computer...
I'm just not sold. But i will try an Auralic Aeris just to give it a chace; as long as it's USB works with my ODSE. |
As for servers, I have used the Antipodes several times and it will trounce most computers, particularly playing FLAC or ALAC files. It is the only server I know of that goes the full 9 yards on hardware and software. It is still a computer, but uses Linux and lots of minimized custom and optimized code. It is compatible with the Overdrive.
That said, I think the ultimate solution is not a computer and USB, but the Ethernet DAC, so the computer driving the music over the LAN does not matter anymore. This is why I'm designing the Ethernet interface.
Steve N. |
Want something that will beat any computer, hands down IMO, either the Totaldac or the Antipodes DX. |
It's a shame that this thread has degenerated to product touting by a persistent small manufacturer. I believe that there has been more than one manufacturer "touting" his wares. However, because each has identified themselves, I welcome and encourage their comments! -must be from a company that will still exist in 5 years (I think this is the biggest challenge right now) 1) Whatever I would buy will be essentially worthless 2 years later since it will be very very quickly woefully outdated. Matt, with all due respect, these kinda' seem to be mutually exclusive comments; with the exception that with the former, you may still have direct support, which is probably the reason for your "5-year" viability concern. Speaking of direct support, my best finds/purchases have come from boutique manufacturers. The manufacturer of one such piece has indeed left the scene. But before doing so, he provided schematics, which tended to counter my biggest concern. At any rate, I'm not really concerned! Perhaps I have had satistically unusually good experiences over the years. With the exception of a 1970's Phase Linear 400 amp, and a nearby lightning strike, I have never had problems with the dozens of components that I have owned. In fact, many are either mothballed or have been handed down to my son with nary a problem. So, while I understand your "5-year" sentiment, I for one, don't put much emphasis on any one manufacturer's (U.S. U.K., Europe, Asia, or otherwise) stability! I put more emphasis on a component's design and perceived quality. While researching the pages of forums such as this, there are many well respected components -- electronics, speakers, turntables etc. -- that are being traded repaired, rebuilt, etc. sans their OEM. So, I'm pretty sure that if the worst happens, finding someone to diagnose and repair an item wouldn't be as difficult as imagined. At least for me, taking the off-chance that a component’s OEM leaves the scene, has paid dividends that have surpassed any perceived chance taking. |
I am also of the opinion that the few manufacturer posters are welcome. No problem at all. They can share opinions, insights, and comedy if they like. In the end, we all learn more and will still make our own purchasing decisions based on our preferences. |
I suppose they can post but they should be civil and professional at all times without resorting to insulting and inflammatory remarks. |
|
Not so fast Mattnshilp, I believe you should look into this for a usb/spdif converter for your computer, State-of-the-art CD transports vs USB/SPDIF converter shootout:"
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/state-art-cd-transports-vs-universal-serial-bus-industry-standard-cables-connectors-and-communications-protocols-between-computers-and-electronic-devices-spdif-converter-shootout-15193/
The results of above comprehensive comparison perfectly reflect my own impressions as well, albeit via different equipment and interface (but that'd only underline the generality of the matter at hand).
Notice the difference in price between the CD-transports and USB to S/PDIF converter + server used.. ,, cheers. |
That's an informative article by Elberoth. |
UPDATE: I cheated it by 4 days. But I did my comparison. I just couldn't wait any longer.
CD ripped from my playlist.
Dsd/no filter: absolutely the lowest noise floor; but artificially so. It sounds like a noise gate is in place. I agree, edgy. Digital. Filtered, which is funny considering it's the setting without any filters.... Like the complexity of the music had been removed to fit. Imagine cropping the Mona Lisa to fit in a 2x2 passport photo.... Not my taste. But imaging was laser point...
S-Dly1/4x up conversion - warm, musical, a bit mushy at times. Like tubes, but not as good as tubes done really well. Sound stage was deep and wide. Imaging a bit soft, but not bad. Still enjoyable and I could easily see using this setting on overly bright recordings.
S-Dly2/4x up conversion - oh yeah. That's the ticket. Not sure why they really have the other settings to be honest.... But people like choices. Musical while retaining accuracy, engaging, wide, deep, sure footed and dynamic.
Next it's to start trying the USB input and use it as a DAC.
I'll keep you posted.
-Matt |
Hi Matt, your K-01 findings match my own 100% this far. Very curious about K-01 behavior as a pure DAC using USB input.... Never used K-01 as a DAC.
G. |
It's cooking as we speak (or type). another 500 hours puts us at 11/24.
I have bought a few SACD to try out on the K-01.
My attitude is this:
1) I will compare the K-01 to my beloved ODSE as a standalone DAC sourced from my MAC mini. I am dripping with curiosity to see how they compare.
2) I will relax and enjoy the SACD performance from the K-01 after 11/24 to see how much better SACD can be.
I am not really expecting the K-01 to beat the ODSE as a standalone DAC; but as I have done so far, I will be objective and do it right.
Then I need to decide if I like the SACD thing enough to justify keeping the K-01 long term. Of course, if I do end up liking the DAC in the K-01 more then the ODSE then it'l be a no brainer.
The idea of a dedicated music server does intrigue me as it will obviously be my final source. My Mac mini gives me some conveniences that no other system will offer since much of my music is purchased (routinely) on iTunes and syncs instantly to my Mac. No server will do that (I think)…. When I go the server route I will need to manually transfer each and every new album purchased on iTunes to my Server(as far as I understand, there is no way to point a Server to my iTunes folder on my Mac to stream the music from there).
Of course, I read in the manual today that there is a digital pass through feature on my K-01 that allows me to output the USB input through the SPDIF co-ax output and essentially use the K-01 as a USB to SPDIF converter; a really really freakin expensive USB to SPDIF converter…. LOL
On a side note, i am starting construction of my new dedicated listening room this Friday. |
AUdiolabyrinth - I read that article. His impressions agree with both of ours. And with Steve's. The BEST DAC is one with a built in USB to i2S converter that is top tier. As he stated, even MANY ultra exotic DAC's have crappy, inexpensive USB converters built in.
That is why the new BA Reference DAC doesn't have a USB input. They expect you to use their external USB-SPDIF conveyer if you need USB in. I respect that and wish more high end companies just went that route.
I have said, and will say again, that I think one of the big reasons my OSDE keeps beating the competition is because of its internal Off Ramp tecnhnology. Look at Alex's DSD-S as an example. He spent the time and money to put in a solid USB input and his DAC clearly showed that.
If you have a spinner or a Music Server as a source - anything with SPDIF out (or i2s) then my comparison may not be 100% applicable for your needs. But if you are using a computer as a music source, the ODSE is practically impossible to beat for close to it's price. |
Thankyou matt, I wanted you to see it, cheers. |
11-03-14: Mattnshilp
I have said, and will say again, that I think one of the big reasons my OSDE keeps beating the competition is because of its internal Off Ramp tecnhnology.
....if you are using a computer as a music source, the ODSE is practically impossible to beat for close to it's price. That first point was made by others at the beginning of this thread. One logical conclusion is to buy an Off Ramp (or something like it) for your existing dac. In an ideal (or future) audio world, a server will do this for you. Its simply an engineering lag with computers as our fish with legs.... |
I believe music servers are the future, I agree with Agear +1! |
If you use a computer as source, the current rages are HQPlayer upsampled to DSD256 in Windows ASIO or Windows Server 2012R2 in CORE mode.
I have been told that straight USB beats any converter with these two approaches, so maybe the low hanging fruit is optimization of software filtering, or killing needless computer background processes. |
I think servers are a better way to go, by far, depending on how they are built and how they run. Yes, less is always going to be more in programs.
The servers are "theoretically" better because they are already optimized for audio, and should be minimized for this. The Totaldac Server is the best that I have tried.
Look for the ones that continually update software, and the companies that can do custom software for your setup even. For example, and in my case, the way the router and NAS communicate with each other and the server. This can all be changed. Chose the LAN transfer rate, fifo settings, etc... This is all very important for the sound.
With the softwares Vincent (Totaldac) has available, I can drastically change the way my system sounds. It is really quite extraordinary, and on the level of entire component changes. |
11-04-14: Wisnon
If you use a computer as source, the current rages are HQPlayer upsampled to DSD256 in Windows ASIO or Windows Server 2012R2 in CORE mode.
I have been told that straight USB beats any converter with these two approaches, so maybe the low hanging fruit is optimization of software filtering, or killing needless computer background processes. Winson, have you been told the theory on why that's better? How is jitter addressed? |
Yes, but too complicated to get into here. Phil from AO has spent over 3 years on this problem alone and he is a full time IT guy and gave me a lot of insight.
Suffice to say TIMING is maybe the most important thing in audio and he uses only Windows SERVER OS and encourages a SERVER class motherboard.
Its well and good that some people talk about server being optimsed, but they really have to say HOW in detail.
I dont want to belittle filter tech and POWER supply, as those are critical too. |
So, my DAC only handles 44.1, 48, 96 and multiples up/24 - no 88 and multiples. Given that limitation, is it worth purchasing the 88/24 or the DSD version of Indian Architexture? Thanks. |
If your Dac cant handle DSD or in any case has its sweetspot at 24/88, then buy thta! |
"In an ideal (or future) audio world, a server will do this for you. Its simply an engineering lag"
The music server may seem like a panacea, but it isn't. The same jitter problems exist inside. Its like comparing a CD transport and a DAC and concluding that if they are combined, it will solve everything. You know how that turned-out.....
The real solution is using wired Ethernet instead of USB. This is a solution that makes the computer and its power unimportant. Cabling is unimportant. Even the playback software should in theory be unimportant, but I feel that it will be. This is why I am working on this solution now.
All of my USB interfaces will be upgradable to wired Ethernet LAN interfaces.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Steve, I am finding that the Ethernet cables are important, the supplies for the router and NAS are important, as well as the hard drive in my setup. FE, SSD are more clear sounding than standard HD's in the NAS. |
Wired ethernet like Devialet uses for there AIR streaming. |
I'm Sorry. Can you explain the benefit of Ethernet over USB?
I'm having a hard time processing what the advantages are.
Doesn't this all come down to Jitter and clocking? Wouldn't the ideal server be connected to a DAC that shares a single external high end clock?
Steve, does your ODSX have inputs for an external clock? |
The real solution is using wired Ethernet instead of USB. This is a solution that makes the computer and its power unimportant. Cabling is unimportant. Even the playback software should in theory be unimportant, but I feel that it will be. This is why I am working on this solution now. In other words, you are working on an Ethernet streamer or "renderer" that nixes the puter and takes its clocking out of the equation. Devialet and dBsystems (also out of France and which I used to own) have done that. In your own words: Have there been any disruptive advances in the Computer Audio DAC interface and how do you see this evolving in the future?
Certainly....
The next thing to look for is converters and DACs with WiFi or Ethernet interfaces that use ubiquitous software and source devices to deliver high-end sound. These will not eliminate the need to still do excellent designs and implementations and use low-jitter clocks, but it will eliminate the variability in sound quality due to computer hardware, software and cables. More folks will get better quality music playback for less money. http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-steve-nugent-empirical-audio-page-4 |
The real solution is using wired Ethernet instead of USB. This is a solution that makes the computer and its power unimportant. Cabling is unimportant. Even the playback software should in theory be unimportant, but I feel that it will be. This is why I am working on this solution now.
All of my USB interfaces will be upgradable to wired Ethernet LAN interfaces. This is reason I use wired ethernet via DLNA for years. 11-05-14: Paul79
Steve, I am finding that the Ethernet cables are important, the supplies for the router and NAS are important, as well as the hard drive in my setup. FE, SSD are more clear sounding than standard HD's in the NAS. If the server process caches TRACKS before streaming to the DAC, then only ethernet cables between computer to dac is important. I find replacing generic with AQ ethernet cable made a nice improvement. |
"I'm Sorry. Can you explain the benefit of Ethernet over USB?
I'm having a hard time processing what the advantages are."
Its Ethernet only, no USB. Ethernet is packetized and has retry error correction. It treats all data the same, unlike USB, which uses a streaming mode for audio.
"Doesn't this all come down to Jitter and clocking?"
IT always does, however there are other considerations. Because USB uses more of the computer OS audio stack and Ethernet uses none of that, this is the advantage. Also, USB is not packetized and has no error correction/retry like Ethernet.
"Wouldn't the ideal server be connected to a DAC that shares a single external high end clock?"
The ideal DAC uses a high-quality internal clock for master clock.
"Steve, does your ODSX have inputs for an external clock?"
Yes, actually. The I2S input provides the external clock(s).
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Paul79 - which Ethernet cable is important in your setup?
Are you using a USB DAC or an Ethernet interface like squeezebox?
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
"In other words, you are working on an Ethernet streamer or "renderer" that nixes the puter and takes its clocking out of the equation. Devialet and dBsystems (also out of France and which I used to own) have done that."
Correct. The difference is that I use novel techniques to reduce jitter in these interfaces.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Steve,
Totaldac Server/Reclocker, which is an ARM based mini computer running RT Lenux I think, with optimized power supply. This feeds the reclocker (in same chassis) with a USB Cable jumper. AES/EBU output to the DAC.
The NAS and Server are on the LAN ports of the router. This is all controlled with MPD software using Mpad App on Ipad. No homerun Ethernet or internet required.
The Ethernet cable going from NAS to Router is less important than the one going from Router to Server IME, but there is still an improvement even here, with the better Ethernet cable.
The better Ethernet cables provide much greater image focus.
Albeit, this is not as great a difference as different USB Cables make on a USB DAC, but the difference is really there.
Routers make a difference also! Belkin seems to be the best and most efficient here. I have Hynes supplies running the NAS and Router (12V) and the difference these made was unbelievable.
I use the Belkin AC1200 DB, and the Qnap HS-210 Dual Bay Fanless NAS with Crucial M550 1tb SSD's
So it all still matters I am finding, at least with this setup, but once dialed in, it has been quite revelatory for the sound here. |
How you guys post so quick? Mine sometimes take over a day to show up...... |
Paul79 - that is a bit disconcerting to hear. I'm hoping it will not be the case with my interface. I did not galvanically isolate because Ethernet is coupled with magnetics....
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Ya, I hear ya. Hard for me to believe when I started all this, but tuning is necessary to get the best results. I to was of the mind frame that with the packet correction and retry, the digital source would not matter. Not so!!
I will say that I could never get a computer or a Mac to sound like what I have going here. The transparency and focus is really unbelievable. |
11-06-14: Paul79
Ya, I hear ya. Hard for me to believe when I started all this, but tuning is necessary to get the best results. I to was of the mind frame that with the packet correction and retry, the digital source would not matter. Not so!!
I will say that I could never get a computer or a Mac to sound like what I have going here. The transparency and focus is really unbelievable. I agree with that Paul. Do you use the Totaldac as well or just the server? What does the rest of your system consist of? |
Though many will take this as an advertisement (no worries), I personally don't think that an all-linear powered computer with Windows Server 2012/R2 and Audiophile Optimizer, all running in Core mode can be outperformed with another computer audio solution. But things really come to place when using the computer to load an SD card that plays the audio files from the SDT-M digital transport. SD card directly to output and with linear power. IMO, this is the only solution that comes close to a regular digital transport that cannot be outperformed by any computer audio solution, regardless of technology and cost. Reasons are obvious.
Best wishes,
Alex Peychev
APL Hi-Fi |
Audioengr, have you considered caching on the client/DAC side after the interface that receives the data? Now the client should be agnostic how the data was sent? |
Agear, my system is listed in the 8-18-14 post on this thread. |
