Research the Taiko Extreme and diy clones for technical explanations of factors impacting SQ in servers. I have diy server built with enterprise level components using JCAT Optimo S ATX power supply. Combine lowest noise, latency, accurate timing and fast processing for best server sound quality.
What makes One Music Server Sound Better than Another?
So this week my Mojo Audio DejaVu music server that I have used for the past 2-3 years crapped out. Benjamin at Mojo was more than helpful and the DejaVu is on its way to Mojo Audio where it will make a full recovery.
Thankfully, I still have my Antipodes DX2 Gen 3 (their former flagship) music server so I hooked it up. After wrestling with Roon protocols, transfers, and set-up menus, I was able to get it going so I have music. The DX and my Sonore Sig Rendu SE opt. are both connected to my network so the DX (like the DejaVu), is only being used as a Roon core and the Sig Rendu SE serves as the Roon endpoint for streaming Tidal and Qobuz, with a direct USB connection to my DAC.
The point of this thread is to ask, how come I perceive the the DejaVu server as sounding better than the Antipdes DX? In fairness, the differences I perceive are not great but it seems the DejaVu is fuller sounding, more tonally rich, and bolder. Is this why some here spend $10K+ on a Grimm, Taiko or something else?
If a server is basically a computer, sending digital information to a streamer/endpoint and, assuming that digital information is transmitted asynchronously and reclocked by the DAC’s master clock, and assuming noise is not the issue (i.e., both units are quiet and there is an optical break between the network and both the server and endpoint) then what are the technical reasons one should sound better than the other? It is not that I want to spend $10K+ on a music server with a lifespan of maybe 5 years before becoming obsolete, but I would like to understand what more you are getting for your money. So far, the best I can come up with is lower internal noise as the major factor.
As a side note to the above, when I thought things looked hopeless for getting set up, I scheduled a support session with Antipodes and, although I lucked into the solution before the meeting time, Mark Cole responded ready to help. Setting up the session was super easy and reminded me of the superior level of support I had come to enjoy from Antipodes during the time that the DX was my primary server, including multiple updates and 2 or 3 hardware upgrades, which prolonged the service life of the DX. Good products and good company.
- ...
- 156 posts total
I'm talking about the SQ of a server when using an endpoint over a network. It is the same set of bits at the receiving end, no matter the transmitter. That exact configuration is all I'm referring to. As I said in my post above, if that wasn't true, then emailing word files would introduce typos and your bank account balance would be different every time you check it. That isn't to say that fancy servers don't have their advantages in terms of other functions and features, support, being well built, and looking cool. But over a network, the packets don't know if they are coming from a supercomputer or a networked doorbell. |
but @jji666 it sounds better. it does. you do not have to enjoy better sound. |
Not sure if this is jest. But if it sounds better, which empirical result I am open to, then it is because there is a different configuration. The server is not sending the same set of bits, which necessarily means that the server has something different configured within the software. Because it cannot sound anything but exactly the same unless the bits it sends are different. The receiver simply doesn't know whether those bits are coming from a fancy server or a Raspberry Pi. |
- 156 posts total