Okay, a completely new discovery for me - Music Server - Questions...

heiney9

ChrisD06 wrote: »

treitz3 wrote: »

It's the same thing as using an upgraded power cord after or outlet hundreds of miles of non-audiophile electrical x-sfrmr's, sub stations and span. There are some things in this hobby that are inexplicable.

1's and 0's are not as cut and dry as you think.

I definitely would NOT have spent what I did on my streaming rig, had it not been for a simple Ethernet cable swap, at a whopping cost of $14. That day, I discovered something. I took that first observation and kept exploring with different things. That lead to more observations that lead to more gear to extract more of what I was (and was not) hearing at that point.

Gentlemen, here's my thoughts. I figured that I would get an answer to my inquiry within maybe a page of posts. I knew full well that it could get complicated but that a simple solution might work. We may have found that with a thumb drive to test. I may get an SSD drive if that works. Here's what I know now.

I think I'm more confused now than I was before. I'd like to apologize for not being able to respond as I normally do. Life is testing me right now with obligations, work, a new client that is....well, let's just say he's "special". When I add all of that together, along with all of my other obligations?

I do not have the time, especially when I also have to learn this "French" language. I can't tell you how many times I have had to stop and look up 3 or 4 things in one sentence, because I have no clue what it is y'all are talking about.

I used to be the same way about streaming and refining the signal/cleaning up the noise. Last year, I just so happened to get close to 3 weeks off during Christamas and I literally FORCED myself to learn about streaming, what all of the acronyms mean, what they did and how they affect something. That time is simply not available right now. That said, I am glad that I did force myself because now, when people talk about streaming gear, jitter, wave forms and all of the hundreds of acronyms? I can read through a sentence like it was a first grade book, understanding everything.

Y'all speak now and I'm just like......what in the F did he just say? Not because that sentence was hard to understand....but it is hard to understand when you don't know what the acronyms stand for, what computer stuff does what, etc..

Eventually, I will get there. I will read, re-read and re-read again and again, if needed. until I understand this "French" language, as if I were reading as I currently can read about streaming stuff now. For those who have called and PM'd me about this subject. Thank you. Very much. I really, really appreciate your assistance.

At this point I will simply ask questions, as they come across, and monitor the thread discussions. As we all head into the holiday season, time will get even more scarce.




One other note - Chris. Just shut it dude. OMG. Grow up and learn some things before you spew the diarrhea that comes out of your mouth. It is clear to EVERYONE on this forum that you know jack S about even the basics of audio. You really do not know just how ignorant you sound. You simply don't.

Tom

Until then, ignored, because I can't stand people like you. Or flat earthers, but might as well bunch you in the same group as them because it's the same reasoning and cluelessness.

You're not going to last long here and really hate it, because many of us are like Tom, we've been experiencing this hobby for a very long time. Everything matters and our ears are the final determination.

Read my signature, you just don't get it, because you think you know it all and have a very closed mind. You are obviously clueless to the subtleties of audio reproduction. There's nothing wrong with being clueless about such things until you try and "school" those of us who know better by experience. Now you come across as a sad, angry, repressed know it all.

Good luck on your audio journey, mine has been fantastic. My new amp is extraordinary.

H9

erniejade

If you are going usb drive, I have noticed some of the usb things like the AQ jitterbug fmj or ifi usb things can help clean up the power noise or help clean up the signal.

On my DJ rig, I have a 4tb Samsung ssd currently 199 on amazon. I have hooked it up to my Innuos, or when I had a Lumin, ps audio, auralic, ( yes I have gone though a few lol) and I did find having one of the usb devices did make a difference. When I got to the Innuos, the difference was slight vs huge like the Lumin D1 or auralic.

I have heard a couple of the ifi usb units but, settled on the aq fmj. I didn't have them both at the ssme time to do a comparison though.

Viking64

It appears as though Chris went to a high school keg party, came home drunk, and decided to log on to Club Polk.

Toolfan66

motorstereo

The wind blew, the comments flew, and this has been an entertaining thread for a day or two.

With that nonsense being said I understand very little of what's been said of the technical aspects of streaming but I do know how a lumberjack match works in the world of professional wrestling.

billbillw

heiney9 wrote: »

How do you explain different network switches, cables and power conditioning (router and network devices) something like the etheRegen making such a huge difference if 1's and 0's are the same? This is all done pre-conversion and that's a whole other rabbit hole.

Please read about the design of the etheRegen here and tell me again how 1's and 0's are the same? Perhaps I am blaming the 1's and 0's when it's actually a transmission issue causing the 1's and 0's to react differently. But again using better cables, better switches and a device like the etheRegen can make such a HUGE difference?

My interpretation is all 1's and 0's are not the same. Also if you think the etheRegen is snake oil, please have a counter discussion of their research and testing and why it's snake oil. References would be great.

H9

P.s. I didn't believe until I heard very apparent differences.

From EtheRegen's website:
There are two types of sound-degrading influences the EtherREGEN is designed to radically decrease: Leakage—both high-impedance and low-impedance—and clock phase-noise. The clock phase-noise travels on the Ethernet signal itself and on power- and ground-planes. [Every signal edge coming out of any digital device carries the jitter/phase-noise of the clock used to "clock out" that edge; this shows up on the ground-plane and affects the threshold of chips’ clock inputs. This is an oversimplification of a complex subject; here is the link to our 'white paper' about the technical mechanisms (to be followed with some measurement proof of the effects).

The circuitry across the ADIM™ (moat) is designed to eliminate the signal-borne phase-noise from one side to the other. EtherREGEN is mostly symmetrical—there is no “dirty side” or “clean side.” While it works identically in both directions, it is best to have the DAC-attached Ethernet endpoint device (computer/streamer/etc.) alone on one side—typically the ‘B’ side.

The circuitry between ports on the ‘A’ side decreases phase-noise effects to some degree, but not nearly as much as crossing the ‘A’>’B’ moat. It is the differential isolators used in conjunction with the differential flip-flops that delivers the performance of the EtherREGEN. The differential isolators prevent the data-borne clock signature from getting onto the ground-plane of the PCB, while the differential flip-flops prevent the signature from getting into the flip-flop’s own internal ground network. It takes the combination of these to achieve the performance of the EtherREGEN.

Absolutely none of what that device does affects the 1s and 0s. As I mentioned previously, it takes away RFI noise, which they describe in more detail.
The File is untouched, otherwise everything traveling on a network would be corrupted/degrading/lossy. That is not the case and that is widely verified by hash-tags and other security methods.
A file is a file. A signal, digital or analog, can carry out of band noise, etc. None of that is stored in the file made of 1s and 0s.

All your doing is detracting from the conversation with this nonsense. It doesn't affect how a server would be setup/designed in its core hardware/software aspects.

billbillw

I'll just add one more thing that came up in a separate conversation with Scott (msg).

USB, although it is used to connect countless DACs to streamers, has to be the weakest link in any digital playback design. It took years of design/protocol tweaking and chip design to get something that wasn't garbage for audio streaming. Having more than one USB device on a chain often increases the chance of noticing glitches in the USB connection.

Network device to network device file transfer is a much more mature and reliable protocol.

Connecting a USB thumb drive may be the quickest and easiest test for local file streaming, but it depending on how Lumin implements USB file reading, it is possible that it is not the 'best' way to playback local files.

Another option may be to use one of the Netgear routers as a NAS. I think that is a built in feature for most high end routers. People connect thumb drives or portable spinning drives to them all the time for file access.

There are lots of ways to test this.

mhardy6647

I should actually stay out of this discussion -- not because of my attitude (for a change!) but rather due to my ignorance.
My (uneducated but intuitive) sense is that there is a bit (no pun intended!) of a difference between a data file and a digital audio file in the sense that the latter must be dealt with in not one but two dimensions: amplitude and time. The former would be common with all data files, but not the latter.
Time does count for all data files whenever they're transferred (read or written), but I can intuit a difference in the impact of any time-related anomalies in transfer of a file that ultimately is dealt with in parallel (i.e., all at once, when it's actually being used) versus in series (bits streaming through a real-time decoder).
Realizing full well that I may be out in space with this "observation", I still feel moved to post it.

jdjohn

It has been mentioned before in other 'digital' type threads, but as a reminder here, we are not sending 1s and 0s down the line, nor are 1s and 0s what actually get stored on computer drives. The actual stored data is + or - magnetic charges. Yes, the + represents a 1, and the - (no charge) represents a 0, but there is not a literal 1 or 0 being stored. Likewise, there is no 1 or 0 traveling down a cable; it is a small electromagnetic charge of + or -. The binary code written to interpret/translate those electrical charges is where the 1s and 0s come into play, but not in the actual storage or transmission.

So, switches and filters are really working with electromagnetic pulses - not 1s and 0s. The potential 'noise' being treated is in relation to the electromagnetic pulses being transmitted, and not the binary code itself. Now, how would any of this said 'noise' get converted by a DAC? I have no idea. But, it seems to me that minimizing the noise is a good thing.

Regarding timing, I think CPU caches and buffers serve to control the flow of data. The cache or buffer creates a temporary storage tank, if you will, of the data, so that the CPU can sip from the tank as needed, rather than drink straight from the hose and potentially choke.

treitz3

It is those electromagnetic highs and lows that can be altered, if the signal being read has noise on the line. In other words, a 0 can be interpreted as a one, and vice versa.

This, equates to distortion and is very audible. Assuming no file corruption, how those little one and zeros are read becomes a whole other ball game.

Addressing these issues are what I did (extensively) in my streaming rig. From filters, to moats, to upping the speed rate of the cables to reclocking.....basically every aspect possible was addressed to the best of what I could afford. All of that combined made for a huge uptick in sound quality.

Not only of what you hear, but what you don't hear as well.

Tom

invalid

@jdjohn quite right, I'll add that there is no such thing as a digital signal in the natural world, this includes electromagnetic charge, only the interpretation is digital.

ChrisD06

billbillw wrote: »

heiney9 wrote: »

How do you explain different network switches, cables and power conditioning (router and network devices) something like the etheRegen making such a huge difference if 1's and 0's are the same? This is all done pre-conversion and that's a whole other rabbit hole.

Please read about the design of the etheRegen here and tell me again how 1's and 0's are the same? Perhaps I am blaming the 1's and 0's when it's actually a transmission issue causing the 1's and 0's to react differently. But again using better cables, better switches and a device like the etheRegen can make such a HUGE difference?

My interpretation is all 1's and 0's are not the same. Also if you think the etheRegen is snake oil, please have a counter discussion of their research and testing and why it's snake oil. References would be great.

H9

P.s. I didn't believe until I heard very apparent differences.

From EtheRegen's website:
There are two types of sound-degrading influences the EtherREGEN is designed to radically decrease: Leakage—both high-impedance and low-impedance—and clock phase-noise. The clock phase-noise travels on the Ethernet signal itself and on power- and ground-planes. [Every signal edge coming out of any digital device carries the jitter/phase-noise of the clock used to "clock out" that edge; this shows up on the ground-plane and affects the threshold of chips’ clock inputs. This is an oversimplification of a complex subject; here is the link to our 'white paper' about the technical mechanisms (to be followed with some measurement proof of the effects).

The circuitry across the ADIM™ (moat) is designed to eliminate the signal-borne phase-noise from one side to the other. EtherREGEN is mostly symmetrical—there is no “dirty side” or “clean side.” While it works identically in both directions, it is best to have the DAC-attached Ethernet endpoint device (computer/streamer/etc.) alone on one side—typically the ‘B’ side.

The circuitry between ports on the ‘A’ side decreases phase-noise effects to some degree, but not nearly as much as crossing the ‘A’>’B’ moat. It is the differential isolators used in conjunction with the differential flip-flops that delivers the performance of the EtherREGEN. The differential isolators prevent the data-borne clock signature from getting onto the ground-plane of the PCB, while the differential flip-flops prevent the signature from getting into the flip-flop’s own internal ground network. It takes the combination of these to achieve the performance of the EtherREGEN.

Absolutely none of what that device does affects the 1s and 0s. As I mentioned previously, it takes away RFI noise, which they describe in more detail.
The File is untouched, otherwise everything traveling on a network would be corrupted/degrading/lossy. That is not the case and that is widely verified by hash-tags and other security methods.
A file is a file. A signal, digital or analog, can carry out of band noise, etc. None of that is stored in the file made of 1s and 0s.

All your doing is detracting from the conversation with this nonsense. It doesn't affect how a server would be setup/designed in its core hardware/software aspects.

Furthermore, digital signals are transferred using square waves, in DC voltage. It's high (1) or low (0) and that comprises the binary data. You'd need quite a lot of signal noise to affect a digital signal in the first place, because of the way its transmitted, but if it does get affected, the highs and lows of the wave are different enough in voltage that any noise that makes its way through will not degrade the signal because the 1 and 0 is still interpreted correctly and is within a large margin of error. If you had enough noise in a setup to flip a 1 to a 0 or vice versa, then none of your devices that use cables, digital or analog, would work properly. It's an obscene amount of EMF needed to harm this data.

There is an exception Ive found though, and that's running an unshielded ethernet cables in just the right way around a coiled unshielded power cable carrying 120V. That will produce enough noise to cause issues, fortunately the error correction manages to work past this with the downside being slower speeds. The only time you'll need to worry about this EMF is a microwave that has no shielding (can kill you), living right under a cell tower, living extremely close to super high voltage power lines, or unshielded power cables running in just the right way near your unshielded digital cables.

Otherwise, the engineers who spent years designing and perfecting these made it so the technology does this work for you.

jbreezy5

motorstereo wrote: »

The wind blew, the comments flew, and this has been an entertaining thread for a day or two.

With that nonsense being said I understand very little of what's been said of the technical aspects of streaming but I do know how a lumberjack match works in the world of professional wrestling.

https://youtu.be/62bYUbiPpc4?si=sMEu3jCv6yk_i7ZX

billbillw

billbillw wrote: »

Another option may be to use one of the Netgear routers as a NAS. I think that is a built in feature for most high end routers. People connect thumb drives or portable spinning drives to them all the time for file access.

Did some checking on the Netgear MK83 and it appears that does not have any NAS features.

audioluvr

This is how we need to be getting along.

tonyb

seems like clockwork, we have periods of relative peace and harmony, then usually one or 2 naysayers who think there is nothing better in audio than their Denon receiver and apple airplay because....ya know, the science. Numbers tell all there is to tell, supposedly.

If that is your belief, your certainly welcome to it, but you might want to think twice about joining audio forums where the pursuit of sound quality goes well beyond 1's and 0's. The Boze forum is down the street and around the corner....which might suit your tastes better.

Upstatemax

It's wonderful to see in this ever changing world, some things might never change.

Good ol' Polk Audio forum...

I do find it funny that the 2 hobbies I've chosen (audio and cycling), seem to have similar levels of nerdiness and arguing about the dumbest crap.

treitz3

Chris wrote:

Blah, blah, blah.....

Thread crap somewhere else. You have no clue what you are talking about. I am NOT talking about the basics here. Now, kindly buzz off!

You have zero, and I do mean ZERO information that has helped, or been remotely relevant to my discussion.....other than the basics.....and you are incorrect with some of that as well. Go back to your own playground. Leave us alone.

Tom

treitz3

One thing I forgot to mention in what was in my streaming rig is the associated upstream gear, seperate from what's plugged in at the rig. I have 5 Puron's, 3 noise eliminators, 1A/C line filter and 5 spike arrestors. I have also put in upgraded modems, routers and made sure they all had LPS's, upgraded the RG5 to RG8 and upgraded the PC's leading up to them, with a Shunyata Alpha Ethernet cable between the modem and the router, which also has a filter.

I also have a an AQ Niagara 1000 power conditioner that I still have yet to install at the modem/mesh router area at the opposite side of the house. In theory, that should also reduce some of the noise. I'll post about that when I have the time....as to whether or not it was beneficial to anything in the house....but more specifically, the rig.

Everything I have added at the rig and upstream from the rig has reduced the amount of signal and line noise to the streaming rig.

motorstereo

jbreezy5 wrote: »

motorstereo wrote: »

The wind blew, the comments flew, and this has been an entertaining thread for a day or two.

With that nonsense being said I understand very little of what's been said of the technical aspects of streaming but I do know how a lumberjack match works in the world of professional wrestling.

https://youtu.be/62bYUbiPpc4?si=sMEu3jCv6yk_i7ZX

Nope; Hacksaw and his 2x4 don't a lumberjack match make. The squared circle was surrounded with other wrestlers to keep things on the up and up. We don't want any cheating in pro wrestling.

RyanC_Masimo

pitdogg2 wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance here.
With hard drives in the multi-terabit era, why not use WAV files over FLAC?
While FLAC is "lossless" it's still tossing out something if it's smaller than WAV files. While doing a bit of research trying to understand it seems folks think WAV files are better audio wise. Are the streamers the choke point in that they like the FLAC files better than WAV ?
A snippet from a discussion.

WAV files offer great sound quality, but they tend to be large in size : which can be an issue if you want to save storage space on your device or share the file with someone else online. FLAC is much smaller in size, but it also offers lower sound quality than WAV.

FLAC is probably the best widespread compression algorithm to use but ultimately is still a compression algorithm. Over the years of working in studio and live sound engineering I've noted a lot of my mentors and other professionals still opting for WAV over FLAC if possible. WAV usually is how music these days is exported directly from the DAW (some DAWs differ with options for export but WAV is usually the standard) so it has the minimal changes from the source files that were recorded since it is the mix bus sum of the entire session. That all said, you are running the source file through the codec to result in a smaller and "lossless" audio file that is FLAC but there is certainly some sort of digital changes happening within that conversion.
To he honest, most people, if not all, probably cannot hear a difference and even being in multimillion dollar studios with professional grade gear, I could not personally pinpoint the differences between the two and neither could some of my more experienced peers. It kind of boils down to the same debate on if studio engineers should be recording and mixing in higher sample rates although we cannot hear beyond 20khz but that is an entirely different debate. I still opt to use WAV files for my personal use if my gear allows for it but it seems network streamers do have a choke point in reproducing WAV files due to their size, I'd have to look more into this. I'd be interested in seeing what others have experienced in this realm as these days I only grab a FLAC file if that is the only one available and will personally opt for WAV.

Emlyn

Same experience here.

What got me started on ripping CDs was not any desire for high fidelity but my desire to use an iPod for travel music and using iTunes to maintain a small library. MP3 format was fine for that. When I got serious I stopped using iTunes and ripped my entire 2K plus CD collection into WAV format after settling on JRiver as my media manager.

Must've taken me a year off and on to rip all my CDs! I realized it was going to take time so decided to use a format for archiving without compression and "do it right the first time." Part of what persuaded me to do that was a series of articles in The Absolute Sound and other chatter that some experienced listeners could hear a difference between files originally created from CDs in FLAC and WAV formats. The recommendation I trusted was that storage was getting less expensive so why spend time ripping CDs into what "might" yield inferior results. I have no idea what might cause a slight audible difference.

It takes listening on a highly resolving system for me to hear a difference but I can hear it. FLAC is actually my primary casual listening format because it's more portable and better at holding meta data when portable than WAV files. The best sounding files to my ears are WAV files turned into DSD files when they're played back on an SSD based media player that relies on an internal DSD DAC without re-converting the files. They are notably smoother than files stored in FLAC or WAV format without losing details and dynamics. But they're also really not for mobile use and not really necessary for that. YMMV

treitz3

Emlyn wrote: »

It takes listening on a highly resolving system for me to hear a difference but I can hear it.

Interesting. Thanks to both you and @RyanC_Masimo for your observations. This is part of what I was asking to begin with. Since I am not interested in taking things portable, and the fact that I want to listen to the absolute best I can hear?

At least we have settled on one thing. I will be doing the copying into a WAV file. The only thing I have to check on is can my DAC and the Lumin do/decode that kind of file.

I definitely have a highly resolving system, so this is a very important aspect for me. I don't want to do anything to thwart the end result as to what hits my ears. Thanks again, gentlemen. That information is extermely valuable to me. It is very much appreciated. I only want to do this once.

Tom

treitz3

jdjohn wrote: »

So, switches and filters are really working with electromagnetic pulses - not 1s and 0s. The potential 'noise' being treated is in relation to the electromagnetic pulses being transmitted, and not the binary code itself. Now, how would any of this said 'noise' get converted by a DAC? I have no idea. But, it seems to me that minimizing the noise is a good thing.

Here is a snippet from a recognized technical expert in the field. This mimics what I was reading last year when I was learning anything and everything about reducing noise during my time off.

"Most DACs include asynchronous clock recovery and data buffering to isolate the actual DAC inside the box from the incoming data stream. This isolates the DAC itself (the thing inside the box that does the actual digital to analog conversion) from any jitter on the incoming data. A phase-locked loop (PLL) with a separate reference clock is used to pull the data from the internal data buffer and provide a "clean" stream to the DAC. The PLL is designed to lock onto a clock and filter out any noise outside its bandwidth".

Then you get into the Nyquist rate/theorem and a whole other level of things that were beyond the scope of what I was looking to achieve, so I stopped there.

What I have learned with the streamers is that the more you clean up the signal prior to said signal entering into the streamer? Less packets need to be sent back and corrected/less corrections need to be made overall, which in turn, frees up the processor to work on other things. It also greatly reduces the chance of a high being mistakenly read as a low due to jitter and other factors. (cleaning up the A/C line will help this as well) This gives the processor "headroom", if you will. In turn, the less the DAC has to do? The more it can work on simply refining the signal even more (aforementioned), before it gets to the actual D2A conversion.

There is a lot more to it, but this should at least give you the jist. The Muon you suggested to Trey was a damned good recommendation. When I heard his, I HAD to get one, for what it brought to the table!

Tom

invalid

treitz3 wrote: »

jdjohn wrote: »

So, switches and filters are really working with electromagnetic pulses - not 1s and 0s. The potential 'noise' being treated is in relation to the electromagnetic pulses being transmitted, and not the binary code itself. Now, how would any of this said 'noise' get converted by a DAC? I have no idea. But, it seems to me that minimizing the noise is a good thing.

Here is a snippet from a recognized technical expert in the field. This mimics what I was reading last year when I was learning anything and everything about reducing noise during my time off.

"Most DACs include asynchronous clock recovery and data buffering to isolate the actual DAC inside the box from the incoming data stream. This isolates the DAC itself (the thing inside the box that does the actual digital to analog conversion) from any jitter on the incoming data. A phase-locked loop (PLL) with a separate reference clock is used to pull the data from the internal data buffer and provide a "clean" stream to the DAC. The PLL is designed to lock onto a clock and filter out any noise outside its bandwidth".

Then you get into the Nyquist rate/theorem and a whole other level of things that were beyond the scope of what I was looking to achieve, so I stopped there.

What I have learned with the streamers is that the more you clean up the signal prior to said signal entering into the streamer? Less packets need to be sent back and corrected/less corrections need to be made overall, which in turn, frees up the processor to work on other things. It also greatly reduces the chance of a high being mistakenly read as a low due to jitter and other factors. (cleaning up the A/C line will help this as well) This gives the processor "headroom", if you will. In turn, the less the DAC has to do? The more it can work on simply refining the signal even more (aforementioned), before it gets to the actual D2A conversion.

There is a lot more to it, but this should at least give you the jist. The Muon you suggested to Trey was a damned good recommendation. When I heard his, I HAD to get one, for what it brought to the table!

Tom

Totally correct, plus I believe the more corrections can cause more noise that can enter the analog domain.

heiney9

treitz3 wrote: »

jdjohn wrote: »

So, switches and filters are really working with electromagnetic pulses - not 1s and 0s. The potential 'noise' being treated is in relation to the electromagnetic pulses being transmitted, and not the binary code itself. Now, how would any of this said 'noise' get converted by a DAC? I have no idea. But, it seems to me that minimizing the noise is a good thing.

Here is a snippet from a recognized technical expert in the field. This mimics what I was reading last year when I was learning anything and everything about reducing noise during my time off.

"Most DACs include asynchronous clock recovery and data buffering to isolate the actual DAC inside the box from the incoming data stream. This isolates the DAC itself (the thing inside the box that does the actual digital to analog conversion) from any jitter on the incoming data. A phase-locked loop (PLL) with a separate reference clock is used to pull the data from the internal data buffer and provide a "clean" stream to the DAC. The PLL is designed to lock onto a clock and filter out any noise outside its bandwidth".

Then you get into the Nyquist rate/theorem and a whole other level of things that were beyond the scope of what I was looking to achieve, so I stopped there.

What I have learned with the streamers is that the more you clean up the signal prior to said signal entering into the streamer? Less packets need to be sent back and corrected/less corrections need to be made overall, which in turn, frees up the processor to work on other things. It also greatly reduces the chance of a high being mistakenly read as a low due to jitter and other factors. (cleaning up the A/C line will help this as well) This gives the processor "headroom", if you will. In turn, the less the DAC has to do? The more it can work on simply refining the signal even more (aforementioned), before it gets to the actual D2A conversion.

There is a lot more to it, but this should at least give you the jist. The Muon you suggested to Trey was a damned good recommendation. When I heard his, I HAD to get one, for what it brought to the table!

Tom

So, all 1's and 0's are not the same. They need to be transmitted to be converted to analog. Lot's of obstacles as stated above can interfere or at least cause issues during transmission. Get rid of some or all of the obstacles and you get a better end result that many can hear.

H9

machone

I have some mojo-audio components in my system and they have never disappointed. I incorporated many of his recommendations such as dedicated AC power circuits, low power solid state fanless computer, linear power supplies along with his dac.
He believes in error prevention rather than error correction.

His blog helped me and has good info on digital.

https://www.mojo-audio.com/blog/

billbillw

So are we talking about setting up a server or reducing the noise at the end of the line before the streamer?

Regarding FLAC vs WAV, there is no loss in converting. You can go from one back to the other and always have the same audio file, which can be verified using complex analysis tools.

It may be true that some under powered streamers play back a WAV file better because their processor has more breathing room, but my Daphile box has plenty of CPU overhead. I've never been able to hear a difference and my system is pretty resolving.

FLAC is much better at holding song/album Metadata as well.

Either way, you can't make a wrong decision because something like Fubar2000 could convert from one to the other in seconds.

I can tell you, the stuff coming from Qobuz is not stored in WAV format.

erniejade

When I had a lunin, it did wave just fine. Most dac's can do wave. Even on the old lumin d1 I could hear the difference between wave and flac.

Having a resolving system is a blessing and a curse at the same time.

Example, Chicao II ( just called Chicago) on my rig sounds horrible and almost unlistenable but, on my friends rig who is running old concert type speakers in his house on old crown amps, sounds ok. His system couldn't resolve what mine could.

Why haven't you tried the Niagara 1000? I have the 5000 and it was night and day for me BUT, I do not have a dedicated circuit. I didn't know I had a noise issue until I got that in my rig. Maybe if I had a dedicated circuit, it might not have been so drastic.

treitz3

billbillw wrote: »

USB, although it is used to connect countless DACs to streamers, has to be the weakest link in any digital playback design.

Good evening, Bill. I am in no way confronting you on this, but I do have to ask. The reason, is that the users of the Taiko Extreme seem to contradict your stance on the USB connection. By quite a margin as well. (See below)



This, from the thread over at the WBF - https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/taiko-audio-sgm-extreme-the-crème-de-la-crème.27433/#post-555907

This is the server I would love to own but unless I win the jackpot in the lottery I'm not even playing? It ain't ever gonna happen. My question is this...

Given that this server is currently the Bugatti Chiron of audio, why would the bulk of the users use the weakest link?

My apologies for getting a little off topic with cleaning up the signal on the streamer side of things but a question was asked and while 1's and 0's may remain the same in the file, The way it's read serves a very important part of the reproductive effort.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

erniejade wrote: »

When I had a lunin, it did wave just fine. Most dac's can do wave. Even on the old lumin d1 I could hear the difference between wave and flac.

Another observation. Thanks for the feedback about the Lumin being able to do WAV.

erniejade wrote: »

Having a resolving system is a blessing and a curse at the same time.

It can be with certain things but I wouldn't ever go back. I get way, way too involved into the raw power of the music now....instead of constantly picking it apart, wondering what I could do to improve things.

erniejade wrote: »

Why haven't you tried the Niagara 1000? I have the 5000 and it was night and day for me BUT, I do not have a dedicated circuit. I didn't know I had a noise issue until I got that in my rig. Maybe if I had a dedicated circuit, it might not have been so drastic.

I have had mixed results over the years with various power conditioners/regenerators. I have zero intention of ever putting one on the rig but when I put the RG 400Pro back in the rig to get more outlets? It actually helped when I plugged just the items that power the LPS's, ER and clock that help prep the streaming part of the rig. It was a slight change but a nice one, nonetheless.

I bought the AQ 1000 to do the same thing to the gear that has the modem, router, the associated LPS's and whatnot. I have had it for a while but have been having a blast simply listening and enjoying where the rig is currently at. When I do it, I'd like to also do some cable management in that area as well (my son's gaming system resides right next to this). Time. It's the time that has been escaping me.

It may blow me away, it may be detrimental, it may offer some deficiencies. I don't know. When I get some time, I'll address getting that installed and experiment with different PC's in that area as well. BUT, when I do that, my family can't be here because what they do (whether for work or for personal time) is usually associated with using the internet. That difficult to get that installed, clean up the cable management and experiment within a time frame that's acceptable to them.

Tom