Why DIY computer-based music servers are not ready for me

ack · Sep 23, 2012

I have been researching this subject for the last two years. Unsurprising to many, my overall conclusion is that there are two main issues: a) the computer has to be extra-ordinarily optimized, like everything else in the audio chain; and b) USB is an inferior interface to AES/EBU. Convenience aside, to invest, thus, in such a source system I would then have to be itching to own true hi-rez material, like RR HRx, which I don't since 16-bit + HDCD comes close enough to true hi-rez, therefore not worth my trouble. Subsequently, it then became a simple question for me: could I come up with a computer configuration (hardware and software) that would be more optimized than a stellar transport like the Spectral SDR-3000 and the Berkeley Alpha DAC, which I use, using the AES/EBU interface?

On the hardware side, as a consumer, it's virtually impossible to figure out what exactly works best (see more below). On the OS side, Windows-based servers appear not to be the best candidates for this type of application, but UNIX-based, like mach2music.com (or any Mac-based) perhaps fit the bill better. Sadly, mach2music has been out of business for some time now. Some folks have gone to extraordinary lengths to optimize the playback, like Jplay that's been discussed here a number of times. TAS, in its January 2012 issue, features a very nice article that attempts to rate ripping, playback, burning and other software, and at the top we find a couple of offerings, like JRiver for ripping and the user interface plus JPlay as the preferred playback as a plugin to JRiver, in Hibernate mode to shut down as much of the Windows PC functions as possible, and for other reasons like loading the entire track in memory before playback. This combination is apparently favored over Foobar2000 and cPlay (by many on the net as well as the reviewer below).

Say what we may about many reviews, but the 6moons piece on Jplay is dead on with what I know and have observed, and a real must-read in my mind: http://6moons.com/audioreviews/jplay/1.html. Here are some excerpts worthy of special attention:

there are several settings you can experiment with such as Buffer. Essentially use the lowest possible setting possible before you get ticks and pops. This will depend on your computer’s specs, your audio interface driver and the bit depth/sampling rate of the music files.
...
I found this feature to have a profound impact on sound quality. Interestingly, Josef pointed out in an email exchange that it is impossible to send one sample at a time to a DAC via USB even with 16-bit/44.1kHz (1/44100 = 23 microseconds) material. The lowest any USB DAC or USB-SPDIF interface can support is 1000 microseconds due to limits imposed by USB. Even the new USB 3 standard is limited to 250 microseconds. That still leaves 10 samples as the absolute minimum package one can send down a USB pipe at a time. Regardless of which USB standard your gear uses, its driver still has to buffer samples before shooting it down the wire. So one has to ask how feeding a USB driver one sample at a time can possibly affect sound quality. According to Josef, "it's a real mystery but the fact that most people report sonic benefits with smaller buffers just shows how little we know about computer-based music playback and why this exciting area still has some room to grow."

Hibernate Mode is arguably the most powerful feature which shuts down every non-essential process including I/O devices and leaves just enough computer resources to play music but nothing else. Once you have loaded an album, track or playlist into Hibernate Mode, you lose control of your PC until playback is finished. Your screen will go black, keyboard and mouse will stop functioning.

Going FullScale Hibernate mode again upped the ante. Here was the absolute pinnacle in sound quality. Even standard Redbook sounded great

Well, my standard Redbook has been sounding great for a very long time...

With respect to hardware:

One wonders what else could possibly improve playback further. Indeed I asked Josef and Marcin that very question. There’s already a lengthy thread on their forum discussing this. According to Marcin, "the PC should be treated with the same attention to detail as any regular mechanical transport. Obviously there are very few 'audiophile' PC components available and this field is also very new so we have to experiment. But I can tell you that almost everything matters: quality of power supply, power cord quality, motherboard selection, RAM selection, almost every component - even USB or SATA chip sets have an effect on SQ as do SATA cables. Right now I use JPlay with my operating system on an SSD in an external SATA-USB enclosure powered by a linear PSU connected to the PC via USB over fiber-optics extender and high quality USB cable. My DAC also is connected via USB over a fiber-optics extender."

And to top it all off:

Addendum: Just prior to publication I installed the latest beta of Windows 8 as per Marcin’s and Josef’s prompting. I’m not sure what Microsoft has altered in their coding over Windows 7 that could cause this but there’s clearly greater textural fidelity and a more natural relaxed sense of flow.

Technology aside, I have never really been wowed with the sound of Redbook when my dealer drives the Alpha DAC from his optimized server (and I believe they have also evaluated a number with minimal success), except when playing HRx - but then it's the true hi-rez material that trumps Redbook, not the server itself. In the end, no matter how good a USB-to-SPDIF bridge one builds, I can't see how the overall approach can better a direct SPDIF or AES/EBU feed from an excellent, optimized transport. What I need is a stellar, dedicated CD/DVD-A/SACD transport and a DAC to go with it - or better still, DACs where you first upload the entire content and then interact with them exclusively (memory is so cheap these days!). So as far as DIY computer-based audio goes in the here and now, I am done with this subject, probably for a very long time - and I don't need the convenience either. On with trying to figure out which commercial products fit my ideal architectural approach.

microstrip · Sep 23, 2012

ack said:
(...) So as far as DIY computer-based audio goes in the here and now, I am done with this subject, probably for a very long time - and I don't need the convenience either. On with trying to figure out which commercial products fit my ideal architectural approach.

Ack,

This forum should have an applause Smiley!

I have decided to stay with an integrated CD player that matches well my system. The only system that called my attention - the Metonome Kalista - was too expensive, but I missed it when he left my room after a short stay.

edorr · Sep 24, 2012

ack said:
I have been researching this subject for the last two years. Unsurprising to many, my overall conclusion is that there are two main issues: a) the computer has to be extra-ordinarily optimized, like everything else in the audio chain; and b) USB is an inferior interface to AES/EBU. Convenience aside, to invest, thus, in such a source system I would then have to be itching to own true hi-rez material, like RR HRx, which I don't since 16-bit + HDCD comes close enough to true hi-rez, therefore not worth my trouble. Subsequently, it then became a simple question for me: could I come up with a computer configuration (hardware and software) that would be more optimized than a stellar transport like the Spectral SDR-3000 and the Berkeley Alpha DAC, which I use, using the AES/EBU interface?

On the hardware side, as a consumer, it's virtually impossible to figure out what exactly works best (see more below). On the OS side, Windows-based servers appear not to be the best candidates for this type of application, but UNIX-based, like mach2music.com (or any Mac-based) perhaps fit the bill better. Sadly, mach2music has been out of business for some time now. Some folks have gone to extraordinary lengths to optimize the playback, like Jplay that's been discussed here a number of times. TAS, in its January 2012 issue, features a very nice article that attempts to rate ripping, playback, burning and other software, and at the top we find a couple of offerings, like JRiver for ripping and the user interface plus JPlay as the preferred playback as a plugin to JRiver, in Hibernate mode to shut down as much of the Windows PC functions as possible, and for other reasons like loading the entire track in memory before playback. This combination is apparently favored over Foobar2000 and cPlay (by many on the net as well as the reviewer below).

Say what we may about many reviews, but the 6moons piece on Jplay is dead on with what I know and have observed, and a real must-read in my mind: http://6moons.com/audioreviews/jplay/1.html. Here are some excerpts worthy of special attention:

Well, my standard Redbook has been sounding great for a very long time...

With respect to hardware:

And to top it all off:

Technology aside, I have never really been wowed with the sound of Redbook when my dealer drives the Alpha DAC from his optimized server (and I believe they have also evaluated a number with minimal success), except when playing HRx - but then it's the true hi-rez material that trumps Redbook, not the server itself. In the end, no matter how good a USB-to-SPDIF bridge one builds, I can't see how the overall approach can better a direct SPDIF or AES/EBU feed from an excellent, optimized transport. What I need is a stellar, dedicated CD/DVD-A/SACD transport and a DAC to go with it - or better still, DACs where you first upload the entire content and then interact with them exclusively (memory is so cheap these days!). So as far as DIY computer-based audio goes in the here and now, I am done with this subject, probably for a very long time - and I don't need the convenience either. On with trying to figure out which commercial products fit my ideal architectural approach.

You could look inot the aesthetix romulus CD player. This is a very high grade DAC, with optional preamp, multiple digital inputs and a TEAC CD transport build in for a mere $1000 premium over the DAC only Pandora product.

daytona600 · Sep 24, 2012

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/NVA-TFS-C...ision_Other&hash=item336f000de9#ht_918wt_1053

friend of mine just bought one of these All in one units , not heard it yet myself but looks very nice

docvale · Sep 24, 2012

I cannot comment about comparison is audio quality, as all the comparisons I've done occurred with gear which is not SoTA.
Notwithstanding, I think that the plus of computer audio is the comfort.

Using digital playback mostly for casual listening, I frequently jump from an album to another, so the idea to handle tons of discs in front of me just belongs to the past

For serious listening, I love to spin vinyls: in that case, I'm addicted to the ritual of handling the physical media and to listen the entire album.

So, for me, thumbs up for a Mac Mini w/ Pure Music and a USB cable.

asiufy · Sep 24, 2012

ack,

Most of what you quoted are issues related to a Windows-based solution. Go with a Mac, and you'll avoid all that.
All you need is a Mac (a laptop will give you better results than a Mac mini), iTunes, and some player software (Pure Music, Audirvana, etc.)
If you have an iPad or iPhone, you can even control it remotely.
If you go that way expecting it to beat the ol' transport, you'll find it won't. But it's a solution that'll provide enough joy, given its relative low cost. Also, if you have a sizaeable collection of media, it'll help you navigate through it, finding that one song you haven't heard in a long time...

alexandre

ack · Sep 24, 2012

So for me, the question was always very simple: could even the best async/reclocking USB-to-S/PDIF converters - like the Berkeley Alpha USB, which also isolates the AES/EBU circuit from the USB noise and all - ever offer better jitter performance than the low-teen picoseconds that the transport I use is capable of? I could never find any data, and it was very hard to believe that. At the end of the day, if I wanted to play true hi-rez like HRx, I could just get any good Windows laptop with the proper chipset that supports 24/196, dBpoweramp for ripping, plus JRiver/JPlay, iPad/Remote, install the dedicated WASAPI driver that the Berkeley Alpha USB comes with, shut down unnecessary services, and then let the converter give me the lowest possible jitter performance. If that jitter performance on the output still depends on the host server, then we are in deep trouble. My friends at Goodwin's have got this quite right although that server is unnecessarily overpowered.

I am still looking for the DAC that will host an entire program on board, and let you then interact with it exclusively.

hvbias · Sep 24, 2012

I have to agree with ack, to me no USB converter comes close a PCI or PCI-Express professional sound card with digital output (ie Lynx AES16 or RME HDSP). Which means to use either of those you have to get a Mac Pro desktop or use a Windows based PC. IMO you can get terrific sound with a Windows based PC with one of those professional digital out cards to a high quality DAC.

mep · Sep 24, 2012

Do you guys really think that the Mytek Stereo 192 mastering version DAC is inferior to a computer sound card? If you haven't heard a PC based music server into a really good USB DAC, you simply have no idea how good they can sound. I'm comparing the sound of my Mytek against the sound I get from 15 ips 2 track tapes played back from my Otari MX-55 through a pair of Ampex 350s.

FrantzM · Sep 24, 2012

mep said:
Do you guys really think that the Mytek Stereo 192 mastering version DAC is inferior to a computer sound card? If you haven't heard a PC based music server into a really good USB DAC, you simply have no idea how good they can sound. I'm comparing the sound of my Mytek against the sound I get from 15 ips 2 track tapes played back from my Otari MX-55 through a pair of Ampex 350s.

mep

This is getting dangerously close to heresy and sacrilege ... Careful

hvbias · Sep 24, 2012

mep said:
Do you guys really think that the Mytek Stereo 192 mastering version DAC is inferior to a computer sound card? If you haven't heard a PC based music server into a really good USB DAC, you simply have no idea how good they can sound. I'm comparing the sound of my Mytek against the sound I get from 15 ips 2 track tapes played back from my Otari MX-55 through a pair of Ampex 350s.

I have not heard the Mytek. I can only offer my opinion based on the USB converters I have heard using a highly modified Assemblage DAC 3.1 Platinum, PS audio PerfectWave, and Berkeley Alpha 1. With all 3 DACs my friends and I preferred Lynx and RME digital output. Those sound card as "transport" were even better than highly regarded CD transports like CEC.

The soundcard is not outputting the analog signal. It is only used for the digital output.

I do not think I am being biased as I myself use a Musical Fidelity V-Link which is USB based. I simply don't have the time to build a Windows server, configure it, etc at the moment... but I plan to after hearing how good those pro cards were.

JackD201 · Sep 25, 2012

FrantzM said:
mep

This is getting dangerously close to heresy and sacrilege ... Careful

Must be the meds. LOL. Sorry Mark, bad joke. Hope your arm is feeling better.

michael123 · Sep 25, 2012

ack said:
I have been researching this subject for the last two years. Unsurprising to many, my overall conclusion is..

..but you quote mainly marketing, misleading material..

ack said:
a) the computer has to be extra-ordinarily optimized, like everything else in the audio chain;

briefly - no. Depends on the DAC anyway. BTW you can buy C.A.P.S. server from some retailers, not really DIY but somebody else will Do-It-For-You

ack said:
b) USB is an inferior interface to AES/EBU.

USB is not an audio interface. Quality of USB audio depends on the DAC primarily, although you can invest in PCI SoTM USB card..

ack said:
since 16-bit + HDCD comes close enough to true hi-rez, therefore not worth my trouble.

The difference is huge, depending on material, D/A, hearing, and what matters to you in sound reproduction..

Summarizing what you wrote above, indeed, DIY music server is not for you.

Buy Aurender or Weiss MAN301 - these are top digital players today.
Aurender are releasing soon W10 15K$ model

ack · Sep 25, 2012

mep said:
Do you guys really think that the Mytek Stereo 192 mastering version DAC is inferior to a computer sound card?

No we don't. That's not the point. The point is which interface is better driving the _same_ DAC. If we think that getting better sound is as simple as throwing an optimized computer and a USB-to-S/PDIF reclocker, then what this market really needs is an update to the old Genesis Digital Lens between a transport and a DAC! I would love to see jitter measurements for all those DIY computer-based servers - even if it's at the reclocking coverter, but alas, none exist.

michael123 · Sep 25, 2012

ack said:
I would love to see jitter measurements for all those DIY computer-based servers - even if it's at the reclocking coverter, but alas, none exist.

Take a Weiss INT202, M2Tech EVO (with a separate Clock), Off-Ramp and you're all set.

microstrip · Sep 25, 2012

The main point of the thread is not the virtual formats, but the DIY music servers. I admit I dislike the idea of using something where I will be the beta user - the only time I got a car just being presented was a complete disaster - and I fail to see a positive trend for the general public in the DIY approach. There are many options, and there seems to be no standard. You go somewhere and you risk that you are not able to operate the existing music server. May be members of your family will not be able to use it. Not to refer the constant upgrade needs.

IMHO the DIY approach to music server is a selfish option, that reflects the current individualism of society. One of the purposes of standards is allowing sharing of goods and facilities between people under legal conditions. DIY music servers kill it.

The thread on the legal aspects of digital music in this forum died after half a dozen posts, people being afraid to post on it.

And yes, any one over 12 coming to my home should be able to use my high-end system and listen to my recordings - just three power buttons and a volume control clearly labeled.

However, I must acknowledge the pioneering efforts of those brave people who are going the DIY way and say I admire them for their expertise and for leading progress - my words apply to the general public.

FrantzM · Sep 25, 2012

Ok then whatever way you think DIY music servers are, they are not for some. For those willing to invest a little bit of time and effort, it could be one of the best $600 or more ever spent in Audio.

ack · Sep 25, 2012

microstrip said:
The main point of the thread is not the virtual formats, but the DIY music servers.

Precisely; funny how folks get carried away so quickly. And moreover, I gave explanations why this is not FOR ME. And an addendum to my previous post: with respect to a soundcard (which, again, outputs S/PDIF or AES/EBU, not analog) vs USB, there have been no comparisons that I know of, especially jitter measurements. And moreover, let's not forget this post by Bruce, excerpted again here:

Most mastering studios use the Lynx AES16 or the RME AES32 card using ASIO via AES/EBU to an outboard converter.

Perhaps this information is now outdated after two years, and if so, I'd like to understand why.

Phelonious Ponk · Sep 25, 2012

There are few jitter measurements of DIY servers, because jitter, on that side of the DAC, is not relevant. Galvantically isolate. Re-clock outside of the computer. Do it very expensively and elaborately if you must. Then, the computer is not in your audio chain and the only thing it is required to deliver is bit-perfect data (which it will re-check and re-send until a match is achieved). You are now optimized, and you can run any software you like, including options that are nearly as intuitive as a play button and a volume control.

Tim

edorr · Sep 25, 2012

ack said:
If we think that getting better sound is as simple as throwing an optimized computer and a USB-to-S/PDIF reclocker, then what this market really needs is an update to the old Genesis Digital Lens between a transport and a DAC!

This is already there. It just sits in the same chassis as the DAC. The digital lens technology is build into the PWD MKII DAC, and is active on all inputs, including the USB and the AES/EBU. PS audio's Paul McGowan designed the original genesis digital lens.

Also, this is not what we think, this is what we hear. I have not compared myself, but the guy specifying the CAPS 2.0 with USB card, says with a good USB converter it sounds better than the Lynx in his CAPS 1.0 design. Others have similar experience. The there is Steve N. who builds the Offramp 5 saying the USB input on his latest version of the Overdrive DAC is as good as the Offramp 5. So there is really no single golden sure of where in the chain conversion and clocking needs to take place for optimal performance. It is a moving target and different solutions can all made to sound excellent.

Why DIY computer-based music servers are not ready for me

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

VIP/Donor

WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Industry Expert/VIP Donor

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

New Member

WBF Founding Member

Similar threads