Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Standalone music server vs Mac mini
#11
(19-Nov-2017, 12:38)roestano Wrote:
(19-Nov-2017, 03:41)Jim_Anderson Wrote: Hi roestano

Can you help me understand what you mean by "However, I’ve noticed Roon downsampling to 24bits as Eth is capped. USB has more room for bits." please.  I've not heard of this suggestion Eth (which I'm assuming is ethernet) is capped (which I might be misinterpreting to mean limited).

Thank you
jim

Your assumptions are all correct Jim. Ethernet is limited compared to USB bitrate. And I assume Roon automatically corrects by downsampling. I am going to experiment and connect the USB port for the first time. Hope this helps.

Not sure why you are worried about the bit rate of Ethernet being "limited" compared to USB...? As far as I know, USB 3.0 has a raw transfer rate of 5 Gbps, vs up to 10 Gbps for wired Ethernet.  That difference in maximum throughput is probably completely academic for normal audio streaming purposes: for example a 32-bit, 384 kHz stereo stream uses "only" about 25 Mbps of raw bandwidth (excluding protocol overheads).
Roon (Mac Mini), Wilson Benesch Full Circle, Expert 1000 Pro CI, Kaiser Chiara
Warwickshire, UK
Reply
#12
(19-Nov-2017, 17:22)roestano Wrote: @Spindrift Appreciate this! It’s exactly what I’m afraid of: spending money on marginal gains and more hardware to worry about ?
Did you notice differences between ETH sources?

Hi @roestano - I’ve only used a Mac mini and a prior to that a Mac pro as roon cores and didn’t really note much difference through Ethernet - though as far as I know since there is no inherent clock signal over Ethernet - the Devialet internal clock is providing primary word clock - maybe that’s the reason it sounds so good! Jitter accumulated through a more extensive digital signal chain is minimized . . . 

I could be wrong about the Ethernet - but I think it’s packetized data .  . So I’m not sure if the source will make a huge difference . . As the signal will be clocked by Devialet no matter which device is providing the data . . As opposed to AES where the word clock is extracted from the signal.


Cheers?
Roon/mac mini > hqplayer > sms-200 ultra and MC-3+ USB both clocked via Mutec Ref 10 > MIT Oracle MA-X AES/EBU > D440 > Dynaudio C1 MkII via MIT Matrix HD-60
Reply
#13
(19-Nov-2017, 17:15)Spindrift Wrote: As an AES user - I would observe that some folks do notice a difference on SQ between the USB and the AES inputs hence all the effort that goes into a reclocked signal. 

From my standpoint I have found that the Devialet Ethernet through Roon (upsampled to 24/192 through Roon) direct, sounds great but I found the AES input reclocked via a mutec usb and reference 10 clock upsampled through HQ player to 24/192 to give more space around instruments and high frequency detail (sound of the hall etc). 

But it is a lot additional components for a moderate increase in SQ - doing it all over again - I might have never moved away from using the Ethernet input if I hadn’t already committed to an AES signal chain . . .


Thks for your honesty!
I agree , ROON/AIR eth is sounding damm good in my system.
Set up is so clean and minimalist i love it.
I m trying since 2 weeks to feed the usb input of my dev200 with audioquest diamond usb, there s may be ( not 100%sure) slight improve in lower notes control but overal is very similar.
My next step while waiting impressions on core infinity sq, is trying audioquest ethernet cables vodka and diamond.
Thks


Macbook pro -Air-Roon/-tidal-Devialet200 /frw 10.1.0-power cord burmester: vde reg nr9990
Power conditionner:isotek evo3+isotek sequel pc
Spkr cables: acoustic zen satori
Speakers:wilson audio sabrina
Reply
#14
(19-Nov-2017, 17:48)Spindrift Wrote:
(19-Nov-2017, 17:22)roestano Wrote: @Spindrift Appreciate this! It’s exactly what I’m afraid of: spending money on marginal gains and more hardware to worry about ?
Did you notice differences between ETH sources?

Hi @roestano - I’ve only used a Mac mini and a prior to that a Mac pro as roon cores and didn’t really note much difference through Ethernet - though as far as I know since there is no inherent clock signal over Ethernet - the Devialet internal clock is providing primary word clock - maybe that’s the reason it sounds so good! Jitter accumulated through a more extensive digital signal chain is minimized . . . 

I could be wrong about the Ethernet - but I think it’s packetized data .  . So I’m not sure if the source will make a huge difference . . As the signal will be clocked by Devialet no matter which device is providing the data . . As opposed to AES where the word clock is extracted from the signal.


Cheers?

There is an implied clock on Ethernet but it is not related to the audio sample clock; as you said, the data is packetised and arrives asynchronously to the Devialet's internal clock which would be used to clock samples through the audio pipeline in the DAC/amp. The same is true of USB, for that matter.
Roon (Mac Mini), Wilson Benesch Full Circle, Expert 1000 Pro CI, Kaiser Chiara
Warwickshire, UK
Reply
#15
(19-Nov-2017, 18:22)samsoum Wrote:
(19-Nov-2017, 17:15)Spindrift Wrote: As an AES user - I would observe that some folks do notice a difference on SQ between the USB and the AES inputs hence all the effort that goes into a reclocked signal. 

From my standpoint I have found that the Devialet Ethernet through Roon (upsampled to 24/192 through Roon) direct, sounds great but I found the AES input reclocked via a mutec usb and reference 10 clock upsampled through HQ player to 24/192 to give more space around instruments and high frequency detail (sound of the hall etc). 

But it is a lot additional components for a moderate increase in SQ - doing it all over again - I might have never moved away from using the Ethernet input if I hadn’t already committed to an AES signal chain . . .


Thks for your honesty!
I agree , ROON/AIR  eth is sounding damm good in my system.
Set up is so clean and minimalist i love it.
I m trying since 2 weeks to feed the usb input of my dev200 with audioquest diamond usb, there s may be ( not 100%sure) slight improve in lower notes control but overal is very similar.
My next step while waiting impressions on core infinity sq, is trying audioquest ethernet cables vodka and diamond.
Thks


Macbook pro -Air-Roon/-tidal-Devialet200 /frw 10.1.0-power cord burmester: vde reg nr9990
Power conditionner:isotek evo3+isotek sequel pc
Spkr cables: acoustic zen satori
Speakers:wilson audio sabrina

Minimalist and great sounding is the key!

The more I fiddle with the signal chain the more I think that “less is more”

The benefit of additional components in the chain (which on their own may be great) can be offset by the noise/distortion from the additional power supplies, cables etc. . After all the design of the “magic wire dac” in the Devialet itself, benefits from minimizing the length of the signal chain. 

Will be interested to hear your thoughts on the different ethernet cables…
Roon/mac mini > hqplayer > sms-200 ultra and MC-3+ USB both clocked via Mutec Ref 10 > MIT Oracle MA-X AES/EBU > D440 > Dynaudio C1 MkII via MIT Matrix HD-60
Reply
#16
Some interesting posts in this thread. I would make a simple point. It is easy to think that you can add some kind of music server to your Devialet, something costing quite a bit of cash, and this should give you some sonic advantages over a Mac Mini running AIR, or indeed a PC for that matter. From my experience, this is not necessarily true, but neither is it a straight forward question to answer.

When I first had an expert amplifier I mainly used it via AIR. I had read a few reports of people trying alternatives to AIR, with mixes results, although perhaps unsurprisingly when somebody reported that 'product X' sounded better than AIR, 'product X' was generally something fairly expensive. With my own experience, I found that the kit that I thought was a definite step up from AIR was almost always kit that could feed the Devialet via AES/EBU. The Aurender N10, W20, dCS Vivaldi upsampler are all superb with an Expert. I then ran a combination of the microRendu and Mutec MC3+USB with my Expert, this too was small step up from AIR, with the bonus of excellent functionality and bullet proof stability.

The product that disappointed a little with the Expert, for me at least, was the Melco N1Z. In some respects, the Melco was indeed better than AIR. In fact, I can recall the N1Z sounding remarkably good, it is just that to my ears it lost out slightly in terms of bass accuracy. I have some theories here, relating to the Devialet's USB implementation, leakage loops and so on, but this can only be conjecture. The one product that I have listened to with an Expert that did not appear to suffer from this was the CAD CAT, which I auditioned with it's ground box device. It's interesting to note here that UK magazine HiFi News and Record Review run a D800 as a reference amp with a Melco feeding a Mutec MC3+USB which feeds the Dev via AES/EBU. Seams an odd choice of reference amp now that the 1000Pro exists though.......

OK, so that is with the Expert, but I think things are very different with the Pro. Earlier this year when Roon AIR emerged, I thought I would try AIR with my Pro. It is fair to say that I was very surprised just how good AIR is with the Pro. So with the Expert, my microRendu + Mutec combination gave a nice lift in sound quality over AIR, but with the Pro, I would say that the differences between AIR and the Mutec have shrunk to being tiny. For the record, I still use my mR+ Mutec combo, a case of it having exactly the functionality I want, perfect stability, and maybe an absolute fraction of an SQ advantage. Although I already own the mR+Mutec, I would say that it would probably not be worth the cash buying it again new for the Pro, highly debatable at best.

More on that topic here:

https://devialetchat.com/showthread.php?tid=4427

The above linked thread should at least provide food for thought for those thinking of spending reasonable cash for a music server for an Expert. In crude terms, you could spend 3K or 4k (or more) on a music server for an Expert which offers a sound quality hike no bigger than the SQ difference between AIR on an Expert and AIR on a Pro, so maybe simply going for the Pro when the upgrade scheme restarts might offer the best 'bang for buck'?

I think all this leads to a new question, that is what would offer a decent sound quality hike over AIR with a Pro amplifier. My feeling here is that nobody can possibly know the answer to this, not yet at least. Consider that nobody has yet spent any time listening to the new Devialet OS Board. (Except Devialet, assuming they actually have got it working) Also consider that the new OS Board provides a new specification USB input. So all the stuff that has been posted on this forum to date regarding the differences between AES/EBU and USB with the Expert becomes irrelevant, or at least needs revisiting, for Pro spec amps. As an example, maybe that N1Z will become the killer from end with the new OS Board spec USB, who knows.

The OS Board upgrade programme has now stuttered into life and the first upgraders should be getting their amps back soon. So before too long we should get some reports as to just how good it is for sound quality. My guess is that it would need something like a Mutec MC3+USB with the Mutec REF10 to significantly beat it for sound quality, in fact I think you would need something like the Mutec MC3+USB with the Mutec REF10 to be significantly better than the current AIR with the Pro. The OS Board is a complete unknown at the moment. How will it compare with the current 'good stuff', like the big Aurenders, dCS Vivaldi etc.? We can guess of course, but nobody knows at the moment.
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - iFi Zen Stream - Mutec REF10 - MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
Reply
#17
Lovely explanation confused.
I m not doing any step or move till i read some reviews of C.I from the devoted fellas here .
I know pro220 is better than 200 sq wise, but reading your comments that Air pro220 is better than Air dev200 means outstanding sq for me.
I have a used pro220 in my radar, so may be i will arrange a demo.
Thks again for the clear and objective view.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply
#18
@Spindrift My thoughts exactly on the ethernet vs usb path. Major advantage of eth is lack of electrical noise.

@samsoum I use the vodka eth cable and its definitely worth the investment. If AIR wifi is stable not really necessary though.

Believe it or not, I downgraded from a D220 to a D200 to have some extra cash as I focus onmy startup.
There is definitely a SQ difference. But Once I got used to the D200 sound (which took a few days) I never regretted the downgrade. I even downgraded the firmware to 7.1.3 because of all the great reviews. And it does sound good. Truth be told I did not spend a lot of time A/B testing. Maybe I’ll do that with a new firmware.

After seeing the first test videos of the new streamerboard I must say that upgrade itch creeped up again. But I doubt that SQ is going to be much improved. Im the end thats what matters most.
Reply
#19
(20-Nov-2017, 13:20)samsoum Wrote: Lovely explanation confused.
I m not doing any step or move till i read some reviews of C.I from the devoted fellas here .
I know pro220 is better than 200 sq wise, but reading your comments that Air pro220 is better than Air dev200 means outstanding sq for me.
I have a used pro220 in my radar, so may be i will arrange a demo.
Thks again for the clear and objective view.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Saw a great deal on hifishark from a Canadian owner/dealer  The unit is on its way for the upgrade and will be shipped straight to buyer from Devialet France.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)