2. digital
  3. 173440-1853

Streaming, Optimization and compromises

So, find out Covid hit some family members, Christmas called off so here at home with time on hands.

 

First off, this thread not for objectivists for whom general service computer good enough, heard your objections prior, no need to repeat.

 

Recently I've come to realization my extreme optimized mac mini will become obsolete sometime in near future. So once again investigating future server replacement.

 

First off, any quality server solution requires good power supply, whether internal or external, pure lps or combo of lps and switching such as Antipodes offers.

 

Now we come to output, I'm going to concentrate on the two most common outputs available, usb and ethernet. The first is usb, an inherently compromised digital audio interface. So we have a number of ways usb implemented in servers, usb directly off motherboard and various schemes for usb optimization. Directly off motherboard is serious compromise, noise inherent to motherboard, add to that running added processes to motherboard, therefore,  need to act as streamer in addition to server, which adds even more noise. Also, using motherboard power supply and motherboard clocking, all are serious compromises. Now, we can optimize usb output either internal or external, dedicated power supplies and clocking can improve usb out. In spite of all this, still have inherent liabilities of usb.

 

And now we come to ethernet out, a superior solution in my experience. I've bridged thunderbolt as ethernet out on my mac mini, far superior sound quality to the motherboard usb out. While I can't directly speak to superiority of ethernet to usb outputs on all servers, for sake of discussion I'll presume this to be true. My reasoning for this is with ethernet out one has option for FMC (fiber) and outboard streamer. Fiber eliminates all noise prior to FMC and outboard streaming relieves motherboard of those duties and isolates many choices of optimized streamer and dedicated power supplies for those steamers. These streamers will also optimize usb with dedicated clock. Your could also have many options of streamer/dac with ethernet out.

 

The way I see it, even ethernet out is somewhat compromised in that in order to take advantage of fiber's advantages one must use FMC. I'm now beginning to see fiber output on servers, Sonictransporter I9 is one I know of. Advantage of this is eliminating clutter in form of one FMC and attendant lps, although in my case requires FMC adapter.

 

At this point, I'd suggest ultimate streaming solution would be fiber out server to fiber capable streaming dac, lowest noise and reduction of clutter. Until this happens I see all present solutions as compromised to some degree. As far as my top choices for off the shelf solutions at this very moment. Antipodes, Innuos both have ethernet out options, both compromised usb outs except on highest level models. Mojo Audio Deja Vu has both optimized usb and ethernet on board.

 

What do others have to say in regard to my criticisms of usb outputs vs ethernet outs? Have any of you directly compared optimized usb to optimized ethernet outs on same server in your own setup? My take is usb meaningless, and if ethernet out is preferred setup, most server moves will be lateral for me. Doubtless  better usb out solutions available vs my  lousy mac mini usb outs, again, this not part of my question. Also, I'm not looking at streaming dacs in this equation. I'm happy with present dac with optimized usb in at this point. My discussion is only meant to compare server usb vs ethernet out interfacing with usb dacs.

sns
sns OP
3,198 posts
 

I'll look more into the Evo.

 

@sgreg1 On one hand it makes sense, noise and rf prior to fiber wouldn't matter. On the other, makes sense noise anywhere along the network would make a difference. Lets say one had fiber internet provider, so full fiber network, noise eliminated between every link in chain, and then pay attention to noise production in the components themselves, logic states this would be optimum streaming setup. It makes sense noise produced within each component affects the processes taking place within that component. 

 

Also, if noise produced within components, server in this case doesn't matter, why does small green computer even produce a audiophile server, wouldn't a general service computer work just as well?

 

I've used a variety of servers over the years, my experience is that servers don't all sound the same. The extreme variety we observe in streaming setups is empirical evidence there isn't an objective optimal setup for streaming. The only objective goal I have is to minimize noise at every point in entirety of streaming network, we do have the means to accomplish this.  I hear noise diminishment in my chain as higher resolution. My streams even with present non optimized setup sound essentially same as cd rips. And my rips were superior to cd's played over transport some years ago, there's only been improvement in my streaming since that point.  This all due to maximum attention paid to noise suppression on my total network.

sns OP
3,198 posts
 

@sbank In regard fiber cable, that was my understanding as well. I have considered everything post modem, the only things we have control over in thinking about optimization of streaming. I did try an audiophile switch between router and server/NAS, didn't work well for me, I theorized excessive clocking in my case. It may also have something to do with my attempts to optimize my router with over spec LPS powering it.

 

DIY is highly likely to be my choice, I just don't want to spend a lot of time with researching and choosing parts list. If I can get total parts list together, I'll have fun with the build part of equation. I did do all the research and parts choosing with my diy general service computer, rather exhausting part of process for me, I like the actual build much more.

 

I recently recall seeing a Taiko server copy build, quite amazing, not sure I'm reaching that high.

sbank's avatar
sbank
3,378 posts
 

@sns Your thorough research will pay off. Sort of building on "measure twice, cut once". Keep us posted! Cheers,

Spencer

Post removed 
sonic79
80 posts
 

For most of us the best we can do is to convert to fiber as early in the chain as possible. In my case I have coax running into house from the road, and so the earliest opportunity to convert to fiber is after the modem. Better yet would be having 10GbE service so you have a fiber modem, but availability and cost of fiber service is detrimental. I researched coax modems with SFP ports without success. It makes sense why such a thing doesn't exist, as the two mediums are contradictory. This means next best option is either FMC or switch right after modem.

Fiber optic cable is so inexpensive that converting to fiber early in the chain actually saves money if running long lengths of cable is needed. A 20m fiber cable is under $20, while cat6 UTP could be over $100. Then the noise rejection property of fiber is enjoyed. A long run of UTP snaking through the house has many opportunities to collect RFI.

One last bit of advice is to avoid going through a router if possible. This is one of the most extreme sources of RFI in a household. I had to plan a chain that completely bypasses the router.

More to discover