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.

 

mitch2
Post removed 

Thanks all.

It is an interesting comparison given that both servers were positioned and connected in the exact same way to the exact same equipment. Isolation is provided by an optical breaks between the router and server, and also from the router to the Sig Rendu SE opt. streamer, and LPSs are used on all the converters and network equipment. Therefore, the incoming signal should be completely isolated from the audio equipment by optical fiber. Based on the discussion, I will conclude what I hear may result from:

  • Improvements in processing between the older DX and the DejaVu, coupled with increased demands in running Roon,
  • Improvements in isolation of components within the DejaVu over the DX, and maybe in the implementation of the network connection,
  • Finally, maybe I have a bias in what I believed I was hearing. The more I listen to the DX, the more I am ok with what I am hearing.

In any event, the DX is older but would still work quite well for somebody. Mark Cole offered to update the processing remotely and maybe I should take him up on that and then listen for differences. I could then more easily sell it when I get the DejaVu back or move to something else.

The other thing I seem to be learning is that this digital thing is sort of a crapshoot. Server, streamer, DAC, all play a role but it seems to be hard to pinpoint the impact of each on the overall sound. Adding the Sig. Rendu SE opt. seemed to elevate the SQ I heard in specific ways. Also, changing out DACs results in a clearly and reliably audible SQ difference in my system, which surprises me less because of the DAC's job of converting from a digital to an analog signal. I probably shouldn’t be surprised that different streamers sound different from each other, but I still don’t understand why.

@mitch2 the two streamers you’re comparing are approximately on the same level. That is definitely one of the driving factors in the differences you’re hearing. There may be a difference between how one stream renders tone and presentation vs the other. It’s a matter of preference. If you want to experience difference in streamers, order a WiiM Pro, a highly hyped up streamer with built in dac. Use its digital out and compare to antipodes or mojo. You can return it if you don’t like it.
Forget the psychological aspect of it. One listen is all it will take.

 

As to why the streamers sound different, I listed few reasons above. 

I will say that if one attempts to account for how modern digital audio technology performs using the same approach and factors as in teh past with older analog only technologies, they are likely missing the boat to a great extent. Pretty much anything is possible with digital (DSP) and the devil is in the details case by case, which alone accounts for why different products sound different, either by design or otherwise. Robust analysis using measurements is the key to understanding each case properly.  Anything is possible regardless of price tag. Otherwise, yes its pretty much a crap shoot.

yes servers have different sound quality

in our case we mport the 432evo servers and the difference in sound quality between models is very evident.

In the case of our highend model vs our Aeon model the parts are identical with

The one big change is how the clock board is powered,.,just isolating the clock board enables theserver to produce a larger soundstage,greater clarity, and a more analog like presentation..

So in server design, even tismall  differences in data isolation, yields noticicible audibile changes.

Dave and Troy

Audio Intellect NJ

us importers 432evo music servers