2. digital
  3. 188181-21

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
audphile1's avatar
audphile1
5,340 posts
 

The issue is not that my system doesn't sound good, but that it sounds better with one server than with the other and I am curious why that is.

@mitch2 why is that an issue? I’m also not sure why it is so surprising to hear the difference between streamers. There’s a difference between preamps.  Different amps sound different. But when it comes to digital, somehow it’s impossible to get past that 1s and 0s 🐂 💩. 

It also seems very odd to me that you bought into the concept of fiber conversion for your network with LPS units on the FMC modules but you can’t seem to comprehend that streamers can sound different and that actual components matter more than all that clutter you created with copper to fiber to copper conversion. Dude…none of that💩 does anything to make your system sound better. But the components do.
I have tried the FMC several times on several streamers. I call BS. Because all it did is made it sound much worse than the simple router to streamer connection with a very good cable. 

Treat streamers and DACs the same way you treat amps, preamps and speakers. Forget the “it’s all 1s and 0s” narrative. It’s a defense mechanism for the ASR crowd that can’t afford a decent streamer and DAC. Peel away from it man. 

mapman's avatar
mapman
22,399 posts
 

@audphile1 he is talking about servers not streamers.

Only two things I can think off that could make servers sound different as alluded to above:

1)noise introduced on the network wires that make it through the streamer to DAC signal path and add jitter

2)Something on the server is mucking with the raw file data before sending to streamer. Could be different advertised features in different products capable of this, or could be processing baked into the server for some reason, perhaps to create some kind of unique house sound for a particular product line.

mclinnguy's avatar
mclinnguy
610 posts
 

@audphile1 

 

I have tried the FMC several times on several streamers. I call BS. Because all it did is made it sound much worse than the simple router to streamer connection with a very good cable. 

There must be something beneficial to it otherwise Playback designs wouldn't suggest it as their proprietary link. But for sure that is a different level than buying some low-end converters and fiber and slapping them together. I imagine by the time one spends enough for quality optical connectors and switches to make a difference perhaps they are probably better off taking that money and getting a better streamer and streaming cable? 

audphile1's avatar
audphile1
5,340 posts
 

@mapman oh poop I missed he’s streaming with Sonore. Scratch everything I said. Lol

thanks for setting me straight!

mclinnguy's avatar
mclinnguy
610 posts
 

@mapman 

 he is talking about servers not streamers.

If one box, such as the Antipodes DX2, can be both a streamer and the server why is it wrong to call it a streamer? 

More to discover