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
emergingsoul
1,217 posts
 

So much commentary. Have you considered trying a roon nucleus?

It's a computer yes. But if you couple that with a decent streamer dac which is where the true value is you should be in pretty good shape. The merits of spending a lot of money on a server are questionable in my opinion. 

jetter
3,052 posts
 
So much commentary...The merits of spending a lot of money on a server are questionable in my opinion.

Actually, if you take a look mitch has a perfect purchase/sale record on A’gon of 568 (i.e., experienced).  Doesn’t seem like excess commentary for an interesting question from someone who walks the walk.  And I’ll bet dollars to donuts he has his own opinion on the benefits of using a server in his system already thought through.

mapman's avatar
mapman
22,460 posts
 

@mitch2

 

Please confirm this is Roon core/server running on both?

If so its possible different versions of Roon are running on each. If so, tehn its very possible the resulting sound could be somewhat different.

Even if same version running on exactly same OS on both, then next thing would be to make sure all Roon setting that affect sound quality (everything short of any added user defined DSP) are the same, for example volume limiting and any other parms that may affect the streaming. I know there are many that may be somewhat different with version but can’t list them all off the top of my head.

Of course an easy first check to compare is to examine the streaming pipeline in play using the Roon endpoint. Is the processing exactly the same in both cases being compared? If not that alone could very well result in a difference in sound.

Assuming streamer is similarly isolated from any network noise (from server of any other devices attached to the same network) as you indicate, and assuming you are using Roon to stream in both cases, changing only Roon server/core hardware my bet would be differences in teh Roon software implementation on each is most likely to result in significantly different sound.

Doesn’t Roon have their own optimized version of Linux (Roon OS) optimized for Roon? Do both servers use that? That would seem to be the best choice of OS to run Roon core/server on.

I run Roon core/server on WIndows.  Not optimal, but still works pretty well and sounds very good.   I might move to an appliance with Roon OS someday just for kicks.  I removed a lot of unneeded programs on my Windows PC and turned off a lot of resource hogging features  to help make Roon happy running there.  My only issue is periodic slowness with the GUI.   All my Roon devices connect over very strong Wifi.

Mysteries.....cheers!

 

Post removed 
mitch2 OP
4,087 posts
 

@mapman 

  • Both servers use a version of Linux, maybe not the same - I wouldn't know
  • In both set-ups, the server (DejaVu or Antipodes DX) is what Roon considers a Music Server running what is called Roon Server in the Sonicorbiter app (essentially, it is serving as the Roon core, only)
  • In both set-ups, the server has only a single direct connection with the network/router, and no connection to the streamer or to the DAC
  • In both set-ups, the Sonore Signature Rendu SE optical is what Roon considers a Network Player (or streamer) and is running what is called Roon Ready in the Sonicorbiter app 
  • The Sonore Signature Rendu SE optical is NOT connected directly to the server but has a single direct connection with the network/router
  • The Sig. Rendu SE opt. is connected with Mojo Audio's Mystique EVO Pro DAC via a direct USB connection currently using Network Acoustic's muon USB cable

 

More to discover