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
Ag insider logo xs@2x
jji666
543 posts
 

I added ferrite cores to my ethernet cables as a wild guess at reducing radiated noise but no idea how effective that is.

This is not my area of knowledge, so just passing on what I've read.  You may want to Google the efficacy of ferrite chokes on network cables. I have read that it can actually introduce errors.  Presumably the network components can correct for that as I and others have described above, but the ferrite core may actually be more of a concern than anything a fancy server can resolve.  

To be clear, I am not expressing an opinion or disagreeing with anyone. Just suggesting you do some reading and confirm you want to take this approach. 

tonywinga's avatar
tonywinga
844 posts
 

I got the idea using the ferrite cores from reading that IT professionals add them to the ethernet cables going into their large banks of switches in network rooms.

mitch2 OP
4,091 posts
 

Tony, the point was not really about how it sounds in your system (I suspect it sounds fantastic) since both the K50 and the Aries-Cerat Helene are well-regarded, top notch digital components. 

The question is whether the extensive build properties of the K50 (and resulting price) would be necessary if it were used as a server-only, or whether the same sound quality could be achieved by using a (less expensive computer-type) server located in another room away from the system, performing server-only duties, and feeding a K50 used as a player-only into the Aries-Cerat Helene DAC, i.e., would you be able to tell the difference between the server-only K50 and a different server?

mclinnguy's avatar
mclinnguy
684 posts
 

Using Roon that would be really easy to do, as the user interface in the K50 allows one to switch server and player duties- all he would have to do is press a button on the web interface to swap the Roon core from K50 to the NUC back and forth with the Roon remote, where the K50 player is constant for both.

But @tonywinga did say he was going to do a review, so perhaps this comparison would be included in that.

tonywinga's avatar
tonywinga
844 posts
 

Yeah well, I already traded in the NUC.  But I would not be able to do that with my old music server anyway.  The old NUC based server had just one ethernet port and then USB out.  So to use it as a server with the Antipodes, I would need two ethernet ports- one port in and one port out to the player.  The K21 or the K22 both have just an ethernet port for an input.  The K41 server has two ethernet ports- one purposed for input and one purposed for output to the player.

More to discover