Glisse

Amusing how time flies, along with memories apparently. The reason the Lumin has a cable overhang at the rear is because the Linn Klimax DSM does. Pixel Magic started Lumin by reverse engineering the Linn product.

Alex, You should try using the USB A/B adapter you provide with the REGEN to connect the Intona directly to your DACs that use an XMOS USB input, rather than a USB cable (any USB cable). Regards, Glisse

Whilst the DAC's clock(s) become the master clock with asynchronous USB, that clocking arrangement does not extend beyond the digital transmission from the USB transmitter. So for all digital functions prior to output, the Aries' clocks will influence performance levels. I suspect if you removed the clocks from the Aries, that despite using USB, the Aries would not function. I may be wrong, but I don't think so.

That would be most unusual, the different clocks are traditionally used for different frequency multiples (x44.1kHz, x48kHz). Are you sure this is correct?

The first reply to your post, by john57, gave you the answer - the Oppo (any un-modified Oppo) will only pass DSD via HDMI. Given what you are trying to do, and referencing the points you made in post #4, you need a media bridge that is capable of transferring a DSD file from your basement "server", which it will do via Ethernet, and sending it to your DAC via USB. The Auralic Aries will do this. May help your thought process to understand that S/PDIF interface was designed for a 24/192kHz limit, which is around 4.6MHz. Fine for DSD64 (standard DSD, which is 2.8MHz), but not for DSD128 and beyond. Which is why you are finding most DSD DACs have USB inputs.

Current spec AV Powerline products send pulses over a spread spectrum, between 1.8 to 70MHz. If the power supply in your component can completely filter out this frequency range, and any harmonics of these frequencies, to below the noise floor of your system, you will not have a problem. I do have an extreme problem with some components, notably phono preamplifiers for obvious reasons. These I run off PS Audio P series power regenerators which seem the most effective at reducing this type of noise on the AC line. By extreme problem, I mean hearing the pulses (obviously a harmonic) through the audio system. In other cases, the increase in the noise floor can be more subtle, and is only "heard" by pulling out the power line products and hearing if the resolution of your system improves. Or not. It is better to avoid using the power line product on the same circuit as your audio system, if possible. If not, I would suggest using a decent power conditioner for the audio components.

There is a tendency for people to pull DAC A out of their system and plug in DAC B. Then listen. Then judge. Instead of saying "in my existing system, DAC A sounds better", they say "DAC B is complete rubbish". I see even seasoned audiophiles doing this across many different forums, which I struggle to understand. After reading many comments on the Naim forums, which has a very "un-muted" reception to the Hugo, I thought I would try my Hugo (bought as a portable device) in my little Naim system: UnitiServe source, V1 DAC/Pre, NAP100 amp to Focal Aria 906 speakers. Just used the tiny Toslink cable that came with the Hugo, and Linn Silver RCA just because they were the first ones I grabbed that fitted, and ran it into the NAP100 power amp. It sounded okay. I thought the Naim V1 was a touch more dynamic, and had a little more bass weight. And much easier to use in a system sense. Rather than assume everyone on the Naim forums was completely mad (although it was a tempting assumption), I thought I would try to optimise the Hugo in my most transparent system, which at the time had both a modified Mac Mini and an Auralic Aries as source, MSB Platinum IV Signature DAC, Burmester 088/911 amplification to SF Amati Futura. I tried every digital cable I could with the Hugo, and found a Chord Signature TA was working best. I tried every RCA cable (that I could fit), and found the AQ Wild Blue Yonder was the best. I tried every source I could, and found the Naim UnitiServe via coaxial out was the best. I tried the "fixed" output from the Hugo into my Burmester preamp, but found the sound was better the next colour down. I then compared it to the MSB DAC, and found: On Redbook, the Hugo was at least as good as the MSB. Which shocked me. On 24/96, the MSB was capturing a bit more of the recorded space than the Hugo. But they were close. Above 24/96, the Hugo fell away. On DSD, I had to use the Aries with the Hugo. I found the sound flat and uninvolving. I thought the Hugo sounded better playing a Redbook version of a track than a DSD version of the same track. Given most of the ubiquitous delta/sigma DACs (I have plenty of those too) tend to sound better the higher the sample rate, the Hugo is very different. So given my experience of using the Hugo in two very different systems, and going to some trouble to optimise source/ cables/output gain, I am not surprised there are polarising views. It is a quirky device by nature of its design and form factor. Yes, I would agree with your supposition (and Ted_b's later comment) that the Hugo is capable of close to reference level on Redbook. And my personal opinion, based on my own experiences, is that those that find it sound cold/flat/hard/thin/uninvolving, etc, on Redbook have used it in a system context that does not suit it. And perhaps were either unable, or not prepared, to optimise it. I don't have a problem with that. However, I do have a problem with such people pontificating their views as gospel. Which they most certainly are not.

ted_b, Post number 308, attributed to a ted_b: Perhaps there are 2 ted-b's? Point being, if you "will ask John" something, it would be interesting to have some input on power design influence on 2Qute/Hugo/Hugo TT, QBD76 performance. From an audio engineer that has significant experience in power supply design. That would be a useful addition to the constructive contributions that can be found amongst the noise in this thread. Personally, I don't care how many Qutes Chord may have sold

I would think the performance of the Hugo TT relative to the QBD might be more relevant in determining whether the Hugo TT could be regarded as a tough sell in value terms. They do seem to be fragmenting their product ranges rather than consolidating them. Whilst additional filtering in a component might minimise the impact on that component from a cheap and noisy SMPS, that same SMPS will still inject HF noise on the AC line which may impact on every other component used in the system. Speaking of which, as per your reference in post 308, Rob Watts is a consultant to Chord Electronics: specifically in the area of digital signal processing. Audio circuit design, and most certainly power supply design, is a specific expertise of Chord Electronics (John Franks) rather than Rob Watts. The company was founded on the back of Franks' power supply design work as an aerospace engineer. So if you are going to question John on how many Qutes they have sold, you might also take the opportunity to ask him about the role of power supplies in the various levels of Chord DACs. It could be very interesting.

Yes, you can do that easily enough, and it is a reasonable option. But you need to factor the current and future HDD costs into these decisions. Further, you could use enterprise class 3TB drives running RAID 0 which will cost less than consumer class 6TB drives running RAID 1. There are plenty of options

Johann, I think you meant RAID 1 in your second and third paragraphs, but I understood the points you were making. I also have a 1511, and do use RAID 5 on that. But I use the 1511 primarily as a NAS, as in storage device, rather than as a file server. What I am finding is that despite the continual growth in HDD sizes, file sizes and quantities are growing at a much faster rate (for me at least) with hi-rez music, HD video, and photo files. The 50% storage overhead of RAID 1 is too high for the negligible benefit, in my view. But I have no problem accepting the views of others are equally valid

I agree with your comments, except RAID 0 does offer better performance than JBOD, useful for video in particular. Disk failure on a JBOD array is the same result as for RAID 0. In theory, you can recover data from the remaining disk which you cannot with RAID 0, but it is not so easy in practice. The only reason to use JBOD over RAID 0 is to use unequal size disks. I cannot see the logic in using RAID 1 in a 2 bay NAS, and sacrificing half of the storage potential. More effective, and much safer, to buy a low cost external drive and back up the data to that. As you said, the redundancy benefit is for mission critical data access (hardly applicable to home environments) and absolutely not as an alternative to a backup. Further, performance during both the failure and the rebuild period is so degraded that it is not useful for computer audiophiles. Also, rebuilding RAID arrays ranges from slow to glacial, depending on RAID type. Much faster to disk copy from backup/original files. I'm not sure the hardware in consumer NAS devices have a MTBF any better than the hard drive. As per your experience with WD and mine with QNAP. The ideal redundancy solution is to have a second (or more) NAS on which the primary NAS will duplicate files (specified folders) via rsync. This works flawlessly with Synology NAS devices, and can offer better network performance depending how many users there are and how it is configured.

Have owned both brands. QNAP had terminal hardware failure, the 4 Synology NAS I have been flawless. This can of course go either way, so check warranty. Given the difference in processor (not that would need it) performance and the pricing, the QNAP seems to represent better value. Is a 2 bay NAS big enough for music and video? Get the biggest HDDs you can, and run RAID 0.

Outstanding!!

Well, I think most of us will still be using the Pono supplied Micro-SD card, so lets hope they are not supplying "bad" cards. But corruption of the card may related to the way it is being treated. Under OS-X, ejecting the player under Pono Music Software always results in an OS warning message indicating the storage devices have not been correctly disconnected. That can often lead to data corruption. Clearly PMS (!!!) is causing some conflict with Finder.