A novel way to massively improve the SQ of computer audio streaming

[Johnseye]

3 minutes ago, lmitche said:

Maybe a clockectomy is better, and cheaper.

 

Well Rick explained it.  I didn't make the connection that it couldn't be used for motherboard clocks.

 

Considering the expense involved in this effort, about $2k all in, I really hope the improvement in sound quality is worth the investment in new system clocks and filters.

[lmitche]

6 minutes ago, rickca said:

This new information about switching sample data frequencies is applicable if you are modding something like an SU-1 that has SPDIF output.  Recall that SPDIF the clock is encoded into the data stream, unlike USB.

Audio sample rates are mutually exclusive so switching is possible.

[rickca]

5 minutes ago, lmitche said:

Maybe a clockectomy is better, and cheaper.

Or maybe a lobotomy. 

[elan120]

21 minutes ago, rickca said:

Note that this idea of using one clock tap to switch between frequencies applies only to sample data frequencies, so it doesn't apply to anything on your motherboard or tX-USBexp where nothing runs at sample data frequencies.

 

 

My understanding is this can be applied to any frequencies, not just the sampling frequencies.  In order to use this feature, you will need a control signal feed back to sCLK-EX to switch between any two frequencies, in the case of MOBO, since all frequencies are being used at their designed output continuously, there is no switching needed.  In the case of sampling frequencies between 44.1KHz anad 48KHz families, only one frequency is being used at a time, and a control signal is available, in my case, to mod SU-1, this feature can be utilized.

[Johnseye]

4 minutes ago, rickca said:

Or maybe a lobotomy. 

 

Why the pessimism.  You agree with other improvements, especially in the power realm.

[rickca]

Thanks @elan120 that's a more accurate 

Just now, Johnseye said:

 

Why the pessimism.  You agree with other improvements, especially in the power realm.

Oh, it was just a joke! Didn't you see my emoji?

[Johnseye]

Just now, rickca said:

Thanks @elan120 that's a more accurate 

Oh, it was just a joke! Didn't you see my emoji?

 

[rickca]

6 minutes ago, elan120 said:

My understanding is this can be applied to any frequencies, not just the sampling frequencies.  In order to use this feature, you will need a control signal feed back to sCLK-EX to switch between any two frequencies, in the case of MOBO, since all frequencies are being used at their designed output continuously, there is no switching needed.  In the case of sampling frequencies between 44.1KHz anad 48KHz families, only one frequency is being used at a time, and a control signal is available, in my case, to mod SU-1, this feature can be utilized.

Thanks.  That is a better explanation and agrees with what @lmitche said.

[Johnseye]

10 minutes ago, elan120 said:

My understanding is this can be applied to any frequencies, not just the sampling frequencies.  In order to use this feature, you will need a control signal feed back to sCLK-EX to switch between any two frequencies, in the case of MOBO, since all frequencies are being used at their designed output continuously, there is no switching needed.  In the case of sampling frequencies between 44.1KHz anad 48KHz families, only one frequency is being used at a time, and a control signal is available, in my case, to mod SU-1, this feature can be utilized.

 

3 minutes ago, rickca said:

Thanks.  That is a better explanation and agrees with what @lmitche said.

 

So then this can be used with motherboard clocks?

[lmitche]

18 minutes ago, rickca said:

Or maybe a lobotomy. 

Did that already.

[rickca]

7 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

 

 

So then this can be used with motherboard clocks?

I think @elan120 explained that it isn't applicable to motherboard clocks because

18 minutes ago, elan120 said:

in the case of MOBO, since all frequencies are being used at their designed output continuously, there is no switching needed.

 

So I think I gave you the correct answer earlier.

 

I'll leave this to @elan120 who has clearly done some research with SOtM.  

[JohnSwenson]

It seems a lot of people are getting confused by my posts on the subject of network leakage, I will try and state things in a more concrete manor.

 

This is relating to a switch which is what your network endpoint into your audio system is connected, this may be streamer (microRendu etc) a laptop or other computer Mac mini, PC etc). We shall call this the audio endpoint (AE)

 

Leakage current can get into the AE through the switch in two ways, from the power supply powering the switch, or from the cable connected to the rest of the network. The leakage coming from the network comes from the SMPS powering THOSE devices.

 

If the switch connected to the AE is powered by an SMPS, grounding the negative of output of the SMPS will shunt the leakage from that supply, but the leakage from the NETWORK will still go through. There is one exception, see the next section.

 

IF the switch is one of FS105 and FS108, grounding the negative of the supply will get rid of BOTH the leakage from the SMPS AND the network leakage. NOTE, this ONLY happens for these two switch types. Grounding the supply to a different switch type does NOT block network leakage.

 

If you are powering a switch from a linear supply, this gets rid of the leakage going through the PS of the switch, but NOT the network leakage. The only way to get rid of the network leakage is to use one of the above switches AND ground the negative of the supply powering the switch, no matter WHAT that supply might be. (linear, SMPS, LPS-1 etc)

 

If you are using an LPS-1 to power the switch, see the above rules for ANY supply. ANY supply includes the LPS-1. Thus IF you have one of the two named switches and you are powering the switch from an LPS-1, you must ground the output of the LPS-1 in order to block the network leakage. This will only work with one of those two switches. Grounding the output of the LPS-1 will NOT block leakage if you are using some other switch. It will not help if the LPS-1 is driving some other type of device. Thus there is no reason to ground the output of an LPS-1 if it is NOT driving one of the above named switches.

 

There is one exception to the last point. IF the LPS-1 is driving an ISO REGEN there can be a situation where the whole audio system is floating with respect to earth ground and a charge can build up which can show up as clicks and pops. ONE earth ground in such a system can alleviate this. ONE way to do this is to ground the negative of the supply powering the ISO REGEN. If this supply is an LPS-1 then you can try grounding the output of the LPS-1 to see if it fixes the clicks and pops.

 

Grounding the INPUT to the LPS-1 can help in other situations by shunting the high impedance leakage.

 

I hope this makes things clear, I'm running out of ways to say this.

 

John S.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[auricgoldfinger]

17 minutes ago, JohnSwenson said:

I hope this makes things clear, I'm running out of ways to say this.

 

I find having everything on this topic in one post to be very helpful.  It seems definitive to me.  Thank you!

[Superdad]

1 hour ago, lmitche said:

Maybe a clockectomy is better, and cheaper.

 

Well for inclusion in a couple of new products, John is working on a technique he keeps referring to as "clock-blocking," but that's a bit to cheeky for UpTone's marketing terminology.  More the sort of term Schiit would use... 

[lmitche]

9 minutes ago, Superdad said:

 

Well for inclusion in a couple of new products, John is working on a technique he keeps referring to as "clock-blocking," but that's a bit to cheeky for UpTone's marketing terminology.  More the sort of term Schiit would use... 

You're right take a look at the urban dictionary of clock block.  Who knew?

[Johnseye]

56 minutes ago, JohnSwenson said:

It seems a lot of people are getting confused by my posts on the subject of network leakage, I will try and state things in a more concrete manor.

 

This is relating to a switch which is what your network endpoint into your audio system is connected, this may be streamer (microRendu etc) a laptop or other computer Mac mini, PC etc). We shall call this the audio endpoint (AE)

 

Leakage current can get into the AE through the switch in two ways, from the power supply powering the switch, or from the cable connected to the rest of the network. The leakage coming from the network comes from the SMPS powering THOSE devices.

 

If the switch connected to the AE is powered by an SMPS, grounding the negative of output of the SMPS will shunt the leakage from that supply, but the leakage from the NETWORK will still go through. There is one exception, see the next section.

 

IF the switch is one of FS105 and FS108, grounding the negative of the supply will get rid of BOTH the leakage from the SMPS AND the network leakage. NOTE, this ONLY happens for these two switch types. Grounding the supply to a different switch type does NOT block network leakage.

 

If you are powering a switch from a linear supply, this gets rid of the leakage going through the PS of the switch, but NOT the network leakage. The only way to get rid of the network leakage is to use one of the above switches AND ground the negative of the supply powering the switch, no matter WHAT that supply might be. (linear, SMPS, LPS-1 etc)

 

If you are using an LPS-1 to power the switch, see the above rules for ANY supply. ANY supply includes the LPS-1. Thus IF you have one of the two named switches and you are powering the switch from an LPS-1, you must ground the output of the LPS-1 in order to block the network leakage. This will only work with one of those two switches. Grounding the output of the LPS-1 will NOT block leakage if you are using some other switch. It will not help if the LPS-1 is driving some other type of device. Thus there is no reason to ground the output of an LPS-1 if it is NOT driving one of the above named switches.

 

There is one exception to the last point. IF the LPS-1 is driving an ISO REGEN there can be a situation where the whole audio system is floating with respect to earth ground and a charge can build up which can show up as clicks and pops. ONE earth ground in such a system can alleviate this. ONE way to do this is to ground the negative of the supply powering the ISO REGEN. If this supply is an LPS-1 then you can try grounding the output of the LPS-1 to see if it fixes the clicks and pops.

 

Grounding the INPUT to the LPS-1 can help in other situations by shunting the high impedance leakage.

 

I hope this makes things clear, I'm running out of ways to say this.

 

John S.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

@JohnSwenson  Does it make sense to use these switches at other locations in the network to contain any noise generated from the devices attached to those switches at the switch?  Or by using one of these switches does it then block all upstream noise eliminating any need for others, so that an edge switch used for audio devices is all that's needed?  I'm wondering if it makes sense to use these switches everywhere possible and shunts wherever I have a PSU using a barrel adapter.

 

By the way, your explanation was the clearest summarization I've seen. Thanks.

[afrancois]

19 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

 

@JohnSwenson  Does it make sense to use these switches at other locations in the network to contain any noise generated from the devices attached to those switches at the switch?  Or by using one of these switches does it then block all upstream noise eliminating any need for others, so that an edge switch used for audio devices is all that's needed?  I'm wondering if it makes sense to use these switches everywhere possible and shunts wherever I have a PSU using a barrel adapter.

 

By the way, your explanation was the clearest summarization I've seen. Thanks.

I was also thinking of putting an FS105 before my AQVOX switch so that there would be no network leakage coming into the AQVOX.

Interesting read : 

 

[JJ Braham]

Now that we're talking of switches, SOtM was showing their new audiophile switches at the RMAF. They even had two versions, one with the sCLK-EX clock at $450 and one with the clock that's in their new master clock for $850. They seemed really interesting to me. It'd be interesting to know if they block network leakage like the FS105 and FS108.

[AmusedToD]

1 minute ago, JJ Braham said:

Now that we're talking of switches, SOtM was showing their new audiophile switches at the RMAF. They even had two versions, one with the sCLK-EX clock at $450 and one with the clock that's in their new master clock for $850. They seemed really interesting to me. It'd be interesting to know if they block network leakage like the FS105 and FS108.

 

This is very interesting indeed! How did they manage to lower the price to $450 for a switch with a sCLK-EX clock? The sCLK-EX board itself with just 1 clock output is $700 on their website.

[afrancois]

5 minutes ago, AmusedToD said:

 

This is very interesting indeed! How did they manage to lower the price to $450 for a switch with a sCLK-EX clock? The sCLK-EX board itself with just 1 clock output is $700 on their website.

I guess it will be some kind of partial simplified one clock output sCLK-EX board inside the switch.

[elan120]

9 minutes ago, AmusedToD said:

 

This is very interesting indeed! How did they manage to lower the price to $450 for a switch with a sCLK-EX clock? The sCLK-EX board itself with just 1 clock output is $700 on their website.

I wonder if this is the same switch that this other thread talked about, which appear not to be a SOtM designed product.

 

 

[rickca]

52 minutes ago, JJ Braham said:

Now that we're talking of switches, SOtM was showing their new audiophile switches at the RMAF. They even had two versions, one with the sCLK-EX clock at $450 and one with the clock that's in their new master clock for $850. They seemed really interesting to me. It'd be interesting to know if they block network leakage like the FS105 and FS108.

Did you get those prices from an SOtM rep at RMAF?  Any info about when they would be available?

 

It's kind of interesting how those prices closely match AQVOX AQ-Switch-8 (398 euros) and AQ-Switch-SE (798 euros).

[mozes]

These are not SOTM switches, they are made by someone else who knows SOTM. May clarified this on the above mentioned  thread.

[rickca]

4 minutes ago, mozes said:

These are not SOTM switches, they are made by someone else who knows SOTM. May clarified this on the above mentioned  thread.

Yes I saw that comment from May.  So I'm curious about the source of @JJ Braham's information that these switches have sCLK-EX and sCLK-OCX10 clocks in them.  It doesn't make sense.

[d_elm]

39 minutes ago, rickca said:

Yes I saw that comment from May.  So I'm curious about the source of @JJ Braham's information that these switches have sCLK-EX and sCLK-OCX10 clocks in them.  It doesn't make sense.

They probably have a mod for an external sCLK-EX.  SOtM will do this for an FMC.