Can playing an Audio file from the solid state HD sound better than from an ext HD?

[bigbob]

It does on my "Computer Audiophile on the Cheap" system.

 

Transferring a file via USB3.0 to the SSD from the External 4 Tb Hard Drive, and playing it from the SSD actually sounds better.

 

I don't know why, but it is certainly worth transferring your play-list over from their safe homes on the External, and kill them off when you are done listening.

 

I don't get into arguments with folks about USB interconnects to the external DAC, but some sell for a few dollars and others cost Hundreds.

 

I think phenomena I am describing has more to do with the quicker throughput of the file, from the SSD to the DAC. Don't know, don't care.

 

It sounds better.

[plissken]

It does on my "Computer Audiophile on the Cheap" system.

 

Transferring a file via USB3.0 to the SSD from the External 4 Tb Hard Drive, and playing it from the SSD actually sounds better.

 

I don't know why, but it is certainly worth transferring your play-list over from their safe homes on the External, and kill them off when you are done listening.

 

I don't get into arguments with folks about USB interconnects to the external DAC, but some sell for a few dollars and others cost Hundreds.

 

I think phenomena I am describing has more to do with the quicker throughput of the file, from the SSD to the DAC. Don't know, don't care.

 

It sounds better.

 

I know when I intentionally lifted the shield on a balanced cable you could hear more noise with an HDD as far as click and pops as the HD was accessing data vs SSD.

 

The other thing that made a difference was going to a linear PSU.

 

What made the biggest difference was using my quality sound card with correctly balanced cables. After that it didn't matter SSD, HDD, SMPS, or Linear PSU. It all sounded great.

 

I'm of the mind if differences are heard I would question the quality of the DAC.

[erniejade]

I'm not sure if the ssd has better shielding or ness electrical noise but in general I agree. Ssd usually sounds better but, I have read a few threads where different ssd sounds better then others.

[plissken]

I'm not sure if the ssd has better shielding or ness electrical noise but in general I agree. Ssd usually sounds better but, I have read a few threads where different ssd sounds better then others.

 

When I played around with it it was 100% the head actuator that was causing the noise with the mechanical spinner. You could also hear mouse movement as a series of quick clicks. I got rid of that by doing remote desktop in my testing. I've really got to question these setups with expensive DAC's that are so susceptible.

[erniejade]

It could be the dac is pulling more detail and information out of the music.

Recently I had 3 dacs here. LH labs vi Infinity, w4s dac2 and the stock dac built into my Lumin D1. Between the w4s dac2 and the VI,the VI pulled a lot more detail out and showed every flaw. On a rig that is revealing, it was not too forgiving of bad source or badly mastered recording playing from the same source. So maybe it's more on the line of the dac itself pulling more detail out?

[plissken]

It could be the dac is pulling more detail and information out of the music.

Recently I had 3 dacs here. LH labs vi Infinity, w4s dac2 and the stock dac built into my Lumin D1. Between the w4s dac2 and the VI,the VI pulled a lot more detail out and showed every flaw. On a rig that is revealing, it was not too forgiving of bad source or badly mastered recording playing from the same source. So maybe it's more on the line of the dac itself pulling more detail out?

 

It's the implementation. Because I would rather enjoy the benefits that HDD's ($ per MB) provide and engineer for any potential drawback/s.

 

I've just installed another NAS for someone along with a $40 Dlink 1200 AC router and $29 AC1200 USB3 wireless adapter. Getting throughput consistently above 70MB second. Ping rates are 1ms or sub. I averaging an install every two months now.

 

Even in modest use scenarios you can pickup a Toshiba 3TB Canvio 1GBe NAS for ~$80 and spend another $70 on WAP and USB Adapter. No need for $350 network cables or very effective but still some cost and work to install optical.

[bigbob]

I have been testing the iFi nano iDSD LE against the Schiit Modi2, but I discovered the difference after I pulled up a song from a native folder of the SSD, and I could more detail, better decay and more air. Since I had just transfered the file to my $129 4TB Seagate, I loaded the song into Audacious from that folder. It was as if the cloth covers on my speaker were now made of felt. With USB3.0 it just takes a few seconds to move the file over and play it from the SSD... but what do I know? I hear a significant difference when I plugged in my HFC MC-0.5 into the six out let strip which powered my receiver, and computer...go figure

[davide256]

Try an SDXC card USB3 connected... it should sound even better than your SSD.

[astrotoy]

IIRC when Chris did his CA Seminar in Berkeley way back in 2009, they did a comparison of spinning drive vs. SS drive and the latter clearly sounded better. Maybe Chris can comment. Larry

[Lebouwsky]

On 30-1-2017 at 5:54 PM, davide256 said:

Try an SDXC card USB3 connected... it should sound even better than your SSD.

Can you give a little bit more info about how to use it and how it improved things for you?

[AudioDoctor]

I don't know, my files get played back from RAM on my computer.  Aurender plays the music from an SSD versus the HDD, so maybe.

[Ralf11]

I'm all ears if you guys want to do some testing...

[plissken]

Could always setup a RAM Disk if your current machine has HDD. Plenty of remote desktop applications that someone could setup the machine and blind if for evaluation.

 

I've remoted in for a few members to help them trouble shoot their setups here.

[wwaldmanfan]

I'm surprised that some folks can hear differences between storage media. My music player app loads the track into a RAM buffer before playback. I have experimented with feeding files from external FireWire hard drive, internal SSD, SD card, and RAM disk, and it makes no difference, nor should it. Either that, or those that hear an improvement have noise problems in their signal chain that can be bypassed one way or the other.

[davide256]

5 hours ago, Lebouwsky said:

Can you give a little bit more info about how to use it and how it improved things for you?

I started with comparing music library stored locally on 128 Gb Crucial SSD, compared to a Sandisk Extreme  Pro 128Gb SDXC card using Fidelizer Pro with Foobar2000 and a trial instance of HQPlayer, and the Ifi Nano as asynch USB converter for the Metrum Octave. Its basic affect was to improve resolution at lower volume levels so that sounds which  were muddied before became clearer for instrumentation and phrasing. The effect was noticeable for both USB2 and USB3 but at USB3 speeds the sound was more relaxed, similar to the speaker sound difference between 2 good amps where one just  barely has enough watts to drive the load. Around that time I acquired the microRendu which itself is great at low level resolution and also had the Aries mini to compare for network streaming from my Synology NAS. WIth the Aries mini there was some lowl volume level muddiness  that I just couldn't shake with SSD or SDXC cards, the microRendu solved that and gave back even better resolution using NAS source with SDXC  USB3 attached then with the 2x512gb Crucial SSD solution I had been using.

 

The observing experience with renderer and file server solution was very reminiscent of  telescope optics where resolution is dependent on  quality of both the eyepiece and the objective lens; defects in one can mask the resolution capabilities of the other.

[wwaldmanfan]

HQPlayer processes and plays the track in real time, so the computer is continuously paging the storage drive as it plays. Therefore, it is conceivable that connected devices in your signal chain could affect the signal. OTOH, Audirvana caches 1-2 tracks into RAM before playback. At that point, external devices, while physically connected, are "on standby", simply waiting to pre-load the next track.

[bigbob]

I am understanding what you are saying and it makes sense. I run Ubuntu Linux and use Audacious as my player. I believe it loads the playlist into temporary memory, but I can hear a difference when the file is on the Solid State rather than external HDD, which is running into a USB3.0 card with a USB3.0 cable. I am using a USB3.0 interconnect to my iFi iPurifier 2, then into a Schiit Modi 2 DAC.  I see a lot written about different music players like JRiver and Foobar, and I have even investigated "dedicated Audiophile Linux" OS, but they all seem more trouble than they are worth. (Audiophile Linux requires a 64-bit system) Why re-invent the wheel, Audacious works, it is a small, efficient player that uses a ALSA plug-in. I do know that the $39 I spent on the SSD made such an improvement in the overall performance, and speed of my old Dell Vostro (4 Gb RAM maxed out)--but then again I built the computer from parts I got at Goodwill for $14, so....

[firedog]

If the external drive is powered from an external PS that could make a difference. The external PS could be injecting noise into the system.

[Jud]

10 hours ago, wwaldmanfan said:

HQPlayer processes and plays the track in real time, so the computer is continuously paging the storage drive as it plays. Therefore, it is conceivable that connected devices in your signal chain could affect the signal. OTOH, Audirvana caches 1-2 tracks into RAM before playback. At that point, external devices, while physically connected, are "on standby", simply waiting to pre-load the next track.

 

True, but those devices are still electrically connected.  So whether you get any electrical noise from them I suppose would depend on whether that noise came from I/O activity (presumably not happening, or not happening as much, with memory players) or, for example, a "wall wart" (still connected during memory play).

[Lebouwsky]

19 hours ago, davide256 said:

I started with comparing music library stored locally on 128 Gb Crucial SSD, compared to a Sandisk Extreme  Pro 128Gb SDXC card using Fidelizer Pro with Foobar2000 and a trial instance of HQPlayer, and the Ifi Nano as asynch USB converter for the Metrum Octave. Its basic affect was to improve resolution at lower volume levels so that sounds which  were muddied before became clearer for instrumentation and phrasing. The effect was noticeable for both USB2 and USB3 but at USB3 speeds the sound was more relaxed, similar to the speaker sound difference between 2 good amps where one just  barely has enough watts to drive the load. Around that time I acquired the microRendu which itself is great at low level resolution and also had the Aries mini to compare for network streaming from my Synology NAS. WIth the Aries mini there was some lowl volume level muddiness  that I just couldn't shake with SSD or SDXC cards, the microRendu solved that and gave back even better resolution using NAS source with SDXC  USB3 attached then with the 2x512gb Crucial SSD solution I had been using.

 

The observing experience with renderer and file server solution was very reminiscent of  telescope optics where resolution is dependent on  quality of both the eyepiece and the objective lens; defects in one can mask the resolution capabilities of the other.

Thank you Davide, listening at lower volume at "high resolution" is something I can appriciate as well. Your suggested experiment playing music from Sdxc card can be done with little experience, I think I will try.

[Lebouwsky]

9 hours ago, firedog said:

If the external drive is powered from an external PS that could make a difference. The external PS could be injecting noise into the system.

My music library was on a nas, renderer is Sotm sms500 in mpd/dlna mode. Now my music is on a server running minimserver. 

 

In both setups the sms500 continues to play when unplugging the ethernet cable, so the sms500 buffers somehow. 

 

A fellow forum member Austinpop suggests to install Audiophile optimiser on the server, resulting in better sound. I do believe him and my plan is to do so. Still  I can't figure out why, because timing is no issue when files are buffered.

 

Copy pasting a picture will always result in the same picture. Only when factors like time/timing/clocking enters the audiophile can of worms opens, combined with electrical noise.

[plissken]

17 hours ago, Lebouwsky said:

My music library was on a nas, renderer is Sotm sms500 in mpd/dlna mode. Now my music is on a server running minimserver. 

 

In both setups the sms500 continues to play when unplugging the ethernet cable, so the sms500 buffers somehow. 

 

A fellow forum member Austinpop suggests to install Audiophile optimiser on the server, resulting in better sound. I do believe him and my plan is to do so. Still  I can't figure out why, because timing is no issue when files are buffered.

 

Copy pasting a picture will always result in the same picture. Only when factors like time/timing/clocking enters the audiophile can of worms opens, combined with electrical noise.

 

Your logic is spot on. AO does absolutely nothing for you in this instance because it's impossible for it to do so. 

[Lebouwsky]

3 hours ago, plissken said:

 

Your logic is spot on. AO does absolutely nothing for you in this instance because it's impossible for it to do so. 

Thank you for the compliment, though I do plan to follow his tip. I think I'll install a dual boot, one with and one without AO. That way I can compare. 

 

It's strange that this subject is not deepend out more. In the whole NAA discussion I can remember people stated the server part can be as noicy as can be without harming the sound. It does make life easier.

[davide256]

20 hours ago, Lebouwsky said:

My music library was on a nas, renderer is Sotm sms500 in mpd/dlna mode. Now my music is on a server running minimserver. 

 

In both setups the sms500 continues to play when unplugging the ethernet cable, so the sms500 buffers somehow. 

 

A fellow forum member Austinpop suggests to install Audiophile optimiser on the server, resulting in better sound. I do believe him and my plan is to do so. Still  I can't figure out why, because timing is no issue when files are buffered.

 

Copy pasting a picture will always result in the same picture. Only when factors like time/timing/clocking enters the audiophile can of worms opens, combined with electrical noise.

 

Not sure that it will get you better sound but it may make the NAS less likely to crash over time. Windows PC's always seem to corrupt resource handling and become less and less stable the longer they  have been up since last reboot.