My Summary about Computer Audio Music Server

[amir57bs]

before reading my post please note my idea may not be useful to you , My taste may be different to you because I just like sound of audio note and living voice , if you like over 100w solid-state amplifier and 90db or lower sensitivity speaker then there is no relation between my taste and your taste and my comment is not for you.

after testing all ways and spending over 20k $ the I should say in my idea the only man who think right is Gordon Rankin , other not. Gordon is the only trusted man in my view .

now I am sure no audio designer no music server no company could not make good sound from computer audio.

please ignore all you read in this forum (ideas and recommendations), please ignore all you hear from other Internet forums, Please stop shopping any music server or computer audio .

 

music server could not beat CEC TLx 3.0 and it is better to pay for CEC Transport.

the best sound you can hear from computer audio is this setup and it is ecommended by Gordon Rankin :

macbook pro 2015 quad core 15” (USB 2.0 port right position)

Berkeley Alpha USB to SPDIF Converter (it use Gordon Rankin Codes)

Purist 30 Anniversary USB Cable 1.2m

Mavericks with Roon Labs 1.2 bit perfect exclusive mode 

sudu renice coreaudio to -20

CAD optimisation script for mac osx

 

do not use any Ground Like CAD GC3 or ...

 

please do not waste your money , all you hear is hype. just email to Gordon Rankin for getting good result.

[AnotherSpin]

Good for you

[nbpf]

52 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

Good for you

And for Gordon Rankin as well, I guess!

[audiobomber]

On 6/9/2018 at 8:41 AM, amir57bs said:

Berkeley Alpha USB to SPDIF Converter (it use Gordon Rankin Codes)

 

AUDIOSTREAM:  "Some people claim that USB is an inferior method of connectivity as compared to S/PDIF. Are they are wrong?"
RANKIN:  "Yea!!!!! I hate SPDIF more than anything Digital."
https://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-wavelength-audios-gordon-rankin-page-2#ilu9WwGPQxURilIq.99 

 

S/PDIF is a poor interface because the sending clock and receiving clock can never truly synchronize, there is always jitter. 

• A CD player (transport and DAC in one box) is superior to S/PDIF, all else being equal, because there's only one clock
• Asynchronous USB is superior to S/PDIF because the DAC controls timing
• Separate clock and data lines (e.g. I2S) is superior to S/PDIF because transport and DAC clocks can synchronise

My digital guru is John Westlake. For a number of years I used his Cambridge DiscMagic transport / IsoMagic DAC, with separate data and clock lines. That was a unique system because it enabled full galvanic isolation using Toslink cables.

 

I'm currently using his Audiolab 8200CD player, which has an integral CD transport, with input switching and volume control like a digital preamp. He recommends USB over the S/PDIF or AES/EBU inputs. Fed by an sMs-200, USB sounds as good as the internal CD transport, so I don't see a need for any other USB devices. I do use a modified cable that blocks 5V USB power.

 

I will likely get his FDAC when released. 

[KingRex]

On 6/9/2018 at 5:41 AM, amir57bs said:

before reading my post please note my idea may not be useful to you , My taste may be different to you because I just like sound of audio note and living voice , if you like over 100w solid-state amplifier and 90db or lower sensitivity speaker then there is no relation between my taste and your taste and my comment is not for you.

after testing all ways and spending over 20k $ the I should say in my idea the only man who think right is Gordon Rankin , other not. Gordon is the only trusted man in my view .

now I am sure no audio designer no music server no company could not make good sound from computer audio.

please ignore all you read in this forum (ideas and recommendations), please ignore all you hear from other Internet forums, Please stop shopping any music server or computer audio .

 

music server could not beat CEC TLx 3.0 and it is better to pay for CEC Transport.

the best sound you can hear from computer audio is this setup and it is ecommended by Gordon Rankin :

macbook pro 2015 quad core 15” (USB 2.0 port right position)

Berkeley Alpha USB to SPDIF Converter (it use Gordon Rankin Codes)

Purist 30 Anniversary USB Cable 1.2m

Mavericks with Roon Labs 1.2 bit perfect exclusive mode 

sudu renice coreaudio to -20

CAD optimisation script for mac osx

 

do not use any Ground Like CAD GC3 or ...

 

please do not waste your money , all you hear is hype. just email to Gordon Rankin for getting good result.

Did you spend $20K auditioning the Zenith, Antipodes or Mojo servers?   Users of these servers ditched laptops years ago due to laptops Inferior performance.  Even Apple products with linear PS don't play as well as Windows or Linux machines.  

Never heard your CD transport.  Can it stream Tidal or Spotify?  

[davide256]

if we didn't spend money on playing around with gear, it wouldn't be a hobby ? BTW, Gordon Rankin knows DAC's, analog digital signals but is not a desktop computer hardware guru/designer.  So he can't tell you what makes a better digital audio source.

Mac's used to be a best choice but there has been a lot of development effort over the last 3 years in various platforms that surpass Mac. One of the first devices out that caused people on this site to abandon Mac's was the full Auralic Aries with its Femto clocks and Lightning server software. There have been others since. Mac's still remain a staple for audio show demos because they aren't "fiddly"

[amir57bs]

On 6/11/2018 at 6:58 PM, audiobomber said:

 

AUDIOSTREAM:  "Some people claim that USB is an inferior method of connectivity as compared to S/PDIF. Are they are wrong?"
RANKIN:  "Yea!!!!! I hate SPDIF more than anything Digital."
https://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-wavelength-audios-gordon-rankin-page-2#ilu9WwGPQxURilIq.99 

 

S/PDIF is a poor interface because the sending clock and receiving clock can never truly synchronize, there is always jitter. 

• A CD player (transport and DAC in one box) is superior to S/PDIF, all else being equal, because there's only one clock
• Asynchronous USB is superior to S/PDIF because the DAC controls timing
• Separate clock and data lines (e.g. I2S) is superior to S/PDIF because transport and DAC clocks can synchronise

My digital guru is John Westlake. For a number of years I used his Cambridge DiscMagic transport / IsoMagic DAC, with separate data and clock lines. That was a unique system because it enabled full galvanic isolation using Toslink cables.

 

I'm currently using his Audiolab 8200CD player, which has an integral CD transport, with input switching and volume control like a digital preamp. He recommends USB over the S/PDIF or AES/EBU inputs. Fed by an sMs-200, USB sounds as good as the internal CD transport, so I don't see a need for any other USB devices. I do use a modified cable that blocks 5V USB power.

 

I will likely get his FDAC when released. 

 

my computer audio system is better than many transports. it is just far from CEC TL0-X 

I should use audio note DAC 5 and I can not remove Berkeley from the chain.

the only man who could help is Gordon , he recommended me to buy Berkeley or ART Legato:

http://ar-t.co/PRODUCTS.html

https://www.berkeleyaudiodesign.com/alpha-usb/

 

 

[amir57bs]

On 6/12/2018 at 5:55 PM, KingRex said:

Did you spend $20K auditioning the Zenith, Antipodes or Mojo servers?   Users of these servers ditched laptops years ago due to laptops Inferior performance.  Even Apple products with linear PS don't play as well as Windows or Linux machines.  

Never heard your CD transport.  Can it stream Tidal or Spotify?  

I have asked Chris (owner of this forum) and Benjamin (owner of Mojo Audio) about difference of MacBook vs PC.

both Benjamin and Chris told me MacBook is not good and gordon rankin told me MacBook is better, the Gordon was right.

gordon is highly regarded and he is knowledge man not marketing man.

 

https://www.stereophile.com/interviews/196rankin/index.html

 

in my idea in audio market very very few designers could design good products to give us good sound. market is full of un-natural high Rez impressive clean sounding products.

[amir57bs]

On 6/12/2018 at 6:28 PM, davide256 said:

if we didn't spend money on playing around with gear, it wouldn't be a hobby ? BTW, Gordon Rankin knows DAC's, analog digital signals but is not a desktop computer hardware guru/designer.  So he can't tell you what makes a better digital audio source.

Mac's used to be a best choice but there has been a lot of development effort over the last 3 years in various platforms that surpass Mac. One of the first devices out that caused people on this site to abandon Mac's was the full Auralic Aries with its Femto clocks and Lightning server software. There have been others since. Mac's still remain a staple for audio show demos because they aren't "fiddly"

gordon could modify motherboard to get good clock and 5v power . if PC was better then he recommended me the PC.

I have told him I will pay for your modified PC but Gordon has no interest to product in this market.

apple has best hardware quality and you just need a separate 5v for your DAC.

[KingRex]

I trust Ben.  I like his product.  Yea I own it so I am biased. Ben did start out modifying Mac and moved to PC.  I believe he is chasing sound quality, not ease of manufacture.  Anyhow, its just a choice.  I prefer PC and love the sound I get.  You prefer Mac and love the sound you get.  Don't forget, digital audio is far from plug and play.  You have to think about the network at your home, the cabling, electrical isolation, mechanical isolation, power quality, Ethernet switches, where your library is stored and accesses and how that is isolated as well as integrated to the server, how the storage is powered and so on and so on.  It's almost as hard as vinyl.  The upside is, as you get it closser it gets better and better and does not change so much by each album played.  Have fun.   

[amir57bs]

17 hours ago, KingRex said:

I trust Ben.  I like his product.  Yea I own it so I am biased. Ben did start out modifying Mac and moved to PC.  I believe he is chasing sound quality, not ease of manufacture.  Anyhow, its just a choice.  I prefer PC and love the sound I get.  You prefer Mac and love the sound you get.  Don't forget, digital audio is far from plug and play.  You have to think about the network at your home, the cabling, electrical isolation, mechanical isolation, power quality, Ethernet switches, where your library is stored and accesses and how that is isolated as well as integrated to the server, how the storage is powered and so on and so on.  It's almost as hard as vinyl.  The upside is, as you get it closser it gets better and better and does not change so much by each album played.  Have fun.   

I think Mojo Audio PSU is good but PC do not sound good

 

[LTG2010]

5 hours ago, amir57bs said:

I think Mojo Audio PSU is good but PC do not sound good

It's great to hear that youv'e found a good system, but also I think you need a reference to compare your current set up to, before you pass final judgement. For example an Innuos, Mojo, Pink Faun, etc, server ....... compared to your Mac and CEC Transport. You seem to have only compared your own PC build. Also you could have bought a chord blu2 upsampling transport to play your cd's and upsample from your pc, that would have been another good comparison/ option. There are too many good sounding set ups nowadays.

[amir57bs]

7 hours ago, LTG2010 said:

It's great to hear that youv'e found a good system, but also I think you need a reference to compare your current set up to, before you pass final judgement. For example an Innuos, Mojo, Pink Faun, etc, server ....... compared to your Mac and CEC Transport. You seem to have only compared your own PC build. Also you could have bought a chord blu2 upsampling transport to play your cd's and upsample from your pc, that would have been another good comparison/ option. There are too many good sounding set ups nowadays.

 

I am 100% sure there is no good sound from Computer. It sounds un- natural and compress.

if you like upsample dac then you will like sound of PC .

i do not like upsample DACs , i like minimalist zero oversample , no jitter correction , true multibit , bit perfect DAC.

ypsilon , Audio note are good.

 

i think there is a fundamental difference between Audionote/living voice sound with those high feedback complex modern sounds.

 

i say PC is not good if you love Living voice/Audionote sound. If you like those complex high feedback systems then Computer Audio could be nice for you.

 

I should add the difference of good sound vs bad sound could not be detected by low efficiency speaker/high feedback amplifier.

you just could score Computer audio in a micro linear system like Kondo/LV system.

 

finally i think file playing by computer audio lost musicality when we compare it to CEC TL-X 3.0

 

i hope good designers like Gordon Rankin try to change the game.

 

[LTG2010]

1 minute ago, amir57bs said:

I am 100% sure there is no good sound from Computer.

I like living voice too and met Kevin Scott many years ago.

Some Great sounds come from Hi rez audio such as native DSD (not upsampled) played through NOS DACS if midrange quality space and ambience are your thing. Hi rez PCM  for pace and dynamics. You need a PC for that - a good one.

[amir57bs]

On 6/21/2018 at 2:04 AM, LTG2010 said:

I like living voice too and met Kevin Scott many years ago.

Some Great sounds come from Hi rez audio such as native DSD (not upsampled) played through NOS DACS if midrange quality space and ambience are your thing. Hi rez PCM  for pace and dynamics. You need a PC for that - a good one.

I think my things is not midrange quality or ambience , I believe right sound do not come from PC.

 

I am sorry about computer audio market with tons of buzz without any positive result.

[amir57bs]

 

[mattjtaylor2809]

If you don’t like computer audio may I ask why are you on this forum?

[amir57bs]

On 8/23/2018 at 2:27 PM, mattjtaylor2809 said:

If you don’t like computer audio may I ask why are you on this forum?

 

it is simple : Because I should share my experience to audiophile.

[tmtomh]

5 hours ago, amir57bs said:

 

it is simple : Because I should share my experience to audiophile.

 

Except you're not sharing your experience: you're making absolutist, factual assertions that lack evidence to support them, and at times are contradictory.

 

On 6/26/2018 at 1:40 AM, amir57bs said:

I think my things is not midrange quality or ambience , I believe right sound do not come from PC.

 

I am sorry about computer audio market with tons of buzz without any positive result.

 

Midrange quality and ambience are "not your thing" - but you know what the "right sound" is? That's not going to persuade many people to put any stock in what you say.

 

On 6/20/2018 at 5:23 PM, amir57bs said:

 

I am 100% sure there is no good sound from Computer. It sounds un- natural and compress.

if you like upsample dac then you will like sound of PC .

i do not like upsample DACs , i like minimalist zero oversample , no jitter correction , true multibit , bit perfect DAC.

ypsilon , Audio note are good.

 

You cannot e 100% sure there is no good sound from a computer, since you haven't tried nearly all the possibilities or scenarios involving computer audio. If you think that all computer-based audio sounds unnatural and compressed, that reinforces the idea that you don't have enough experience to know what you're talking about.

 

In addition, you've made not one single offer of evidence that a digital signal going into a DAC from a computer sounds any different than a digital signal going into a DAC from a CD/SACD/DVD-A disc and player. So unless you're "100% certain" that all digital playback sounds "unnatural and compressed," and you're exclusively into vinyl and other all-analogue media, then once again, you don't know what you're talking about.

 

Finally, you do realize that "no jitter correction" and "bit-perfect" are mutually contradictory, yes?

 

[amir57bs]

On 9/3/2018 at 8:11 PM, tmtomh said:

 

Except you're not sharing your experience: you're making absolutist, factual assertions that lack evidence to support them, and at times are contradictory.

 

 

Midrange quality and ambience are "not your thing" - but you know what the "right sound" is? That's not going to persuade many people to put any stock in what you say.

 

 

You cannot e 100% sure there is no good sound from a computer, since you haven't tried nearly all the possibilities or scenarios involving computer audio. If you think that all computer-based audio sounds unnatural and compressed, that reinforces the idea that you don't have enough experience to know what you're talking about.

 

In addition, you've made not one single offer of evidence that a digital signal going into a DAC from a computer sounds any different than a digital signal going into a DAC from a CD/SACD/DVD-A disc and player. So unless you're "100% certain" that all digital playback sounds "unnatural and compressed," and you're exclusively into vinyl and other all-analogue media, then once again, you don't know what you're talking about.

 

Finally, you do realize that "no jitter correction" and "bit-perfect" are mutually contradictory, yes?

 

 

make long story short : I think most audiophiles (over 90%) like stereophile recommendation list, they enjoy 500w amplifiers with 86db 3way huge loudspeakers. some audiophiles (less than 5%) like old tannoys , living voice , old kondo amplifiers , old horns. I share my ideas for those 5% not for 95% . I really believe only one man (gordon rankin)  could help those 5% get good sound from computer . I have checked all configuration and I never get high end sound from computer. i just recommend to go for CEC TL0-X .

[amir57bs]

please consider this market destroyed good sound (for those audiophiles are less than 5%) and online magazines online forums just guide us to hell. I just followed Romaz in this forum and I bought CAD gc3 ground control. the GC3 was recommended by roy Gregory and Romaz had a good experience with another ground control (I guess it was from Norway) . GC3 killed my sound and I put it on recycle bin . I am sorry about that. I lost 4500$ (GC3 price is 4500$) after following this forum.

you know Romaz , he is very active and have tested many configurations.

 

CEC just make 44.1kz 16bit transport. market hype is about higher sample rates higher FIR filter higher bit depth and ...

when you play CEC TL0-X it kills every other transports that play high sample rate .

 

I just write here for those who think like me to not lost their money on PC Audio.

[tmtomh]

3 hours ago, amir57bs said:

please consider this market destroyed good sound (for those audiophiles are less than 5%) and online magazines online forums just guide us to hell. I just followed Romaz in this forum and I bought CAD gc3 ground control. the GC3 was recommended by roy Gregory and Romaz had a good experience with another ground control (I guess it was from Norway) . GC3 killed my sound and I put it on recycle bin . I am sorry about that. I lost 4500$ (GC3 price is 4500$) after following this forum.

you know Romaz , he is very active and have tested many configurations.

 

CEC just make 44.1kz 16bit transport. market hype is about higher sample rates higher FIR filter higher bit depth and ...

when you play CEC TL0-X it kills every other transports that play high sample rate .

 

I just write here for those who think like me to not lost their money on PC Audio.

 

If you prefer the sound of low-wattage tube amps feeding high-efficiency speakers, that's fine - and it's got nothing to do with computer audio vs non-computer audio.

 

If you feel 16/44.1 redbook quality digital audio is sufficient and that high-res is a waste of time and money, that's fine too - and you'll probably get a good number of people here who agree with you, or who (like me) are at least somewhat sympathetic to that point of view.

 

But when we talk about "computer audio," all we're talking about is the digital source going into the DAC that feeds the analogue portion of a stereo system. So if your claim is that we should all be using high-end CD transports and outboard DACs instead of computer-based sources with outboard DACs, that's just silly. There's no evidence that a computer-based source is inferior to a disc-transport based source. And none of it has anything to do with amp wattage or design, or speaker efficiency. 

 

This thread you've started is not "your summary of computer audio" - it's "your personal taste in the sonic character of a stereo system."

[davide256]

3 hours ago, amir57bs said:

 

make long story short : I think most audiophiles (over 90%) like stereophile recommendation list, they enjoy 500w amplifiers with 86db 3way huge loudspeakers. some audiophiles (less than 5%) like old tannoys , living voice , old kondo amplifiers , old horns. I share my ideas for those 5% not for 95% . I really believe only one man (gordon rankin)  could help those 5% get good sound from computer . I have checked all configuration and I never get high end sound from computer. i just recommend to go for CEC TL0-X .

Really... you think audiophiles esteem Stereophile above all others?  If you  want to be current, Stereophile won't help you. Go here for a more comprehensive way to stay current. About the only gear I've seen Stereophile review that does decent computer audio is Naim. Faulty research will get you faulty conclusions.

 

https://www.dailyaudiophile.com/

 

 

[amir57bs]

I think I could not describe my ideas to you , misunderstanding of my ideas may be result of my bad English writing .

 

if I prefer horn/low power amps it means I like micro dynamics of sound and it relates to PC audio because you can not get micro dynamics from computer Audio in 2018.

what is micro dynamics? it is volume resolution of a system and when you turn down the volume the sound is still full .

this is subjective and I may could not describe it to you.

 

I never told red book quality is sufficient , I just say todays high Rez files and high Rez records are not better than pure AAD 44.1/16bit records. high Rez format may be better if they implement it in better way, I do not know but in 2018 we hear bad sound from high Rez media.

 

if I say I like pure 44.1/16bit PCM actually I am helping you what sound type is good to me and I am not discussing about PCM 16bit subject.

 

I think you misunderstood my observation .

please go out of theory and speak about real life , in theory many thing in audio could be ideal like flat frequency response of speakers or zero distortion amplifiers but in real world those ideal measurement speakers/amplifiers sounds crap to my ears.

 

in real world PC audio do not sound as good as a CEC Transport in 2018 . I don not know about future but now the PC audio in my idea is waste of money.

 

audio industry changed Analog Vinyl to CD and now is going to Files . CD never sounded better than Vinyl in real world (you know dynamic range of CD is far better than LP in theory) and I doubt those files sound better .

 

we just pay more for new format but we gain less.

[tmtomh]

On 9/6/2018 at 2:01 AM, amir57bs said:

I think I could not describe my ideas to you , misunderstanding of my ideas may be result of my bad English writing .

 

if I prefer horn/low power amps it means I like micro dynamics of sound and it relates to PC audio because you can not get micro dynamics from computer Audio in 2018.

what is micro dynamics? it is volume resolution of a system and when you turn down the volume the sound is still full .

this is subjective and I may could not describe it to you.

 

I never told red book quality is sufficient , I just say todays high Rez files and high Rez records are not better than pure AAD 44.1/16bit records. high Rez format may be better if they implement it in better way, I do not know but in 2018 we hear bad sound from high Rez media.

 

if I say I like pure 44.1/16bit PCM actually I am helping you what sound type is good to me and I am not discussing about PCM 16bit subject.

 

I think you misunderstood my observation .

please go out of theory and speak about real life , in theory many thing in audio could be ideal like flat frequency response of speakers or zero distortion amplifiers but in real world those ideal measurement speakers/amplifiers sounds crap to my ears.

 

in real world PC audio do not sound as good as a CEC Transport in 2018 . I don not know about future but now the PC audio in my idea is waste of money.

 

audio industry changed Analog Vinyl to CD and now is going to Files . CD never sounded better than Vinyl in real world (you know dynamic range of CD is far better than LP in theory) and I doubt those files sound better .

 

we just pay more for new format but we gain less.

 

It is clear that English is not your first/native language - but you write English perfectly well, and in my experience you have expressed your views very clearly.

 

So it's not that I (or anyone else) misunderstands you. No - it's that we disagree with you. I don't agree, for example, that a 100-watt solid state amplifier and 88dB efficiency speakers are incapable of producing micro-dynamics. And I don't agree with your blanket assertion that computer-based audio also is incapable of producing this.

 

And my understanding is that most of the other folks taking issue with your comments here would feel similarly.