Rafe Arnott over at Audiostream just figured out that a dedicated server is better than a laptop

[saturdayboy]

At least he writes great posts about McIntosh amps and cassette tapes. I never thought I would say this, but I miss Michael Lavorgna.

 

https://www.audiostream.com/content/aurender-n10-preview-and-lack-subtlety

 

 

[Brinkman Ship]

...send him a telegram and let him know Lincoln was shot....?

[AudioDoctor]

1 hour ago, Brinkman Ship said:

...send him a telegram and let him know Lincoln was shot....?

 

I got a good laugh out of that.

[Brinkman Ship]

56 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

 

I got a good laugh out of that.

?

[marce]

This statement tickled me...

"HL: The fact of the matter is that computers were never designed to play music. Computers are full of noise, jitter and other artifacts that will not affect your spreadsheets, but music?"

Read more at https://www.audiostream.com/content/aurender-n10-preview-and-lack-subtlety#XvD1P7rfKy2BjRRL.99

 

So what is a dedicated server, if not a computer! Its a computer plain and simple, it will have a processor of some sort, memory and IO, in other words a computer. Its in a fancy box and has limited functionality but it is still prone to the same problems all computers and digital circuitry have, noise, jitter etc. etc.

[rando]

.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

1 hour ago, marce said:

So what is a dedicated server, if not a computer! Its a computer plain and simple, it will have a processor of some sort, memory and IO, in other words a computer. Its in a fancy box and has limited functionality but it is still prone to the same problems all computers and digital circuitry have, noise, jitter etc. etc.

Here we go again.  ?

 

[mrvco]

'Computer' is a rather generic label in this day and age.  I have multiple computers configured to task.  My gaming PC is infinitely more capable at playing modern games than my iMac, Mac Mini or MacBook Air.  However my iMac is setup specifically for my work and my Mac Mini is specifically setup for streaming music.  The µR+ connected to my Mac MIni is every bit as much a computer as any of these, albeit one tailored to performing a far more specific task.   And my MacBook Air excels at portability, but is a 'jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none' otherwise.

 

It shouldn't be surprising that a 'computer' competently designed and engineered for a specific task would excel at its intended task.  Wow, this framing hammer I just bought at Home Depot sure is good at... FRAMING!  Of course being that I have no experience framing houses, I guess I might be surprised at just how effective a framing hammer is at framing... especially if I had been attempting to frame houses, heretofore, with my trusty tack hammer.

[davide256]

2 hours ago, marce said:

This statement tickled me...

"HL: The fact of the matter is that computers were never designed to play music. Computers are full of noise, jitter and other artifacts that will not affect your spreadsheets, but music?"

Read more at https://www.audiostream.com/content/aurender-n10-preview-and-lack-subtlety#XvD1P7rfKy2BjRRL.99

 

So what is a dedicated server, if not a computer! Its a computer plain and simple, it will have a processor of some sort, memory and IO, in other words a computer. Its in a fancy box and has limited functionality but it is still prone to the same problems all computers and digital circuitry have, noise, jitter etc. etc.

What we buy off the shelf is cheap crap for allowed errors, compared to purpose built machines that need to integrate into electrically complex environments with high reliability. I wonder if for audio some of NASA's design requirements for control PC's might be applicable. At least we don't have to worry about radiation effects so much in earth atmosphere.

[marce]

1 hour ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Here we go again.  ?

 

And what is that suppose to mean, its a computer in a box all be it a nice box, but the same issues apply to all computers. I know this is the magic world of unicorns, but as said the same issues of noise etc. are present and have to be solved whether it has audiophile in the name or not...

A fact, computers are not designed to play music they are designed to manipulate and move digital data, something they are very good at, however you dress your computer up and name it... The trouble is with a lot of stuff in the consumer audio world is designs are taken on word of mouth and marketing splurge, say its an audiophile components and people will flock to back it up however good or bad it is...

[marce]

7 minutes ago, davide256 said:

What we buy off the shelf is cheap crap for allowed errors, compared to purpose built machines that need to integrate into electrically complex environments with high reliability. I wonder

if for audio some of NASA's design requirements for control PC's might be applicable. At least we don't have to worry about radiation effects so much in earth atmosphere.

Is it, another trait is to categorise everything into neat little groups, SMPS's are bad, PC's are bad, ferries are bad, linear supplies are good and anything with audiophile in the name or is audiophile grade (whatever that is) is good.

Now I use some off the shelf crap for CAD and other tasks way far more complex than moving a bit of data from a to b and the crap seams to do its job... And most if not all PC's will provide a data stream with zero errors ( many have posted figures).

What are NASA's design requirements for PC's (although they tend not to be called PC's).

 

What many need to realise is that any digital device creates a lot of noise just by working, I have mentioned it before its generic term is simultaneous switching noise, just because a computer is called an audiophile server does not mean it has been designed optimally, some of the servers I have seen the insides of look far from optimal, often a standard motherboard in a fancy box, so before I spend many more times what a basic motherboard would cost me I would want to know exactly what I am getting, not just some prose saying it audiophile...

[Brinkman Ship]

11 hours ago, saturdayboy said:

At least he writes great posts about McIntosh amps and cassette tapes. I never thought I would say this, but I miss Michael Lavorgna.

 

https://www.audiostream.com/content/aurender-n10-preview-and-lack-subtlety

 

 

BTW, Lavorgna held out until the bitter end..and thought his Mac Book Pro was SOTA. .so nothing new here....

 

If memory serves it was not until he got the microRendu to review that he had an epiphany that his computer just sucked in comparison.

[Mercman]

14 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

BTW, Lavorgna held out until the bitter end..and thought his Mac Book Pro was SOTA. .so nothing new here....

 

If memory serves it was not until he got the microRendu to review that he had an epiphany that his computer just sucked in comparison.

Hi Brinkman Ship,

 

Michael reviewed the Auralic Aries in 2014 and liked it better than his Mac:

 

https://www.audiostream.com/content/auralic-aries-0

 

Michael wrote:

 

"In terms of sound quality, I found the Aries to better my MacBook Pro in terms of apparent noise floor, dynamics, and resolution. Add in the ability to stream up to double rate DSD via WiFi seamlessly and you've got yourself one compelling package."
 

[Brinkman Ship]

3 minutes ago, Mercman said:

Hi Brinkman Ship,

 

Michael reviewed the Auralic Aries in 2014 and liked it better than his Mac:

 

https://www.audiostream.com/content/auralic-aries-0

 

Michael wrote:

 

"In terms of sound quality, I found the Aries to better my MacBook Pro in terms of apparent noise floor, dynamics, and resolution. Add in the ability to stream up to double rate DSD via WiFi seamlessly and you've got yourself one compelling package."
 

Thanks for the specific product and time frame.

[adamdea]

46 minutes ago, marce said:

Is it, another trait is to categorise everything into neat little groups, SMPS's are bad, PC's are bad, ferries are bad, linear supplies are good and anything with audiophile in the name or is audiophile grade (whatever that is) is good.

 

This reminds me of a particular piece of regurgitated marketing verbiage from about 10 years back. Some manufacturers of cdps made a point of saying that they used proper cd audio mechanisms not computer cd (or even worse dvd) rom drives. And I can remember this being parroted in the magazine reviews as meaning that they were better. The same magazines incidentally positively reviewed the ps audio cd transport which (gasp) ripped the cd into memory before playing it.....

[davide256]

2 hours ago, marce said:

Is it, another trait is to categorise everything into neat little groups, SMPS's are bad, PC's are bad, ferries are bad, linear supplies are good and anything with audiophile in the name or is audiophile grade (whatever that is) is good.

Now I use some off the shelf crap for CAD and other tasks way far more complex than moving a bit of data from a to b and the crap seams to do its job... And most if not all PC's will provide a data stream with zero errors ( many have posted figures).

What are NASA's design requirements for PC's (although they tend not to be called PC's).

 

What many need to realise is that any digital device creates a lot of noise just by working, I have mentioned it before its generic term is simultaneous switching noise, just because a computer is called an audiophile server does not mean it has been designed optimally, some of the servers I have seen the insides of look far from optimal, often a standard motherboard in a fancy box, so before I spend many more times what a basic motherboard would cost me I would want to know exactly what I am getting, not just some prose saying it audiophile...

 

I'd say that half the hardware on a typical PC MOBO is superfluous for a  network player, just a source of noise and power instability.  The microRendu is a good minimalist design, the only thing I disliked about it was that it didn't include  Wifi.

[Brinkman Ship]

32 minutes ago, davide256 said:

 

I'd say that half the hardware on a typical PC MOBO is superfluous for a  network player, just a source of noise and power instability.  The microRendu is a good minimalist design, the only thing I disliked about it was that it didn't include  Wifi.

lack of WiFi was a good thing IMO...

[Albrecht]

3 hours ago, marce said:

And what is that suppose to mean, its a computer in a box all be it a nice box, but the same issues apply to all computers. I know this is the magic world of unicorns, but as said the same issues of noise etc. are present and have to be solved whether it has audiophile in the name or not...

A fact, computers are not designed to play music they are designed to manipulate and move digital data, something they are very good at, however you dress your computer up and name it... The trouble is with a lot of stuff in the consumer audio world is designs are taken on word of mouth and marketing splurge, say its an audiophile components and people will flock to back it up however good or bad it is...

Uh no...

The difference is single-purpose computers vs multi-purpose computers. Everyone knows what people mean: they just don't write out "single-purpose-computers." There is nothing WRONG with multi-purpose computers. Their GOAL and DESIGN is not to do one thing well. This is what high end audio manufacturers bring to the table, - single purpose machines designed to playback digital files. This means eliminating unused, noisy, and lower quality components that either get in the way, or can add unwanted artifacts in enhanced audio reproduction.

""A fact, computers are not designed to play music they are designed to manipulate and move digital data, something they are very good at, however you dress your computer up and name it...""

 

"Digital data?" Yes, - ALL computers manipulate digital data, - but some computers are designed to be networked cameras, turn on your lights, run Point of Sale systems, browse the Internet, Email etc. There are many single purpose computers that are designed to do 1 thing. These single purpose computers (be they cameras, networked washing machines, refrigerators, etc. are all BETTER than multi-function computers for that one task or goal.

No one is bothering to run Email and web browsing on their Razberri Pi with Allo Digital1 card in it. They have BETTER multi-function computers available for the many other tasks that multi-function computers are needed for/serve.

 

""The trouble is with a lot of stuff in the consumer audio world is designs are taken on word of mouth and marketing splurge, say its an audiophile components and people will flock to back it up however good or bad it is...""

We don't talk about consumer audio here, - we're talking about high end audio. Un-modified, Multi-function computers are perfectly fine for consumer audio.

Just like any single purpose computing device out there, single purpose music playback computers aren't around long if they do not perform well. The fact that many of these single purpose computers perform so much better than multi-purpose ones proves this point decidedly. In fact many of the design elements that have IMPROVED digital file playback, single purpose computers, - have not come from high end audio designers/manufacturers, - but from the computing industry. Those devices when applied properly, - were proven effective through experimentation and testing: I am referring to devices like the Intona USB isolator.

[davide256]

10 minutes ago, Brinkman Ship said:

lack of WiFi was a good thing IMO...

The Aries mini and  DIgione with RPI3b+ prove that wrong for streamers under $1000.  And Auralic certainly doesn't agree with their better streamers. 

[Albrecht]

2 hours ago, adamdea said:

This reminds me of a particular piece of regurgitated marketing verbiage from about 10 years back. Some manufacturers of cdps made a point of saying that they used proper cd audio mechanisms not computer cd (or even worse dvd) rom drives. And I can remember this being parroted in the magazine reviews as meaning that they were better. The same magazines incidentally positively reviewed the ps audio cd transport which (gasp) ripped the cd into memory before playing it.....

Until the VRDS NEO came along and proved that the transport really matters.

[Kal Rubinson]

5 hours ago, marce said:

And what is that suppose to mean, its a computer in a box all be it a nice box, but the same issues apply to all computers. I know this is the magic world of unicorns, but as said the same issues of noise etc. are present and have to be solved whether it has audiophile in the name or not...

A fact, computers are not designed to play music they are designed to manipulate and move digital data, something they are very good at, however you dress your computer up and name it... The trouble is with a lot of stuff in the consumer audio world is designs are taken on word of mouth and marketing splurge, say its an audiophile components and people will flock to back it up however good or bad it is...

It means that I agree with you entirely but, when this has come up in the past, here and elsewhere, it has ignited flames (without heat).

[Ralf11]

someone should explain exactly what is different about their audiophile purpose built computer vs. say a mac mini

 

- are the traces laid out differently on the PC boards?

 

- are components spaced differently and shielded more?

 

- we already know it is not the processes running - or at least no one was able ot come up with any when @wgscott started a thread on that specific topic

[crenca]

48 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

someone should explain exactly what is different about their audiophile purpose built computer vs. say a mac mini

 

- are the traces laid out differently on the PC boards?

 

- are components spaced differently and shielded more?

 

- we already know it is not the processes running - or at least no one was able ot come up with any when @wgscott started a thread on that specific topic

 

As near as I can tell, specified "audiophile" computer hardware gear (i.e. computers/servers/endpoints, networking boxes such as switches/wifi routers, etc.) are simply taking the commodity parts/boards/chips/solutions that the whole industry uses and mixing and matching them with certain design goals/principles in mind.  This usually comes down to a minimalist product that when combined with minimalist software, is said to be better.  These claims of better run range from simply packaging/functionality to assertions about EM "noise" and seemingly magical assertions about signals and bits and bytes .  Perhaps folks with actual products like @barrowscan say more.

[barrows]

All products are different.  At Sonore, we design and engineer our own solutions.  We moved away from making actual full featured "servers" (and those did incorporate commercial MoBos, albeit carefully selected and running custom software) years ago and switched to Ethernet based renderers as the Renderers offered a greatly reduced noise footprint in the audio system.

There is not much "magical" stuff going on, just well engineered products offering superb performance strictly for audio use.

[fas42]

A palm sized media player, costing not much, can do a remarkably good job - simplicity, compactness wins. Of course, this won't satisfy those who want lots of impressive metal in front of them, to add the necessary visual grunt - it's getting so much easier, and cheaper these days to get so much of the overall package in good enough shape to do the job ... interesting times ...