Jump to content
IGNORED

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


Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, plissken said:

I'll use a $200 computer, a $999 DAC. You pick what ever 'audiophile' do-dad chain. You want a linear supply, microrendu, USB baptizer doohicky, dedicated audiophile player (that you don't think is a computer even though it is).

 

Straight up bitstream playback.

 

All you have to do is evaluate blind.

 

Take a Sonos - why waste your money on a DAC.  You'll never notice the difference, I guarantee.

Tidal / Qobuz--> Roon--> Fios Gigabit--> Netgear Prosafe GS105 --> Supra 8-->EtherRegen --> Fiber--> opticalRendu / CI Audio LPS --> Curious Evolved Link --> Chord Qutest--> AQ Water --> Belles Aria Integrated--> AQ Robin Hood--> Kudos Super 20's

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, Jud said:
2 hours ago, marce said:

created far too much noise for the circuitry due to the faster rise times and PWM of the drive

 

Hmm - @PeterSt, @jabbr, interesting, eh? 

 

No PWM control allowed anywhere near the PC and for those with my PWM pump in the heating system - ban it !

 

Btw, faster rise times ? better make that full square because that's what it is.

Killing.

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment
5 hours ago, jabbr said:

which means the logic has an intrinsic voltage and phase noise

 

I believe Ed Meitner was already measuring this at the dawn of digital.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
On 8/18/2018 at 1:33 PM, PeterSt said:

 

No PWM control allowed anywhere near the PC and for those with my PWM pump in the heating system - ban it !

 

Btw, faster rise times ? better make that full square because that's what it is.

Killing.

Nothing to do with heating...

Don't get the second comment.....

Link to comment
On 8/17/2018 at 6:19 AM, jabbr said:

Uh no. 

 

The trend end these days is to put more function on an integrated CPU called a SoC ... ClearFog is an example that I often use as a specialized network I/O board...

 

There is no one design for “audio” this concept is frankly absurd.

 

The requirements for a streamer (eg ClearFog with essentially one chip) are vastly different from what is needed to run HQPlayer upsampling ... in my experience the video ouput has the most noise, but what about folks who want integrated video + audio ... similarly my NAS has terabytes of storage ... why do you think there are so many motherboards all made by SuperMicro as well as ASUS and then NVidia/AMD etc ... each have different options. Design the system that has the options you need. All off the shelf.

???

I am confused. The singular goal from a digital file player is to play back music. If it's to play back music and video, and to perform other functions, - like Email, - it no longer has the singular goal of playing back music.

 

IDGAF about what the trend is, and that isn't a subject that is being discussed, - nor is it NAS drives, - although (as you suggest) they are more multifunction computers than digital file players. And, - certainly, - there are a lot of devices, - some even made by very talented HIGH END AUDIO manufacturers, - who are combining (server) computers into (multi-function) computing devices.

 

Whether or not a device is capable of running HQPlayer or not, - has nothing to do with whether or not that device is DEFINED as a multifunction computer or not.

Link to comment
On 8/17/2018 at 4:53 AM, marce said:

When you have laid out many single purpose computers and multipurpose computers you find your self at the end of Animal Farm looking in and realise there is not much difference, a few I/O interfaces less, but as said the main parts all look the same these days, an a processor of some sort, memory (inevitably DDR these days), Ethernet Interface, USB interface, PSU, possibly HDD or SSD for long term storage...

There is a difference between low end and high to an extent, don't see much of the high end in consumer audio, from what I have seen...

Hi,

Well, - yes, - I think that if you take a look at the DCS Network bridge, or the difference between the SonicOrbiter and the ultra-rendu, - for example, - you see things like only one USB port, - an enhanced clock, - DC power input instead of a built-in, SMPS, - isolation between the input section and the output section,  no video functionality whatever. As has been decisively proven to many audiophiles, - the lack of some these (multi-function) components and features, and the noise that *they may* bring with them, - is something has been eschewed for devices whose goal is limited to just one function.

Cheers,

 

Link to comment
On 8/18/2018 at 7:03 AM, jabbr said:

 

Right. Logic circuits have the same issue, and when there is a mismatch between the incoming signal's rise time, and the ideal rise time of the receiver, ringing can occur. When you are stitching together ICs there's only so much you can do, and that's another reason why testing is necessary ... or perhaps some people like the sound of ringing logic switching in the morning ...

 

Now this entire thread presupposes that different digital circuits have different "SQ" ... ok so how could that be? The standard answer is "noise" and that leads folks toward assuming that if they use a "magic" LPSU that this will solve the "noise" problem in digital circuits. Nowadays there are many great chips that can be used, the "LT3045" is a currently popular one, but also very easy to create an excellent LPSU from a few transistors, resistors, diodes, capacitors etc... this isn't magic but ok let's do it. But realize that going from 1nV RMS to 1pV RMS does not make the SQ 1000x better (or perhaps it does ? )

 

Then we realize (hopefully) that using the magic LPSU doesn't magically transform our listening room into Carnagie Hall ... so hmm... "jitter", femtosecond clocks ...

 

Ok so lets assume we've totally licked both the voltage noise and phase noise problems and our digital signal is perfectly "clean" -- what are we missing? RF entering our circuits? Ok so we shield, and now we have no noise entering our circuit ... what are we missing? Logically at this point you may think you are perfect (and the SQ will be perfect ? ) but still the problem of intrinsic circuit noise remains, which means the logic has an intrinsic voltage and phase noise. So no matter how perfect your LPSU and clock are, you aren't directly addressing the circuit ... and you still hear the sweet sound of logic ringing in the morning.

""Now this entire thread presupposes that different digital circuits have different "SQ" ... ok so how could that be? ""

 

There is a big difference between the "digital circuit" and the complete, overall device. The power supply powers the digital circuit, - but it is not the digital circuit.

 

I think that you are incorrect, - and it decidedly does not. Although both the SMS-200 and a MacBook Pro, and a Razberri Pi, are all computers, - they are all very DIFFERENT kinds of computers with different design goals. With more than a few calisthenics, you can get your Razberri Pi to run email, - but sheesh, - why bother? There's a lot of audiophiles that have performed various techniques to improve the SQ of something that was not designed for the purpose of what they were using it for, back when folks like Gordon Rankin, figured out that one could use the USB Digital Audio Codec. The vast majority of those techniques have been to limit the functionality of the multi-function device.

Link to comment

The power delivery system is critical for digital circuitry so cannot be considered a separate entity. There is an Audiophile belief that putting a LPS as a main supply solves all the problems, but there are still SMPS’s on the mother board and unfortunately its more of a problem than just slapping a LPS on the front…

A good example of the complexity of supplies required is the VTT supply for DDR memory, look up some of the papers dedicated just to supplying this one critical supply, then you will have more of an appreciation of what is going on when creating a power deliver system for digital circuitry to get the minimum noise possible.

A critical part of the power delivery system PDS is the ground plane, slots in the ground plane cause noise, often a design has unforeseen slots, when vias are grouped together…

I/O pins on switching devices, look at the two picture of a FPGA I/O pins, one of a Virtex 4 one of a Virtex 5, which would create the least SSN (simultaneous switching noise) and why. (A clue, the empty squares in between the I/O pins and GND)

 Its digital engineering skills that is required for doing the digital design, not analogue.

At the end of it all though if the bits get through unscathed (and they do in the majority of cases) then the data presented at the DAC’s data in pins is exactly the same however the data has been sent… Also I hope a couple of examples illustrate that there is a lot more to this than just slapping a linear PSU on the front of some digital circuitry.

 

Also all computers are basically the same, when you get down to the physical level, microprocessor/microcontroller, memory, often long term storage, some I/O (USB, keyboard, disks, graphics etc. the complexity may vary but the basic set-up is the same from one to another...

Link to comment
18 hours ago, Albrecht said:

“Now this entire thread presupposes that different digital circuits have different "SQ" ... ok so how could that be? ""

 

There is a big difference between the "digital circuit" and the complete, overall device. The power supply powers the digital circuit, - but it is not the digital circuit.

 

Substitute “device” for “circuit” if that helps you understand. I always consider the power supply as part of the circuit. The “device” can be subdivided into subdevices or assemblies. 

I’m using the term “circuit” in a common way that people who understand electronics would use the term. No need to quibble.

 

18 hours ago, Albrecht said:

I think that you are incorrect, - and it decidedly does not. Although both the SMS-200 and a MacBook Pro, and a Razberri Pi, are all computers, - they are all very DIFFERENT kinds of computers with different design goals. With more than a few calisthenics, you can get your Razberri Pi to run email, - but sheesh, - why bother?

 

Actually you are conflating a packaged product with both a digital circuit (which is what I was discussing) as well as a device — both the MacBook and Raspberry Pi are considered devices which the customer modifies with software. Actually most OS distributions including Mac OS, Windows and Linux shift default with email — specialized distributions (perhaps SMS-200) can remove. But what are you trying to say? Are you worried that the presence of an email reader which isn’t running but is on the device,  alters SQ? 

 

A “custom” server might have custom assemblies (eg PSU or motherboard). 

 

My post was about the actual digital circuit as delivered, not about the intention of the designer. As @marce says, the details of the board layout for CPUs/FPGAs is constrained by requirements.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

Substitute “device” for “circuit” if that helps you understand. I always consider the power supply as part of the circuit. The “device” can be subdivided into subdevices or assemblies. 

I’m using the term “circuit” in a common way that people who understand electronics would use the term. No need to quibble.

 

 

Actually you are conflating a packaged product with both a digital circuit (which is what I was discussing) as well as a device — both the MacBook and Raspberry Pi are considered devices which the customer modifies with software. Actually most OS distributions including Mac OS, Windows and Linux shift default with email — specialized distributions (perhaps SMS-200) can remove. But what are you trying to say? Are you worried that the presence of an email reader which isn’t running but is on the device,  alters SQ? 

 

A “custom” server might have custom assemblies (eg PSU or motherboard). 

 

My post was about the actual digital circuit as delivered, not about the intention of the designer. As @marce says, the details of the board layout for CPUs/FPGAs is constrained by requirements.

Yes,

No need to quibble. But all I'm saying is that the layperson,- who audiophiles are, - wouldn't consider the two types to be the same even though they both are computers. Again, - a "computer" that has just 2 types of I/O ports is not thought of by the layperson as the same type of computer as a laptop. I understand what you were saying, - but very few, - to no one is ever going to use their SMS-200 for Email. Do you really think otherwise? When someone optimizes a macbook pro, - depending on the level of optimization, - they take steps to limit the variety of the functionality of a multi-function computer and make it more single purpose. Part of this definition, - is to cite the fact that what the item  is used for is a main component of its definition. No one edits photos on an ultraRendu, - they go out and buy a BETTER computing device for that.

The relevance to this thread is that it's a straw man to try to assert that the author is saying that all digital circuits suck, - when the author is in fact, - speaking of "packaged products," - like most everyone does. An external linear power supply plugged into an ultrarendu is certainly not considered part of the digital circuit by anyone.

Regenerating & reclocking the USB signal through just one USB port won't make the device NOT a computer, - but no multi-function computing manufacturer would ever consider doing such thing, - in fact, - they would eschew something like that as absurd. Just read the many trolls who consider themselves (so-called) computing engineers, - who attack high end audio designers, asserting that their designs don't work and they are bamboozling audiophiles.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, marce said:

The power delivery system is critical for digital circuitry so cannot be considered a separate entity.

Also all computers are basically the same, when you get down to the physical level, microprocessor/microcontroller, memory, often long term storage, some I/O (USB, keyboard, disks, graphics etc. the complexity may vary but the basic set-up is the same from one to another...

No.. the processor/controller or microcontroller may & RAM, yes.. similar... but the devil is in the details, a computer that has a 6 USB port bus and video card/adapter processor/controller with a SMPS is very different one from 1 that has no USB bus, and 1 optimized, galvanically isolated, reclocked USB port, no video etc.... this is proven to the satisfaction of many people who have tested these different types of computers extensively. When the Sonicorbiter SE "cube" based micro computer with HDMI port, 3 USB, optical SPDIF, ports, etc. was compared directly with the microRendu, - the differences were significant. It had the same RAM, same gigabit NIC, same microCard based linux OS, - etc..... The two devices, - were significantly different in performance level.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Albrecht said:

Yes,

No need to quibble. But all I'm saying is that the layperson,- who audiophiles are, - wouldn't consider the two types to be the same even though they both are computers. Again, - a "computer" that has just 2 types of I/O ports is not thought of by the layperson as the same type of computer as a laptop. ...

The relevance to this thread is that it's a straw man to try to assert that the author is saying that all digital circuits suck, - when the author is in fact, - speaking of "packaged products," - like most everyone does. An external linear power supply plugged into an ultrarendu is certainly not considered part of the digital circuit by anyone.

 

I consider the power supply as part of the circuit. Perhaps I'm strange, who knows, but when you buy an amplifier, the contained power supply is part of the amplifier. 

 

You responded not to the OP, rather to my discussion of the ways that digital circuits generate noise. Perhaps you don't understand what I wrote, but if so, don't lecture me about circuits and devices and why there are different types of computers. I'm well aware.

 

My point wasn't that nothing is important, rather that one very important source of digital noise has been significantly neglected or not even dealt with. Details are actually important, and what I am saying is that there is a limit to the ability to reduce noise in a server if all you are doing is upgrading a clock to the single femtosecond accuracy, or reducing external power supply noise down to the picovolt range.

 

You missed the point of my post. its not that audiophile products aren't making an effort to reduce noise, its that they, by and large, use the very same chips as all other mainstream devices and these chips have a certain degree of intrinsic noise.

 

The fact that these chips have intrinsic noise levels, and generate a certain amount of EMI,  isn't me making this argument out of the blue. This is known in textbooks.

 

1 hour ago, Albrecht said:

Regenerating & reclocking the USB signal through just one USB port won't make the device NOT a computer, - but no multi-function computing manufacturer would ever consider doing such thing, - in fact, - they would eschew something like that as absurd. Just read the many trolls who consider themselves (so-called) computing engineers, - who attack high end audio designers, asserting that their designs don't work and they are bamboozling audiophiles.

 

No regenerating and reclocking and noise reduction are done ALL THE TIME in high performance high speed digital circuits. Read about the FPGAs of which diagrams were shown. Programming an FPGA is very very significantly about signal integrity, clock domains, rise times, propagation delays etc. These issues are not specific to "high end" audio, in fact I don't see any evidence i.e. specs & measurements that many of the >$2K so called high end streamers have gone to any extraordinary effort (and I mean that literally) to mitigate noise. 

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

I consider the power supply as part of the circuit. Perhaps I'm strange, who knows, but when you buy an amplifier, the contained power supply is part of the amplifier. 

 

You responded not to the OP, rather to my discussion of the ways that digital circuits generate noise. Perhaps you don't understand what I wrote, but if so, don't lecture me about circuits and devices and why there are different types of computers. I'm well aware.

 

My point wasn't that nothing is important, rather that one very important source of digital noise has been significantly neglected or not even dealt with. Details are actually important, and what I am saying is that there is a limit to the ability to reduce noise in a server if all you are doing is upgrading a clock to the single femtosecond accuracy, or reducing external power supply noise down to the picovolt range.

 

You missed the point of my post. its not that audiophile products aren't making an effort to reduce noise, its that they, by and large, use the very same chips as all other mainstream devices and these chips have a certain degree of intrinsic noise.

 

The fact that these chips have intrinsic noise levels, and generate a certain amount of EMI,  isn't me making this argument out of the blue. This is known in textbooks.

 

 

No regenerating and reclocking and noise reduction are done ALL THE TIME in high performance high speed digital circuits. Read about the FPGAs of which diagrams were shown. Programming an FPGA is very very significantly about signal integrity, clock domains, rise times, propagation delays etc. These issues are not specific to "high end" audio, in fact I don't see any evidence i.e. specs & measurements that many of the >$2K so called high end streamers have gone to any extraordinary effort (and I mean that literally) to mitigate noise. 

Hi,

I wasn't aware that I was "lecturing"   Sorry. I thought that I was responding to one aspect of the point that @Marce was making, - not yours...

What I responded too was Marce's point that a computer is a computer, and there's no difference in USB audio performance between a MacBook Pro, and a SMS-200 device or something like a DCS network bridge. That is all.....

Link to comment
39 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

I consider the power supply as part of the circuit. Perhaps I'm strange, who knows, but when you buy an amplifier, the contained power supply is part of the amplifier.

 

Yes, indeed it is. The final piece in the puzzle is realising that all the various components and add-ons of a audio system is one 'big' circuit - the best sound is achieved when that fact is truly understood.

 

Breaking that circuit down and sticking it in different boxes masks this fact; and introduces a whole array of weaknesses, which greatly complicate the business of extracting optimum sound.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, jabbr said:

I don't see any evidence i.e. specs & measurements that many of the >$2K so called high end streamers have gone to any extraordinary effort (and I mean that literally) to mitigate noise. 

 

Just because you "don't see any evidence" does not indicate that high end streamers do not address the issues which you point out.  Unfortunately you appear to be posting as an "expert" (albeit you have not made such a claim yourself) but in reality you seem to have little to no actual knowledge of what is done to make high end Ethernet Renderers perform.

While I agree, no one in high end audio is likely to ever have a custom ARM style processor chip built (as the cost could never be re-couped), all the other issues which you mention are indeed addressed in some of the better high end streamers.

Certainly what good high end Renderers address is not just power supplies and a good clock, as you seem to suspect, every detail is attended to in order to reduce noise levels and increase the integrity of the signal output: including paying attention to things you and @marce point out here like skilled high speed PCB design.

 

While I agree with much of what you are saying when it comes to most of the custom (full featured) Servers out there, which indeed use OTS MoBos, etc,  This does not apply to (all) of the purpose built Ethernet Renderers.

SO/ROON/HQPe: DSD 512-Sonore opticalModuleDeluxe-Signature Rendu optical with Well Tempered Clock--DIY DSC-2 DAC with SC Pure Clock--DIY Purifi Amplifier-Focus Audio FS888 speakers-JL E 112 sub-Nordost Tyr USB, DIY EventHorizon AC cables, Iconoclast XLR & speaker cables, Synergistic Purple Fuses, Spacetime system clarifiers.  ISOAcoustics Oreas footers.                                                       

                                                                                           SONORE computer audio

Link to comment
31 minutes ago, barrows said:

 

Just because you "don't see any evidence" does not indicate that high end streamers do not address the issues which you point out.  Unfortunately you appear to be posting as an "expert" (albeit you have not made such a claim yourself) but in reality you seem to have little to no actual knowledge of what is done to make high end Ethernet Renderers perform.

 

I don't claim to have actual knowledge of how your own products are designed or how they perform (in an electronic sense). By "evidence" I mean measurements. You know, the way network manufacturers supply eye diagrams, you might supply some type of objective measurement which indicates that, for example, your renderer has less RF/EMI production, or an eye diagram which demonstrates the jitter on the USB output.

 

Right, I don't see evidence. I made no claim to have trade secret knowledge, but if you have evidence then publish it! That's all.

 

Quote

While I agree, no one in high end audio is likely to ever have a custom ARM style processor chip built (as the cost could never be re-couped), all the other issues which you mention are indeed addressed in some of the better high end streamers.

Certainly what good high end Renderers address is not just power supplies and a good clock, as you seem to suspect, every detail is attended to in order to reduce noise levels and increase the integrity of the signal output: including paying attention to things you and @marce point out here like skilled high speed PCB design.

 

I didn't mean to imply that you didn't use skilled high speed PCB design, just that motherboard manufacturers such as SuperMicro, Gigabyte, ASUS and well Intel from time to time, have considerable resources that they direct on skilled high speed PCB design as well. 

 

Quote

 

While I agree with much of what you are saying when it comes to most of the custom (full featured) Servers out there, which indeed use OTS MoBos, etc,  This does not apply to (all) of the purpose built Ethernet Renderers.

 

I've never said the purpose built Renderers aren't well designed. As you know there is an entire and growing industry devoted to custom CPU/PCB designs and even custom power supply ICs and my understanding is that with many of the complex CPUs/FPGAs and with the high number of board layers, and given the very specific routing requirements, that the latest generation of board layout tools are almost required to get a reasonable design ( @marce can correct me if he still hand routes Virtex-7 designs ;) ) and so firms like Digilent/AVnet and even Element4 etc are increasingly offering core designs that can be modified. There is also an emerging industry of audiophile add/ons to the RaspBerry Pi (eg mezzanine boards, linear supplies etc) -- not that I'd start with that particular design but nonetheless ... in any case the various ways to design and layout a "custom" CPU board are not all that mysterious.

 

Let me also say that your own boards don't seem out of line for what you are offering because there's a price for design and manufacturing and some of the parts I'm aware you've used are good values e.g. the Crystek clocks, likewise with Uptone and the LT304x regulators (or whatever similar). People also want packaged products and there is value in that... well until y'all can get the "Geek Squad" to come set up your linux boxes ... hmm ...

Really I'm more inclined to caution folks not to spend $$$ on outboard clocks or very expensive power supplies to power a PC or renderer because the PC/renderer itself has an intrinsic noise/jitter that an asymptotically  better clock/psu can't fix.

 

So no, I'd say that @marce is an actual expert, not me --- he has decades of experience, but y'know I've done some stuff and done some stuff and I know what is often needed for very low noise designs.  I think his main point is that high speed digital design is high speed digital design, and low noise, low EMI is low noise EMI (that can be both low voltage noise and low phase noise). So yeah if you have actual evidence that this isn't the case, I'd be happy to see.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
42 minutes ago, barrows said:

all the other issues which you mention are indeed addressed in some of the better high end streamers...every detail is attended to in order to reduce noise levels and increase the integrity of the signal output...

 

12 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

I don't claim to have actual knowledge of how your own products are designed or how they perform (in an electronic sense). By "evidence" I mean measurements. You know, the way network manufacturers supply eye diagrams, you might supply some type of objective measurement which indicates that, for example, your renderer has less RF/EMI production, or an eye diagram which demonstrates the jitter on the USB output.

 

Right, I don't see evidence. I made no claim to have trade secret knowledge, but if you have evidence then publish it! That's all.

 

 

I didn't mean to imply that you didn't use skilled high speed PCB design, just that motherboard manufacturers such as SuperMicro, Gigabyte, ASUS and well Intel from time to time, have considerable resources that they direct on skilled high speed PCB design as well. 

 

 

I've never said the purpose built Renderers aren't well designed. As you know there is an entire and growing industry devoted to custom CPU/PCB designs and even custom power supply ICs and my understanding is that with many of the complex CPUs/FPGAs and with the high number of board layers, and given the very specific routing requirements, that the latest generation of board layout tools are almost required to get a reasonable design ( @marce can correct me if he still hand routes Virtex-7 designs ;) ) and so firms like Digilent/AVnet and even Element4 etc are increasingly offering core designs that can be modified. There is also an emerging industry of audiophile add/ons to the RaspBerry Pi (eg mezzanine boards, linear supplies etc) -- not that I'd start with that particular design but nonetheless ... in any case the various ways to design and layout a "custom" CPU board are not all that mysterious.

 

So no, I'd say that @marce is an actual expert, not me --- he has decades of experience, but y'know I've done some stuff and done some stuff and I know what is often needed for very low noise designs. I think his main point is that high speed digital design is high speed digital design, and low noise, low EMI is low noise EMI (that can be both low voltage noise and low phase noise). So yeah if you have actual evidence that this isn't the case, I'd be happy to see.

 

What @jabbr said @barrows, where is the what, when, and how of this "every detail is attended to"?  You complain of folks just making assertions "without actual knowledge", and then you simply assert that "every detail is attended to".  Show us the money...

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment
1 minute ago, crenca said:

 

 

What @jabbr said @barrows, where is the what, when, and how of this "every detail is attended to"?  You complain of folks just making assertions "without actual knowledge", and then you simply assert that "every detail is attended to".  Show us the money...

 

Yeah let me echo ... if "every detail is attended to" show me the EMI/RF output pattern at the microRendo USB compared with some of your other devices ... e.g the Solid-Run derived ... that would be just one of "every detail" that I'd attend to. and show an EMI pattern on the board, etc ... ok, so you don't have it and realistically no one attends to every detail, and most good engineers who build commercially available SBCs attend to many details.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, barrows said:

every detail is attended to in order to reduce noise levels and increase the integrity of the signal output:

 

 Agreed .

There appears to be far too much effort in this forum to "shut the gate AFTER the horse has bolted"

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment

Hey also let's not get off track here ... the thread is about dedicated servers vs laptops ... I do in fact expect that a high powered server with GPU would spew out high levels of EMI from its ports and every other orifice ... perhaps not too high to pass regs but who knows, and high enough to matter...

 

My advocacy all along has been to isolate the server with a network, and consequently use a low powered and consequently low noise network render.

 

I did say that I doubted that high end audiophile renderers go to any extraordinary measures to mitigate noise. I consider good board layout, good power supply design and good clocking to be an ordinary measure. I mean, yeah, if I were paying >$2K, I'd really expect these techniques to be used. By ordinary I mean textbook, like if you pick up a textbook they tell you to do this stuff --- common knowledge that clocks need good power. Textbook.  Let's see, yeah a GaN custom ARM chip would be extraordinary ;) 

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
17 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

 Agreed .

There appears to be far too much effort in this forum to "shut the gate AFTER the horse has bolted"

Hi,

There's a difference between the noise inherent in processing and coming from the I/O bus. In an ideal world both would be addressed, - but even grabbing low hanging fruit is helpful: as testing has (relatively conclusively) born out.

Link to comment

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...