The Hugo of streaming?

A network can quickly get complicated. Can a simpler setup help SQ? It might, it might not. That CA (Romaz) 'direct' connection of the rendu to the  server/player is an example that did help in my setup:- PC-->rendu-->DAC-V1.

If you are clever at IT (which I am not), you might be able to get this rendu 'direct' connection some other way. The rendu uses the Sonore web GUI for configuration so either way it will need to connect to the internet for that, at least initially.

The method as described at CA is what I (cleverly) followed. It requires my PC to have a second ethernet port for the rendu and a 'bridge' via the OS to connect it to my existing LAN (with the DHCP server/router). That thread now has pointers on the first page for a few different OSs. 

I only have one network interface port so I use a USB/Ethernet adapter to provide the second port (in place of a second NIC). I have one adapter by Anker (on the Win 7 64 bit PC) and another by Apple (on a Win 10 64 bit laptop). The Apple one needs  a Win 10 64bit driver which I downloaded from the asix website (AX88772A) after a little google search.

The effort was worthwhile for me and I am grateful to the OP.

B.

Mr Underhill posted:

Hi Charles,

Yes, it looks complex, as would yours, but I hope it is easier to follow than writing it out?

Have you tried the HD-Plex straight into your mR - how would you describe the difference?

I tried stripping out the FMC media bridge yesterday - after all, you never know. I put it straight back in!.

M

The LPS-1 is better, the HDPLEX better than the iFi. The new model HDPLEX looks even better. A great supply if you need to run several things but really nothing special like the LPS-1. 

Hi Charles,

I asked as I found my cheap R-Core LPSU less transparent than the LPS-1, but had more body. I put this down to having a potential 2.5A on tap. I trplaced the LPS-1 with a slightly more expensive Chinese R-Core LPSU + 2 x LT3045 (7.1 A 1A), which I found combined the transparency of the LPS-1 and the body of the R-Core - for half the price of a LPS-1.

M

 

CP,  You have a nice system. V1/110 must be a foot tapper! I ran the 110 for a little while in the 80s and loved it.

The uR has me a bit buffled regarding PSs. It sounds different yet good with every one, but the LPS-1 appears to be transparent to it, except for a little more detail. With the LPS-1 it takes on the 'tone' of the feeding PS much more so than the mR did (from memory).

1. TP PS ~  2. TP PS+LPS-1: smooth, rounded, fatter bottom, forgiving, musical!

3. ZeroZone (ZZ) ~ 4. ZZ +LPS-1: sharper, detailed, top to bottom balance, revealing, musical!

I have the JSG shunt at the uR DC input. I am not sure I hear anything on A/B testing, but will evaluate its effect over the long term.

The power supplies 'sound can be fine tuned' by using different AC & DC cables (so we have not got rid of all the 'leakage' yet)!

Soundwise - I could live with any combo 1 through 4. The only problem with 4 is that the ZZ cuts out at some point during the booting of the LPS-1/uR probably due to transient current demand it can't handle.

 

Edited

Mr Underhill posted:

Hi Charles,

I asked as I found my cheap R-Core LPSU less transparent than the LPS-1, but had more body. I put this down to having a potential 2.5A on tap. I trplaced the LPS-1 with a slightly more expensive Chinese R-Core LPSU + 2 x LT3045 (7.1 A 1A), which I found combined the transparency of the LPS-1 and the body of the R-Core - for half the price of a LPS-1.

M

Hi M,

Which one is that then?

B.

Hi Brilliant,

I followed the thread when it first surfaced, and was looking at bridging the network ports on my NAS. A couple of things moved me away from this:

1. Using the RPi3 with the LPS-1 was just SO much better than the NAS, also reducing me to 1 RJ45; and
2. The RPi3 is a simple device generating less noise than a full blown PC or NUC, I suspect that it could be a trade off to further improve on the feed into the uR.

Still on the radar though.

M

Brilliant posted:

 

CP,  You have a nice system. V1/110 must be a foot tapper! I ran the 110 for a little while in the 80s and loved it.

 

Well thank you. I keep thinking I want/need a bigger amp but then I listen to my CB110 and it’s always nah... it was rebuilt about 6 years ago and no can no longer power a pre so the V1 is perfect for it. Sounds esp lovely with jazz; not really a stadium rocker per se. The room is very “live” after a recent rebuild - new sub flooring and oak floors and rock wall insulation, 11x17 feet. Perfect boost for the 110. 

This is the DAC-V1 PC setup updated with the Sonore ultraRendu and the UpTone Audio components.

I have compared the playback of some tracks I know and believe to be of the same mastering on the formats: CD  (CD-rip wav), Vinyl, and SACD.

For reference:

TT = Vinyl  played on the Alphason TT/HR100S arm/DV-20X2 cart/ and Belles phono. (I have a Denon DL-304 which might be better for low level detail retrieval but do not want to change current setups)

SACD = Sony XA5400ES player.

Summary (to my ears):

TT gives the fullest tone/timbre and  scores higher mostly for that reason. The uR/DAC-V1 is pretty even with the Sony IME but perhaps a tad thinner sounding on some tracks. The Sony player adds warmth and seems 'sweeter' in tone  which I like especially when playing the SACD layers. In 'musicality' they are all pretty close and in this order (TT>SACD>uR/DAC-V1). I am thinking: they all stop you in your tracks, to listen or to dance! As usual YMMV.

The Tracks used for the comparisons (all subjective, score out of 10= imaginary reference, no format weighting!):

1.Et misericordia (Arnesen 2L 106 SACD, 384.4/24 wav).  This track was recorded in DXD and is offered by 2L for format comparisons. It is available in different formats for free on their website (hires test bench). I also have their SACD. The DSD file was not used as in IMO, DAC-V1 shines better with PCM.

uR/DAC-V1 8.5 (more spatial detail), Sony/SACD 8.5 (more warmth, inviting tones)

2. I am Old Fashioned (John Coltrane -Blue Train AP45 rpm LP, AP SACD, CD-rip wav). The same mastering  transferred to all three and was done  by Kevin Gray & Steve Hoffman from the original Blue Note master tapes!

TT: 9.0 (fuller tone/timbre), uR/DAC-V1: 8.0  (CD Rip , thinner tone), Sony: 8.0 (CD layer) & 8.5 (SACD, warmer, sweet).

3. You Are Too Beautiful - (Oliver Jones - Live At Biddles 1983 LP, CD, CD-rip wav) I believe the CD to be a straight transfer of the  LP- master (but could be wrong). This is a club live recording with background noise from the crowd.

TT: 9/10) (fuller tone/timbre than CD, nice flow), uR/DAC-V1: 8.5, Sony: 8.5 CD layer ( both reveal more low level detail than TT ,  the DV cart is suspect here). This is a nice CD transfer.

It's all good.

ATB

B.

 

Attachments

Photos (1)
Bowers posted:

Talking about "Hugo of streaming"; After moving from ND5X  to microrendu; Had to have my Hugo DAC repaired (warranty) to feed my Naim NAC 282 and using as source the microrendu (+LPS-1 +DC4 + CuriousUSB);  Just watched an enthusiastic review of the Sms 200 ultra. Might be the top of network streaming devices at this moment or it might be very individual ?!  Anyone with experience/opinion and preference concerning these sources ?   any feedback appreciated. Best Peter

 

There is a Nov. review of the SOtM sMS-200ultra Network Audio Player and sPS-500 Power at audiobacon dot net. It has a comparisons paragraph where comments vs uR are included.

In short (roughly quoting from sections in the para.):

sMS strengths - Macrodynamics, deeper and punchy bass, full bodied richer tone and timbre, layered holographic soundstage. Humanistic!

uR strengths - Microdynamics, tight clean bass, transparent, more detail resolving, quieter, more focused soundstaged but less depth. Insightful!

Note: Some problems (skips) are mentioned when playing DSD files on Chord Dave with the sMS but none with the uR- something to do with the unix incompatibility?

B.

Hi M

Thank you. I like what I am hearing. I think the uR could still benefit from a different ps. I will experiment with the LPS-1/LPS supply in the future. I will get that LT3045 3A pcb (diyAudio) and a 50VA r-core tranny from the far east and put together another experimental ps. I also understand Paul Hynes has the SR4  now in production (£330 - 2A cont./20A transient = a smaller version of the SR7). Another tailored affordable option perhaps!  There should be some feedback at CA in the days to come.

ATB

B.

Hi B,

3A LT3045, I'll take a look!

For info:
Last week I did the full ropund of removing the FMCs & other audio route devices and then replacing them - having managed to simplify the 'chain' with the Uptone USPCB = everything stays!

Small incremental gains, but worth having.

M

I could be wrong, but the thread I am using is advising chaining devices. From what I have read I believe there are two types of LT3045, fixed and variable; these seems to be variable - which apparently are not as good.

From my POV I have set up:

ultraRendu: 2 x LT3045 7v1 1A - giving an available 2A to a device which functions on 1A; and

RPi3: 2 x LT3045 5v 1A - Giving 2A to a device that can function with up to 2.5A.

As it happens I now have two unused 0.5A 5v boxes hanging around, Think I may add an additional box for the RPi3 .....thing is, things are sounding really very good and I'd rather just listen to music.

I was thinking through my system over the last couple of days, as I have sold some gear and have some available funds for frivolous upgrades. I could:

Change my AV centre speaker from Audio Physic to a Focal Be II, to match my mains absolutely; or
Upgrade my LP12 with a Tangerine widget; or
Save up to get a 2nd hand EAR912; or .......

Bottom line is - I am actually pretty damn happy where I am and this feels like profligate waste. Think I may just by some CDs and give some money to charity for Christmas.

M

That is great to hear!! I want the ability to charge the LPS-1, and since it is on constantly I would need heat sinks on the regulators. He has catered for that. My last little project for the year.

The thread is in the Vendor's Bazaar forums. He is using LT3045 not the LT3045-1, even though his schematic shows LT3042 and is missing a connection at the output. His built up board is a bit expensive.

Click the image to open in full size.

 

Add Reply

Likes (4)
wandererMoussanbpfhifinerdwannabe
×
×
×
×