Building the ideal(ish) Music Server

[realysm42]

18 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

I meant the motherboard clock.

 

So did I, sorry - ambiguous use of language.

 

Although the SOtM clock does come on a card (@JDWest am I right in saying this; it's got the same foot print as the upgraded clock for the SOtM card itself?)it's an awful lot larger looking than other clock I've seen. 

[Guest rmpfyf]

2 minutes ago, realysm42 said:

 

So did I, sorry - ambiguous use of language.

 

Although the SOtM clock does come on a card (@JDWest am I right in saying this; it's got the same foot print as the upgraded clock for the SOtM card itself?)it's an awful lot larger looking than other clock I've seen. 

 

If high performance most are. Probably a VCXO or OCXO. 

[JDWest]

19 minutes ago, realysm42 said:

 

So did I, sorry - ambiguous use of language.

 

Although the SOtM clock does come on a card (@JDWest am I right in saying this; it's got the same foot print as the upgraded clock for the SOtM card itself?)it's an awful lot larger looking than other clock I've seen. 

 

Yes, the SOtM mobo clock upgrade is a kit comprising a populated PCB of about 12x8 cm that has the clock and a heap of power filtration including ultra low noise regulators and an active noise cancelling circuit.  Also, the clock signal output is transformer isolated.  This approach is not just about using a better clock but providing the clock with cleaner power and isolating the clock power (and signal) from other circuits in your server. 

[acg]

22 hours ago, realysm42 said:

 

With your current experience. have you found cache size is a spec that just keeps giving or does it eventually plateau/begin to degrade sound?

 

Is the logic the less work the CPU has to do the better the sound?

 

50mb is nuts.

 

 

21 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

(my bank balance is fearful of the answer to this last question)

 

I can only give you my experience following someone that knows more about this than I.

 

Identical mobo/ram/power supply/software and settings...the 6 core cpu with 12MB cache does not sound as good as 8 core 20MB cache.  It is quite noticeable.

 

The question now is if 20 core 50MB cache sounds better than 8 core 20MB cache.  Indications from others that have very similar digital systems to me are that increasing cpu cores (which increases cache sort of by default) can improve the sound further when the playback software is written to take advantage of those things (all bets are off if the playback software does not manage the cpu)...others have tested to 10, 12 and 14 cores with more sounding better each time.

 

Will 20 cores in my situation sound better again?  I will have to wait and see.

[realysm42]

@acg Thanks - what software do you use that does take advantage of more cores and cache?

 

Holy moly, is this the CPU you're going for? A $6k badboy?

 

Edited September 29, 2016 by realysm42

[Guest rmpfyf]

3 hours ago, acg said:

Indications from others that have very similar digital systems to me are that increasing cpu cores (which increases cache sort of by default) can improve the sound further when the playback software is written to take advantage of those things (all bets are off if the playback software does not manage the cpu)...others have tested to 10, 12 and 14 cores with more sounding better each time.

 

I'll chime in here - I hope others do to round it out. 

 

I don't use multicore playback (yet!). Increasing the cache has a nice effect - quite audible here. Seems Intel Smartcache - what they're calling a bit of tech that allows any number of CPU cores to use the whole cache - really does work. 

 

I've doubled cache from 3Mb. I have some Xeon chips though not on this motherboard.

Edited September 29, 2016 by rmpfyf

[acg]

4 hours ago, realysm42 said:

@acg Thanks - what software do you use that does take advantage of more cores and cache?

 

Holy moly, is this the CPU you're going for? A $6k badboy?

 

 

No, not an E7, I have an E5.

[Gieseler Audio]

Quick question for you experts.

An old friend of mine has just given me an IBM X3630 M4 rack mount server his company never ended up using. Only one Xeon E5 cpu in it but a socket for a second.

Would this work as a music sever or is it total over kill?

Windows Sever 2016 coming shortly as well.

[realysm42]

Are you asking if the case or cpu is overkill? Sounds like the cpu might be ideal. Idk how I'd feel about the case though, if only for aesthetics! Looks like you've got all the storage space you could ever need too!

[Guest rmpfyf]

@Gieseler Audio I think (I'll stand corrected if I'm wrong) that the CPU in that is LGA2011 socket.

 

If so get a motherboard with a X79 chipset, something as small and simple as you can. There are no mini ITX motherboards AFAIK but you'll find something mATX. It's possible to build something quiet/passive/low power around that. Should cost ~$100 for the motherboard. There's no reason you can't use what's there but that motherboard will power a lot of other chips etc... not what you want for audio use IMHO.

 

Find out what's in there first insofar as the CPU. You could have something awesome, you could have something average (e.g. dual core).

 

if you're happy with the CPU for something else, I'd put something average back into this, load it with hard drives and Linux and use it as a NAS.

Edited September 30, 2016 by rmpfyf
Spelling. Blargh.

[acg]

4 hours ago, Gieseler Audio said:

Quick question for you experts.

An old friend of mine has just given me an IBM X3630 M4 rack mount server his company never ended up using. Only one Xeon E5 cpu in it but a socket for a second.

Would this work as a music sever or is it total over kill?

Windows Sever 2016 coming shortly as well.

 

Clay, what is the cpu?  

[Keith_W]

2 hours ago, rmpfyf said:

@Gieseler Audio I think (I'll stand corrected if I'm wrong) that the CPU in that is LGA2011 socket.

 

If so get a motherboard with a X79 chipset, something as small and simple as you can. There are no mini ITX motherboards AFAIK but you'll find something mATX. It's possible to build something quiet/passive/low power around that. Should cost ~$100 for the motherboard. There's no reason you can't use what's there but that motherboard will power a loot of other chips etc... not what you want for audio use IMHO.

 

Are you sure that that IBM case complies with the ATX form factor? Just looking at it, I doubt if he would be able to fit an ATX motherboard in there. It looks like a proprietary motherboard, mounted in a case with proprietary mounting points. 

[Guest rmpfyf]

2 minutes ago, Keith_W said:

 

Are you sure that that IBM case complies with the ATX form factor? Just looking at it, I doubt if he would be able to fit an ATX motherboard in there. It looks like a proprietary motherboard, mounted in a case with proprietary mounting points. 

 

Not suggesting he put an ATX motherboard in there!

 

Just to pull the CPU if it's deemed useful, buy an mATX motherboard, and use 'em both somewhere else. 

[Gieseler Audio]

Hi Anthony,

Can't see what the CPU is without pulling off the heat sink. Just fired it up to try & get into the bios - any thought of keeping it instantly disappeared on hearing the four fans roaring.

They eventually dropped down to an idle mode but still pretty noisy - way too loud for me as a server.  

I think I will probably just Ebay it.

Sorry I will let you guys get back on track - I have PSU's & DAC's to build too.

cheers

 

Edited September 30, 2016 by Gieseler Audio

[Guest]

Give me a week and this set up will be networked and fully operational.

SQ, very good with headphones dynamic and liquid smooth, PSU is quiet. No mains ac is involved with anything here at all so no wall warts and direct DC powered via, 12v, 24v batteries and DC/DC SMPS. Note no crap cables everywhere like a birds nest. Just DC power outlets. Additional filtering for the PC DC/DC SMPS PSU  has been ordered hoping to wring a little extra from the set up's SQ, but happy how it all came together.

Have a 15nm project underway, based on the ASUS M-150-A microATX/Intel Skylake.

The only fan is in the Synology NAS and thus insanely low noise floor, you only know it's on because the LED's say so. 

This system (back bone) is in a control room associated with a fully off grid sound lounge (under construction) in an isolated area of Tasmania.

Let the music play.

Edited September 30, 2016 by Guest

[Guest rmpfyf]

55 minutes ago, Gieseler Audio said:

Hi Anthony,

Can't see what the CPU is without pulling off the heat sink. Just fired it up to try & get into the bios - any thought of keeping it instantly disappeared on hearing the four fans roaring.

They eventually dropped down to an idle mode but still pretty noisy - way too loud for me as a server.  

I think I will probably just Ebay it.

Sorry I will let you guys get back on track - I have PSU's & DAC's to build too.

cheers

 

 

NAS in a cupboard somewhere, that thing'd be awesome.

 

Got a Linux distro handy? Boot into that and check the CPU from there.

[davewantsmoore]

8 hours ago, Gieseler Audio said:

total over kill

 

 

Dual CPUs is worse than overkill   (it more than likely to be a negative if anything)    Also that case is going to be noisy.

 

Other specifics depend greatly on your mains (ie. is pollution from your computer reaching the DAC), and what the DAC makes of a digital signal that is less than perfection.

[Gieseler Audio]

Finally got into the bios.

Is the CPU anything special - worth removing & fitting in a mATX M/B ? 

[davewantsmoore]

No

[Guest rmpfyf]

No. Bugger.

[Guest]

55 minutes ago, Gieseler Audio said:

Finally got into the bios.

Is the CPU anything special - worth removing & fitting in a mATX M/B ? 

Well, it is a 4core 4 thread @2.27Ghz, which is "reasonable"

If it works with X79 chipset and LGA2011 there are quite a few boards available but expensive. Don't know what thermal target rating though for passive cooler.

Would certainly work. 

Weather certain motherboards or CPU's sound better, different or otherwise is up to debate. 

 

[Guest rmpfyf]

Nah, it's a 1366. Won't go down as far as Haswell/Skylake CPUs either. 8Mb cache, though the consumption. 

 

I still maintain he load FreeNAS on it and live happily ever after

[Gieseler Audio]

Thanks for the info guys. Looks like I'll leave it as a NAS.

[roh008]

On 9/29/2016 at 2:43 PM, acg said:

 

 

 

I can only give you my experience following someone that knows more about this than I.

 

Identical mobo/ram/power supply/software and settings...the 6 core cpu with 12MB cache does not sound as good as 8 core 20MB cache.  It is quite noticeable.

 

The question now is if 20 core 50MB cache sounds better than 8 core 20MB cache.  Indications from others that have very similar digital systems to me are that increasing cpu cores (which increases cache sort of by default) can improve the sound further when the playback software is written to take advantage of those things (all bets are off if the playback software does not manage the cpu)...others have tested to 10, 12 and 14 cores with more sounding better each time.

 

Will 20 cores in my situation sound better again?  I will have to wait and see.

Hi Acg,

 

Do we know if the pro-audio world are going down this route during the mastering/producing stages. I'm not aware that they go to these extremes so am wondering what benefits are occurring within the processing steps that are being heard in these changes? 

 

[TP1]

 

 

 

 

The  bar was raised recently when I took delivery of the latest Accuphase DP and DC 950 models.  How is this relevant to a music server?  You will recall discussions on this and other threads about the importance of the USB interface at the DAC end. It is important, because no matter how much we clean up a PC based server, it still a PC and and RFI/EMI can still affect SQ despite strategies to mitigate the effects.  Accuphase delayed the introduction of USB audio for the reason, according to them, that they were not happy with the noise control solutions and set aboput developing their own. Their solution for the DC-37 was the best I have come across and was superior to the Xmos based solutions with other DACs. However server development helps all DACs so all is not  lost.    

 

The DC-950 interface is clearly a step up again.   The backgrounds are the blackest I have heard on any DAC and this is a huge shot in the arm for CA IMO.  So how does the server compare now to the spinner?  Using the previous spinner,   it would be tough call for  most  to pick. The improvement is all in the USB interface.  However with the DP-950, Accuphase have pushed the boundary again.  It gives me a new target to go for.   What the DP-950 does better than the server is its explosive dynamics and attack speed.   Resolution is slighly better too but I think both aspects are related to timing.   Tonality and timbre of the server is explarary - even in comparison top the latest spinner from Accuphase.

 

We made very good progress with improving speed of response  with the server  and  the key to moving forward is in that area. This is something that  John Swenson was very aware of when he designed the Uptone Audio JS-2 and in my experience, it will still produce the best PRAT for a music server. zFuture developments will hone in on improving response speed and ultimately resolution.  I think the key to this lies in further RFI/EMI noise reduction strategies with PSU,  ATX DC conversion etc.   we have a couple of things in mind ( @Chanh is full steam ahead already) .