Do Modern DAC need a server

[abeidrov]

The difference between 2 servers with the same dac can be more pronounced than the one between 2 dacs with one server. Somewhat strange topic considering we are on WBF, there is a huge thread about Taiko server with tons of information, and hundreds of posts from owners of various servers, where they discuss differences they hear even with a server software change.

 

[wil]

I wanted to start a thread on blind testing. Every job I personally oversee the client inevitably ask me my impressions of before an hour.

I wish I could get my wife to randomly move a cable for me. Even pull a plug at an unknown time for me.

Try to convince her it’s in the interest of … Science!

 

[Kingrex]

Here is an interesting one. Why would everyone hear the same. Is the computer so noisy it masks the changes. And if they picked a favorite, it was the stock switch. Hmm.

 

[Digital Buddha]

here is a good one , in my experience the source is the most important component. servers can make a bigger difference then the dac itself.

 

[Kingrex]

here is a good one , in my experience the source is the most important component. servers can make a bigger difference then the dac itself.

I watched most all the video. He rambled on a bit. I didn't really get a lot out of it. I watched the section on why they sound different, but I felt like I came away with him saying if the data does not outright fail and you don't have a ground loop or impedance issues, it should sound exactly the same. Did I misinterpret the video?

 

[Alrainbow]

Hello Rex it all matters from source to a dac
Some terms used like jitter are made up not a technical term with specs but it does have a meaning to many aspects in digital audio
over the years I have tried many different concepts
The format of the hard drive and even timing of the data stream
It all matters and what a company like taiko does is put many days and hours to make things best for great sound
So any dac using there data stream is benefited from it
anyone who says bits are bits makes this discussion moot
better made dacs can do some stuff to make the source material less important but all need a good source to the dac
years ago PS audio made a memory player in concept it was a great idea and it’s data transfer the holy grail I2S as well. did it sound good ?? To me no even if used with other dacs
Msb makes a great transport helps any dac
but today a cheap transport can be had cheap now not all cheap ones are great but there are many of them made today
to ask a question about this topic in itself starts an endless debate
Someone who spent big bucks on a dac and transport can’t concede to a lesser cost one it’s Simple but most won’t answer
In theory a one box setup should be best
Why all parts are optimized for the purpose
No cables or multiple PSU s
But now where does the 100 k buyer stand lol
esoteric to me makes great sounding one box stuff to me but they also make multiple boxes too. I guess to fill shelves for the 100 k crowd and there I’ll bet it sounds better too.
you can’t get answers here and you can make enemies fast

 

[marty]

I wanted to start a thread on blind testing.

Rex, you may not be aware that Stanford University recently came out with a guide for approved acceptable words. I'm sorry to tell you that "blind" studies are now verboten. According to the gurus at Stanford, "blind" studies "unintentionally perpetuates that disability is somehow abnormal or negative, furthering an ableist culture.” The new correct wording is "masked" studies. Don't get mad at me, I didn't make this stuff up! In fact, as an ophthalmologist who runs a small biotech company currently doing a Phase 3 clinical trial that is "blinded", I am (not a surprise) unimpressed with Stanford's new approved words list ( "blind" study is but one word that did not make the new approved list). I'm also pretty sure that the folks at the Hoover Institute (a conservative think tank on Stanford's campus) had a small stroke when this list came out recently. I'm also guessing that nobody asked the Lone Ranger if he objected to the word "masked" as a substitute.

There are however a couple of good laughs on the Stanford approved words list.

Opinion | The Stanford Guide to Acceptable Words

Behold the school’s Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative.

www.wsj.com

Sorry for the OT. Now back to our regular programming......

 

[Kingrex]

I think I'm fumbling around looking for a technical answer I can give to a technical person on why the source makes a difference. It would be nice to have a definitive reason.

A client of mine told me his high end server was disappointingly sonically similar to his mac mini. But then he got the external clock and the server was now better.

Look, I hear it too. Why do I find my Intona USB less harsh than my FTA. Its just a cable. Why did changing the playback software make such a dramatic difference. I have even heard bit perfect files ripped on a server vs a desktop and they sound different.

Why is the golden nugget, the this is the reason not apparent. I personally could not give a hoot. But this other person pesters me over it and I have no technical explanation. That leaves me with I think I hear it. But am I as well as other subject to bias. Have I been able to perform a blind test. No.

 

[microstrip]

Rex, you may not be aware that Stanford University recently came out with a guide for approved acceptable words. I'm sorry to tell yout hat "blind" studies are now verboten. According to the gurus at Stanford, "blind" studies "unintentionally perpetuates that disability is somehow abnormal or negative, furthering an ableist culture.” The new correct wording is "masked" studies. Don't get mad at me, I didn't make this stuff up! In fact, as an ophthalmologist who runs a small biotech company currently doing a Phase 3 clinical trial that is "blinded", I am not surprisingly, unimpressed with Stanford's new approved words list ( "blind" study is but one word that made the new list). I'm also pretty sure that the folks at the Hoover Institute (a conservative think tank on Stanford's campus) had a small stroke when this list came out recently. I'm also guessing that nobody asked the Lone Ranger if he objected to the word "masked" as a substitute.

There are a couple of good laughs on the Stanford approved words list (which took 18 months to complete).

Opinion | The Stanford Guide to Acceptable Words

Behold the school’s Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative.

www.wsj.com

Sorry for the OT. Now back to our regular programming......

In fact we could keep both words. A properly carried test in absence of knowledge using the correct methods and analysis would become a masked test. The usual casual audiophile challenge would be simply called a blind test ...

Yes, I know my suggestion is even more politically unacceptable!

 

[Kingrex]

Rex, you may not be aware that Stanford University recently came out with a guide for approved acceptable words. I'm sorry to tell you that "blind" studies are now verboten. According to the gurus at Stanford, "blind" studies "unintentionally perpetuates that disability is somehow abnormal or negative, furthering an ableist culture.” The new correct wording is "masked" studies. Don't get mad at me, I didn't make this stuff up! In fact, as an ophthalmologist who runs a small biotech company currently doing a Phase 3 clinical trial that is "blinded", I am (not a surprise) unimpressed with Stanford's new approved words list ( "blind" study is but one word that did not make the new approved list). I'm also pretty sure that the folks at the Hoover Institute (a conservative think tank on Stanford's campus) had a small stroke when this list came out recently. I'm also guessing that nobody asked the Lone Ranger if he objected to the word "masked" as a substitute.

There are however a couple of good laughs on the Stanford approved words list.

Opinion | The Stanford Guide to Acceptable Words

Behold the school’s Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative.

www.wsj.com

Sorry for the OT. Now back to our regular programming......

I get annoyed by all the correctness out there. But Masked Study does not stike me as an inaccurate term. I am temporarily masking the audience.

The problem is, I feel a subject in front of an unfamiliar stereo is blind in many ways. I think it takes days, if not weeks of exposure to a stereo to really get sight into what it does. If I am correct, then setting a room of people in front of a totally unfamiliar stereo and changing say a USB cable may give negative results because people are blind to what changed.

To make matters worse, If I am very familiar with the stereo, I may have developed a taste for the sound, so being masked I may hear the change, but I might still be blind to whether it was a good or bad change.

 

[defride]

Wadax conted it’s not jitter so much these days, that problem is well understood. There’s a piece on Roy Gregory’s new site GY8 where in an interview they describe timing as the issue. There are all sorts of ways that the timing of the bits can get messed up before they hit the dac, the dac then reproduces the errors. That’s as I understood. I’m out at the mo or is find the link, it’s in the first piece of the Wadax Ref review

Wadax Reference Server and Akasa Optical Interface – Part 1 - Gy8

What makes the Wadax Reference Server so different?

gy8.eu

The piece where Javier Guadalajara from Wadax postulates that timing errors in the data stream are a significant problem in digital

 

[Mike Lavigne]

over 13 years, i've gone from 2 different versions of DIY (by my Network Engineer Son) server, to the Taiko SGM 2015 Music Server, to the Taiko Extreme with it's various upgrades, and now to the Wadax Reference Server with the Akasa Optical Interface......the improvement of the music reproduction performance has been significant.

you also have music management systems such as J-River, Roon, Taiko XDMS, and others as variables along the way.

obviously there was also the step up from the Playback Designs MPS-5 player/dac, to the Trinity dac and Lampi GG1 and GG1.5 dacs, then to the Aqua Formula dac, then to the MSB Select II, and finally to the Wadax Reference Dac.

always compared to my vinyl and tape along the way as performance references. since the Trinity dac and Lampi dacs my playback system and room have been mostly a constant. it helps to have a system that is one that tells you about differences. not all systems are equal about that.

at every step i have compared the dacs with both the new and old servers. especially with the MSB/Extreme and the Wadax Dac and Server. i compared the MSB dac with both the Extreme and Wadax server, and the Wadax dac, with both the Wadax server (with and without the Akasa optical) and the Extreme. this last go around included other listeners for each compare.

i trust my perceptions at the various points of change. the SOTA of music server technology has gone a long way in the last 15 years.....it was at the infant stage in 2010 when i got my first one. not sure when we might see a jump up over the Wadax.

but who really knows?

 

[Kingrex]

Wadax Reference Server and Akasa Optical Interface – Part 1 - Gy8

What makes the Wadax Reference Server so different?

gy8.eu

The piece where Javier Guadalajara from Wadax postulates that timing errors in the data stream are a significant problem in digital

This is a bit more clear on how the timing error on the front end impacts the DACs timing and exacerbates the DAC clock issues.

 

[Alrainbow]

A while memory player was in part about timing. the timing in between the data packets for them. the voltage of the usb is interesting in his comments I’m not sure what voltage he means as there are two for most
if it’s just the data varying voltage does exist and the varying voltage of each side in terms of ripple speed and freq matters but it’s still a data stream that pulses
All data streams use error correction as well. now as mike says it’s an obvious improvement I’m all
In with him.

 

[Digital Buddha]