di-fi

I keep coming back here to figure out what exactly happened to Euphony, or more precisely, what is the vision behind this once and still stellar software—at least in audio terms. Should we let go of it, as I did, and as PinkFaun seems to as well, or is it still worth holding onto? For those of you wondering where they are headed, this August 10, 2024 article might be an interesting (if not bewildering) read. I’m curious to hear your thoughts! STEPPING BACKWARDS TO MOVE FORWARD IN MY DIGITAL STREAMING SYSTEM Tom Gibbs August 10, 2024 (…) Here’s where the Mozzaik upsampler comes into the picture. With Devcic having been an active participant in its developmental trials, and with almost two years of evaluation of the Mozzaik software in combination with Euphony equipment, he and Dalibor are impressed with its capabilities, and especially its musicality.(…) (…) In effect, what Dalibor was asking me to do was remove nearly $8000 in equipment from my system, and replace it with a DAC only slightly larger than a deck of cards that retails for $150. Adding insult to injury, I’d also be removing the i²S connection and replacing it with what I regarded as an inferior connection—USB. (…) (…) Compared to my previous digital source system with either the E70 Velvet or Gustard X26 Pro DACs, the sound of DSD files was now mind-bogglingly good. (…) (…) Euphony is in the process of building a statement, single-box streaming solution that will include dual motherboards to separate the streaming and server functions as in their dual-box Summus/Endpoint setup. The new system will also include the latest implementation of Mozzaik’s software, which will upsample everything to DSD128.(…)

@The Computer AudiophileWe discussed here before, hence I am back here OT. But is that why there is now what looks like a small countdown timer, to visually guide users through the short editing window here at AS? Would be very convenient to have something like that!

Twice in a row or not? Same reason or a PinkFaun problem? Hope it went well for you.

@PYPThanks for sharing. Indeed, Marcin achieved a solid result without the switch, but the best result came with it. I understand your desire for convenience, but convenience often aligns with good results, not necessarily the best ones. It’s worth noting that Marcin didn’t connect his home devices, like his TV, to his audio network. For example, even a device like the Grimm can still reveal upstream network changes. My point aligns with Marcin's approach: he introduces a top-tier device that only delivers its best performance in an optimal setup—specifically, a trio of router, switch, and streamer in a rigorously controlled network environment. However, what frustrates me is that it seems unfair to expect end users to solve this network issue themselves. We’re handed this problem, and it feels like we’re left responsible for addressing something that should have been taken care of by the manufacturers. Don’t get me wrong, it still sounds incredible, but like most streamers, it only truly shines with a better network. That said, this approach might not be for everyone—especially if you enjoy the process of tuning your network. This is all I have to say about this here. Thanks.

@matthias As an audiophile, I've seen remarkable advancements in network technology tuning over the years. However, I firmly believe that the upstream network should not dictate the audiophile setup process. The explosion of costly network switches, filters, and cables has created a new audiophile network industry that, while exciting, has left us stuck in a cycle of endless tuning. As I see it, audiophiles have projected their need for fine-tuning onto the network aspect, complicating the pursuit of SQ. So I advocate for the integration of network noise control directly into streamer and DAC devices. By achieving near perfection in this area, these devices would provide consistent sound quality, independent of network variables, and elevate the performance of every downstream component. This approach allows us to focus on the truly enjoyable and rewarding process of downstream tuning. By eliminating the burden of managing network-related variables, we can fine-tune cables and devices with precision, creating a more efficient and satisfying path to optimal SQ. Cheers

Thanks for your comment @matthias. I believe it's possible to break from conventional thinking without compromising performance. With his groundbreaking design, Marcin has already shown that a (not officially released X1) router is no longer just a router, neither is the X1 switch what a switch used to be. More similarities than differences between each device open new ways to integration, at least if it wasn’t for XACT, that is how I see it now. The challenges you mention appear easily surmountable, so who knows what the future might hold? 1.) Upgrades: Design for modularity, allowing component swaps without returning the entire device. 2.) Power & Cases: Use advanced power management and internal isolation to minimize interference. 3.) Regional Router Requirements: Create region-specific modules or configurable router settings. 4.) SQ Without Switch: Ensure minimal signal degradation with high-quality networking and audio components. 5.) Router in Living Room: Focus on sleek designs that blend into living spaces. 6.) WiFi Preference: Include both wired and wireless connectivity options. 7.) Replacing Parts: Make components modular for easy replacement of individual parts. Or let go of thinking in separates : router + switch + streamer is one. 8.) Used Market: This applies to both integrated and separate systems, so it’s not unique to integrated. Encourage a robust market by ensuring compatibility across regions. 9.) Case Size: Prioritize compact (or customizable) designs to fit different setups. Note that I am not talking 5 months, but more like 5 years. Maybe that is all it takes…😎.

By minimizing overhead and reducing board size while ensuring proper isolation, a unified assembly with high signal quality could benefit users by consolidating devices. Sure, this concept faces challenges but I would not call those disadvantages. With the same high sound quality, having a single device would clearly be advantageous for the end user. What disadvantages do you see in this concept?

Hi Marcin, If my suggestion to combine the functions of a router, switch, and streamer into a single device led you to consider creating a device that merges these three functions at a fraction of the cost, that wasn’t my intention. The real issue is whether we will be stuck using three separate devices to reduce noise forever, and who will continue the research and development needed to address this. It seems to me that if anyone can accomplish this, it could be you, and you should charge a fair price for it. I apologize if my suggestion came across as expecting it for free—that would indeed be unfair given the effort involved.

PS. iPad is always wifi disabled and operating in flight mode

No problem. If I’m the first person in 17 years to raise a concern regarding this, do not change anything. I’ll write it elsewhere and copy-paste from there; problem solved! When I’m writing, I like to check past comments or copy quotes to stay consistent, which takes time. By the way, you can delete our conversation here if you’d like. I’m glad I didn’t make a separate thread for this. Thanks for your attention. PS no interface is perfect. You did not address my delete request so I will write as above : Unable to delete, unless there is a workaround?

No site allows editing in perpetuity, but that’s not the point here. This doesn’t seem to cause any issues when posting on other platforms, like WBF. In fact, I find it much more convenient there. On WBF, I can also delete a post if my attempt to quote something accidentally results in a new post being saved. I think you should consider the difference between long-term and short-term editing windows. It seems like the edit window on AS is around 15-20 minutes. Could this be doubled or even tripled, at least?

Unable to delete @The Computer Audiophile Why is it that we can't delete a post after a certain amount of time? And why is there such a short window to edit a post? In my opinion, extending the time limit for editing posts would reduce impulsive or poorly thought-out comments. It would encourage more thoughtful discussions by giving users a chance to reflect and refine their comments, ultimately improving the quality of the content. Then again, maybe it's just me trying to multitask by writing while enjoying music—but that's a tough balance to strike!

@Fourlegs, I understand your hesitation, but I think you should give the wired connection a try. At one point, Marcin personally confirmed this to me (along with feedback from other users with high-end setups). While I can't provide an exact quote anymore, it’s understandable why a manufacturer wouldn’t openly express too much enthusiasm about it in today’s Wi-Fi-centric world. Recurring phenomena related to controller apps (like JCATs) and local files (and possibly streamed files): 1. No WiFi: Investigate how the controller app behaves without WiFi. 2. Controller App Update Time: Track the SQ impact of controller app updates to streamer. 3. App Closed During Play: Examine the SQ when the controller app or tab is closed during active use. 4. … 5. …

Unable to delete

One bullet to rule them all Alex ! 😂 But seriously, was there more, or is this a cliffhanger?