Hi Peter,

Of course I take your comments in the "good spirits," in the spirit indeed in which they were proffered, no doubt.

In some ways, if I may give myself some  credit here, about a month ago, I more or less imagined a solution which is indeed the one you seem on the verge of making reality, when I wrote:


As I said, I investigated that possibility later on, and I had made a mental note of finding just such a solution in the future...I am delighted that thanks to your non human attributes, as you put it, you have been able to resolve this conundrum of the "audio pc," where the pursuit of a minimalist set-up comes into conflict with the very nature of the personal computer.

So many thanks from me, and no doubt many will join me, for the remarkable result you have achieved although I suspect that it will be a little while before a boot-up XXHighend USB (or the like) will become available.

In the same post as the one above, I went on to consider the implications of such a solution:


I imagine that this question, in due course, will now become more pertinent.

It is interesting that Intel has recently launched their 14nm  socket CPU which has integrated 10Gbase Lan and consumes only 45W at load even though it offers 8 cores/16 threads (only 32 pcie lanes but that will do and supports max 128GB memory). This could be the ideal solution CPU wise for that next generation "audio pc."

Again, what a wonderful achievement, Peter. I take my proverbial hat off to you.

Best regards
Rakesh

Yep, I saw that before but Grub4win seems to officially only support up to Windows 7 but maybe it works with Windows 10.

Still, I do not understand why this should have implications for sound quality. XXhighend makes minimal requirements of Windows OS so I imagine both CPU draw and power consumption are negligible.

I can see how this would change practical aspects of building an 'audio pc' but I doubt it ought to make any ostensible change to sound let alone make it 'scary,' presumably meaning by that "realistic."

I am of course wrong but if I had to bet, I think above speculation is not quite it. There is something else afoot...

Best regards
Rakesh

Hi Peter,

Can you please at least update your signature?

Otherwise methinks that could be construed as misleading, as in incorrect, as in not quite true, as in likely to induce into error, as in quite deceitful really, likely to cause argument, conflict, civil disobedience, peaceful demonstrations, civil wars, insurrections (you get my drift)...

Thanks
Rakesh


P.S.

Requirements for Windows OS:

"To: How big is Windows 10 on DVD and HDD?
»» x32 (on the DVD ~ 2.5 GB, after installation on the hard disk drive ~ 9.0 GB)
»» x64 (on the DVD ~ 3.5 GB, after installation on the hard disk drive ~11 GB) "

So, Peter,  even with 16GB of Ram, you may be able to pull it off, but just about....The reality being that you really need another 8-16Gb of Ram. You are a worthy hero for a twenty-fist century sequel to Mapes Dodge's 'Hans Brinker, or the Silver Skates.'

Hi Juan,

I fully endorse your vote, subject to the following reservations:

1. This may work!
2. It might save me money!
3. It is something I was half considering anyway, although thus far I was not completely sure as to how to make it happen. You do have something called non-volatile Ram but that's for highly specialised enterprise applications and costs a small fortune, unless you are Bill Gates.
4. I share your qualms about upsetting Peter for slightly different reasons. I still need him to upgrade my NOS1 to NOS1a next year.
5. Simple economics and undiluted timorousness really. If I negatively score him slightly less than you, you suffer the brunt of the fall-out.

Now that everything has been weighted, the pros and cons carefully assessed, I will go with:

-0.49999...

Best rgds
Rakesh

Hi Juan,

I am with you there. As far as I know they are speaking double dutch (pun intended for anglosaxons)!

I think we should vote to introduce a method of negative scoring obscure, hidden meaning, indecipherable posts!

If that is so(Windows OS being entirely run from Ramdisk), it potentially has monumental implications for our hard drive configuration.

Yes, if Windows OS/XXHighend/Galleries/Playback(i.e. music files) are all running from quad-partitioned Ramdisk, then for me that means, we can throw the rulebook out of the window (the figurative real deal not the Microsoft one).

How about that? Use a very fast SSD in PCIe slot that has Windows OS/XXHighend/Galleries/Playback in one place but with amazing transfer speeds to transfer everything at quicksilver speed to Ramdisk at boot-up and everything works at lightning speed from there on.

Is this so? That would be most remarkable! Please say it is...


Best rgds
Rakesh

Sorry to intrude on what appears to be a private joke being shared between host and guest but I could not help noticing "Windows 10  Preview 10074 RAM Version" being selected.

Is this Windows 10 OS in Ramdisk?  It can't be surely?...

Rgds
Rakesh

Hi guys,

Another relatively irrelevant post I imagine but for me it is all just one project with different strands so I hope you do not mind...may be of interest to some members here.

If you do and I am upsetting sensibilities (as being as remote from an 'audio pc' project as conceivable), please let me know and I will get rid of the post.

These pics were taken by Louis last month and the lathe that you saw in the video I posted earlier in this thread (post #67 above) should be back in action this week when he comes back from his vacations. The indication is that they will be finished by the end of the month but realistically, I now think it is going to be the first week of July. And I am myself off shortly after that until early September, so timing is not great. Well, it is out of my control (I did place the order with an agreed delivery time of April and pay what was required of me months ago), all I can do is wait.

Louis Eastman's website can be found here:

http://www.goldstandardaudio.com/

You can see some sketch-up pics of my project there, as well as some smaller horns!

He also does some other stuff, furniture and the like:


www.madebylouis.com

www.valelaneworkshop.com



best rgds
Rakesh

Looking ahead, I suggested earlier in this thread that good things might come to those who can wait:




I think the following might add credence to that opinion for anyone interested in building a new 'audio pc' later this year (more likely next year), once Skylake and Thunderbolt 3 are well and properly launched in due course.

The backward compatibility of Thunderbolt 3 with USB 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1, its proper integration in the next Skylake socket motherboard because it is an Intel technology, the possibility of using it for 10Gbe networking, maybe all with one single cable, makes this a tantalising prospect for those who can wait.

The original article can be found at this link:

http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2015/06/thunderbolt-3-embraces-usb-type-c-connector-doubles-bandwidth-to-40gbps/

Text copied and pasted below:


Original story

At Computex 2015, Intel has unveiled Thunderbolt 3. The headline feature: Thunderbolt 3 has changed connector from Mini DisplayPort to USB Type-C.

In addition to the new connector, Thunderbolt 3 now also supports USB 3.1 (i.e. Gen 2, up to 10Gbps), and the Thunderbolt transport layer sees its max bandwidth doubled from 20Gbps to 40Gbps (bi-directional, full duplex). Thunderbolt 3 also offers an optional 100W of power, in accordance with the USB Power Delivery spec. Without USB PD, Thunderbolt 3 will provide up to 15 watts.

Thunderbolt 3 is backed by Intel's new Alpine Ridge controller. USB 3.1 support is provided by integrating a USB 3.1 host controller into Alpine Ridge. There will be two flavours of the controller, one that uses four PCIe 3.0 lanes to drive two Thunderbolt ports, and another version that only uses two PCIe lanes connected to a single Thunderbolt port.

With the increase in max bandwidth, Thunderbolt 3 now supports up to two 4K @ 60Hz displays or a single 5K @ 60Hz display running off a single cable. The official Intel slide deck says that Thunderbolt 3 supports DisplayPort 1.2 (not 1.3), but there's no mention of HDMI. The Alpine Ridge leak back in April 2014 suggested that HDMI 2.0 would be supported, but Intel today says that DisplayPort 1.2 is "the native standard" for display over Thunderbolt 3, though HDMI 2.0 monitors will be supported with an "adapter."

The same leak also suggested that Thunderbolt 3 would be paired with Skylake, Intel's next chip after Broadwell, but we can confirm that isn't the case: Thunderbolt 3 would theoretically work with Broadwell. Intel hasn't given an official release date for Thunderbolt 3, but it has told us that it will probably launch alongside Skylake. Updated: We asked Apple about its involvement with Thunderbolt 3, and a spokesperson responded with, "we do not talk about things that may lie ahead." (It wouldn't be surprising if the first outing of Thunderbolt 3 is with a Skylake-powered MacBook Pro in late 2015.)
Enlarge / A promotional image from Intel Light Peak, which is what Thunderbolt started off as, before it got turned into a copper-wire tech.

At launch, there'll be one passive Thunderbolt 3 cable that supports Thunderbolt, USB 3.1, and DisplayPort 1.2, but with a max bandwidth of only 20Gbps. Intel confirms that this passive cable will be a standard, cheap USB Type-C cable. There'll also be an active cable that allows for up to 40Gbps, but drops DisplayPort 1.2 connectivity. Intel is also working on an active optical cable for Thunderbolt 3, but it isn't sharing any more details at the moment, and it won't be on the market until sometime in 2016. (Is this the rebirth of Light Peak?!)

The most exciting aspect of Thunderbolt 3 is its adoption of the USB Type-C connector. Type-C has a much smaller Z-height (about 3mm) than Mini DisplayPort (about 5mm), which in theory will allow Thunderbolt to make the jump to tablets and other small form factors. Ultra-thin laptops, such as the new MacBook with just a single USB Type-C port or Microsoft's Surface line, may also stand to gain a lot from Thunderbolt 3.

With a total bandwidth of 40Gbps, Thunderbolt 3 offers a tantalising glimpse of "one cable to rule them all." In theory, you could use Thunderbolt almost everywhere: to power your laptop, to power and drive your 4K monitor, and to power and connect all of your external peripherals. The one obvious exception is external graphics cards, with all but the lowest-end GPUs still drawing more than 100W. By supporting USB 3.1 and jumping on the Type-C connector, Thunderbolt 3 may actually be the interconnect to usher in that tidy-cable utopia.



That's obviously relevant for those buying a new 'Skylake' socket motherboard. But now imagine if it so happens that Add-On-Cards should come out to add Thunderbolt 3 to X99 motherboards. Obviously it's likely the 100W charging capability would be lost (who cares?) but the remaining functionality as described in the above article would be extremely useful in the context of a Phasure NOS1(a)/XXHighend PC system.

Best regards
Rakesh

Hi Nick,

I have actually read the whole of Juan's thread, twice now, thanks to you!  So in a strange way, yes you have helped me on my journey to understand and learn more about the many design decisions that go into making an "audio pc." I will gladly take this whole affair down a notch as you suggest, although please do not mistake my willingness to be amicable as weakness, or an admission that I agree with you or your approach in the slightest.

I would say this though. In my opinion, fundamentally, your approach is wrong, because instead of proceeding in a holistic fashion based on a deep understanding of how this very complex and audio unfriendly environment that is the personal computer works, you approach the "audio pc" in a random, piecemeal manner, that will ultimately paper over the cracks and not solve the deep-seated issues. Unfortunately, I think that everyone here has no choice but adopt this haphasard method. It is clearly not unscientific because as with many fields of knowledge significant progress can be made in this way. But it is not ideal.

And I find your constant reference to "innovation" in hushed, reverent and mysterious tones, like it was some secret to be handed down as you join a cult at an initiation ceremony, really grating and at odds with the whole atmosphere of transparency and mutual help that runs through this site. 

I would speculate this. What you are talking about is one of two things. Less likely it has something to do with your earlier experimentation with trying to isolate the usb card. Alternatively, and more likely, is the addition of a master clock which slaves both the dac and the "audio pc." Speculatively, this could be done for instance by adding a sound card like the RME (I think) which is capable of accepting an external clock. I am very doubtful about this method working, coming from a non-engineer and amateur like yourself, without meaning to be disrespectful but merely stating the obvious. In the right hands, say if Peter were to look into this, I imagine this could bear some promise. Is it worth the cost, effort and hassle? Personally, I do not think so.

All in all then Nick, far from touching a nerve, you merely made me think and for that thanks.

About the capacitors, you said:


Seriously? This is a a piece of equipment that has on occasions not been used for very lengthy durations and capacitors, even good quality ones, can fail over time. I am not seriously concerned and there is no suggestion online that Grace Design products are prone to failure. Their five year warranty actually attests that the opposite is more likely to be true (do you know many audio manufacturers who offer a 5-year warranty on ALL their products? I don't).



As it happens, in 2004, Michael Grace was asked questions online precisely in the same vein that you were asked, and this even before the Grace M902 was launched. Here is his response (you may benefit from comparing it to yours when I asked about your "product"):

Hi All,
I thought I would shed a little light on the m902. The m902 replaces the 901 in our lineup (although we still have a few 901s left!). It has the same headphone output amplifier as the 901 which is based on a high current, high speed transimpedance amplifier (AD815). This is where the similarities end though.
The first important difference is in the level attenuator. The m902 uses a digitally controlled analog attenuator which provides 95dB of attenuation with precision .5dB steps. I think there are several advantages to this type of control. First off there are no contacts to become contaminated, there is no switch capacitance that varies from setting to setting, and there is no wire or connectors to color the sound. Also, the digitally controlled attenuator has a very wide volume range which makes the m902 handle a variety of headphones from super sensitive types like the Shure E5 to the not-so-sensitive types like the HD600 or K1000. Anywhere in the entire range you can find the exact listening level with .5dB steps. (final firmware might switch to 1dB steps at attenuation levels of –85dB and below). The attenuator IC that had the best transparency and musicality also happened to have four channels so we hooked up the extra two channels to a line output so that you could use the m902 to control speakers or use it as a DAC.

Speaking of DACs, the m902 contains our “second generation” DACs which have some notable improvements over the DACs in the 901. While the 901 used a very high performance chip (CS43122) we chose the Burr Brown PCM1730 for the m902. This DAC is one of the few that has current outputs and allows us to use our own current to voltage converter. The current to voltage converter uses very high speed transimpedance amplifiers which assures that reconstruction of the analog signal is done without the non-linear slew rate limiting of regular op amps. While you won’t see the benefits of this type of topology in the measured performance I think it makes a significant improvement in the clarity and resolving power of the DAC. The m902 also employs a second PLL which we call s-Lock. The s-Lock PLL re-clocks the recovered clock from the digital inputs (including the USB) using super stable crystal oscillators and delivers a sample clock to the DAC with very low intrinsic (self generated) jitter and well over 100 times attenuation of incoming jitter from external sources. Call me old fashioned but I’m just not a believer in sample rate converters. While the 901 DAC is capable of fine performance with a low jitter source the clock recovery circuitry is not capable of attenuating incoming jitter so its performance degrades with long cables and jittery sources.

Like the 901, there are no electrolytic capacitors in the signal path. The inputs to the volume control are capacitor coupled with metalized polymer capacitors while the output amplifier is controlled with a DC servo. I think that a coupling capacitor sounds better than a servo since, when using a servo, you are not only listening to the integrator capacitor but you are also listening to the servo amplifier as its output is summed into the audio signal. However, in the case of the output amplifier we would need a very large value output capacitor to protect the headphones from DC offset so a servo is necessary here. (to keep the low frequency roll off below 10Hz while using 32 Ohm phones we would need around 5000uF which would only be available in an electrolytic type.)

Other enhancements to the m902 include:

All audio signal path resistors are 0.5% tolerance thin film surface mount types. Thin film resistors use the same type of metalic material used in thruough hole metal film types but have no lead inductance.

Improved capacitors in the output amplifier compensation network.

Larger power transformer with separate winding for digital circuitry. (the 901 derived digital supplies from the +analog supply)

Improved headphone jacks

4 layer pcb (this allows a continuous, low impedance ground plane and low inductance power supply distribution)

Separate power supply regulators for analog amplifiers, digital reciever PLL, DAC digital supply, DAC analog supply. 7 regulators in the m902!

Passive cross feed circuit.

Optional IR remote control. I wanted to be able to sit on my couch and have the m902 in my stereo cabinet so I could have it hooked into my loudspeaker system as a DAC…


Yup, there is more stuff in the m902 than in the 901…and it costs more. No cut corners. Just nice rounded ones on the outside.

Cheers,
Michael


A little further on, he posts some additional measurements for his product:

Hi all,
Here are the results of the USB jitter and bit tests. Please let me
know if proper etiquette would be to start a new thread with this sort of
technical stuff.

The Mac Power Book (OSX) will play 44.1kHz and 48kHz files over the usb
interface to the m902 with perfect bit accuracy. Again, as I mentioned
in a previous post, you must open the MIDI/Audio setup panel and set the
output sample rate to match the file being played or else sample rate
conversion occurs. (We will have these details in the owners manual)

SACD:
As far as I know there are no SACD players that have digital output when playing SACD disks with the possible exception of units with the I-link port. I think this is a firewire-like interface but the data is encrypted and (correct me if I'm wrong) asynchronous which would provide for jitter prone transfers. In the professional world DSD equipment uses SDIF-3 which consists of separate clock and data signals on BNC connectors. I think EMM Labs makes a modification for a SACD player so that it will output DSD data to a DSD dac...

USB jitter:
Measured at the spdif output of the PCM2902 the recovered clock from the PCM2902 measures about 240 pico seconds of RMS jitter when playing a 44.1kHz file and 390 pico seconds when playing a 48kHz file. Note that the 44.1kHz performance is very near to the noise floor of the Terrasonde Digital Audio Toolbox which is about 200 Pico Seconds when measuring spdif data streams. To really know the jitter of the PCM2902 would require access to the sample clock inside the chip. Oh well. However, this is not shabby jitter performance. I was expecting worse. With a good secondary PLL (like the s-Lock circuit) this can be reduced to less than 40 pico seconds.

If there was any confusion earlier in this thread, the usb interface is limited to a *maximum* sample rate of 48kHz and 16bit word length. 44.1kHz works fine. While there are USB solutions that support higher sample rates and bit depths, they are marginaly reliable. For higher sample rates and bit depths the only viable solution is IEEE 1394 (firewire) as it is designed for audio and video streaming. USB 2.0 will probably not become a popular audio transport for its lack of clear standards for audio streaming.


On another note a friend of mine who is a Linux guru is working on determining the requirements for making the m902 work with Linux.
I'll report as soon as we know anything.

Michael

So Nick, there you are. This is what happens when you ask a professional details of the product that the potential customer is considering. Very different to your response, quite clearly. Nobody asked you for your schematics (not that I think you have any because you merely assemble a bunch of parts), just a simple explanation of what your product is, what it does, how much it costs, why you think it represents an improvement on what's available elsewhere.

On the other hand, you will have noticed that this is very much the approach adopted by Peter. He is very forthcoming with what he is trying to achieve, the technical hurdles that he faces, and what solutions he has adopted. This is very different to what you have offered here.

So I rest my case.

I am not interested in your "product," Nick, and am unlikely to ever be (you will be relieved to hear). To end, if I may be allowed to quote myself:




Best regards
Rakesh

Hi Nick,

You do yourself a disservice by posting in this thread. In the earlier "Nick's Chronos" thread you refer to, you had explained your position as follows:


You are right and I agree. It is a very clear position. And I for for one was prepared to accept it and close that chapter, which is why I did not reply to your post there. I have more important things to do with my time. Your tone has now veered to the aggressive and you have lost your manners in launching a fairly personal tirade against me.

Irrespective of the right or wrong of your attitude on a site where the ethos seems to be to share, assist others and be as transparent and honest as possible in one's dealings with others, which people are free to make of what they will, your response means that I will feel free to take the liberty this time of making a couple of observations.

You seem to have changed your attitude markedly from the time when you were writing on Juan's long thread about how he built his audio pc where he went on at great length and in some detail into the decisions and choices that he made in finalising his design,  and shared with us all in a post that must have occupied him for weeks and months,  as he updated the contents of his audio pc as it evolved over time. This is what you had to say early on in that thread:



Later on, you refer to your debt of gratitude for the work done by Peter, whose "towering presence" you eulogise in glowing and grateful terms.


Still further on, we have you referring to the cases used and "discovered" by Juan:

 


This is just one thread where there are several instances of your willingness to borrow from others and make use of the work that they have done.

I clearly remember reading a thread which was about how you approached Peter with your miraculous discovery of "Dexa" clocks, of which you were using two and waxing lyrical about until Peter used his equipment to show you how poorly they were performing. Using equipment that you do not have.

I am sure, Nick, that this is the tip of the iceberg. If one were to dig deeper, one would find, I have no doubt, innumerable such instances where you borrowed and asked others for help.

Forgive me, Nick, but when you say that you have a unique solution, I am not convinced. Your solution is almost certainly a combination of several techniques, tips and ideas that you have gleaned, like I have, from this very forum. Pretending otherwise would be a lie.

So now I have said it, the thing that bothered me about your attitude. There is something inherently hypocritical and revolting about the way you seem to have taken full advantage of the open and sharing ethos of this forum, and then violated it in the same breath.

Best regards
Rakesh

I came home a few days ago and opened the doors to the unmistakable smell of burnt electronics. It turned out that the capacitors of my old faithful Grace M902 headphone amplifier/DAC, manufactured in 2005 and bought by me in 2006, had burnt to a crisp. Although I only use the unit intermittently, I realised that I missed it straight away. Fair enough, it may have its foibles but the combination of this neat little unit with Sennheiser HD650 is something quite special indeed. Then I discovered that the company which supplied it in the UK and had serviced it and upgraded it in the past was not a Grace Design Distributor any longer. Having already called Grace Audio years ago, I remembered a very helpful, courteous down-to-earth conversation that addressed briefly and succinctly all the many queries that I had about the unit (I have always liked asking questions!).

So where normally I might have contacted the companies/individuals I turn to when I need such help, I called Grace Design and spoke to a real gentleman that blew away my usual skepticism when it comes to audio companies, that in the main I regard as instruments of the devil himself. Yes he was happy to help. No they could NOT UPGRADE to the latest M920 "flagship" unit but I had a choice of returning to their European distributor (unknown to me) or ship directly to them.

What shocked me and what is the point of this post is that he felt confident enough to diagnose the problem there and then send me an invoice for a derisory amount including parts, labour and shipping! I was left speechless. This is not a feeling that comes often in this hobby. I remember my dealings with Naim here in the UK in the past that left a bitter taste and turned me away from their whole product line forever, and quite a few others, who in spite of their reputation, were so obscure or obscene (figuratively speaking of course) that I became in the main disillusioned with audio companies. On the other hand, companies like ATC offer a stupendous warranty that they back to the hilt (I took my ATC active SCM20-2a 6 years after having bought these from a dealer with whom I fell out and they replaced drivers no question asked, and even changed the voltage on one rare unit I had imported from the US).

So what is my point? Sometime we audio people forget that in buying products from dealers/distributors/manufacturers, we forget that if you tear down all the hullabaloo about a change in settings that means your mother-in-law can shimmy away to "dance music" (what the hell is that anyways? - I thought a set of Bose speakers and two huge subs would do the job) in the kitchen, presumably this being the metaphysical g-spot sweet spot where the system is at its most resolving...you are left with real products which deliver day in day out, and if you run into difficulty, there is someone you can easily turn to.

So my Grace Design M902 is off to be repaired and I await its return with impatience.

So that's the point. But is there a moral to the whole thing? I think there is. I realise today that some of these companies that have most impressed me (I mentioned two here, Grace Design and ATC - there are others but not many) have something in common. They are not part of the mainstream industry and do not go out of their way to serve the high-end audiophile market, which like FIFA, corrupts everything that it touches. Of course, when they do realise that the audiophile community likes their products, they are likely to start behaving very differently. Even Grace Design and ATC are not immune to this contamination (see the pricing of the M920 and the burl 20th Anniversary special edition ATC SCM-50).

One truth which is rarely voiced and admitted, is that ironically and ultimately, the problem lies more with us the electorate of that corrupt and tainted industry, because we in many different ways behave in a manner which encourages these crazy notions such that speakers consisting of 5 drivers in a nice looking enclosure will easily cost upward of $50,000, and pre-amps can cost north of $10000. I feel so bad about this industry that I will make sure that of my many interests and hobbies, this is the one that I will not pass on to my children. They are welcome to my ATCs (the horns speakers are too much hassle for them) and I wish to god that's all the interest they have in audio. If they continue with the piano as they have been doing for the past two years, and develop a habit of going to regular live concerts of classical music, and if they need to get some audio equipment to replace the Grace Design or ATC I send them off with, I know who I will recommend they go to.

This is a unique and quite tragic hobby I find, where although I do enjoy it, I would not wish it on my children and for that matter, on anyone who has a choice.

So some might ask, if you have used such a broad brush to paint such a grim picture of our hobby and the industry that's intimately bound with it, what do you make of our host? Well, he is still a mystery to me. There is clearly a sense of honesty and integrity that permeates the forum generally and this is also why I was prepared to take a blind punt (I knew nothing about the Phasure Dac until a friend told me about it and I read some of Peter's postings and thoughts here). For me, our hobby cannot be dissociated from the people behind the products that find their place in our audio equipment rack. I will feel happy to have Peter's dac in my room, even though ultimately I might not like his view and vision and interpretation as seen through the implementation and execution of the tools at his disposal. Peter is clearly going through a turning point in the evolution of his equipment portfolio. What the future holds, I do not know and I daresay nobody does. But in the main, with most audio equipment out there, especially the absurdly expensive ones, I feel nauseous and sick and guilty...I hope I am not the only one to feel so.

Best regards
Rakesh



P.S.


Hi ACG,

I would not call my current builder an amateur although this is indeed the first time he engages in a project of this magnitude. He has access to CNC machinery and my own attention to detail, so in the end, I think it will be all fine. Good luck with your horns.

Rakesh

This has nothing and everything to do with my Phasure NOS1/ Audio PC project. I thought, as there is some interest in horns over here, that you would not mind me posting what is arguably the most irrelevant post/attachment ever.

I placed this order ages ago, in late February, but the whole project had been discussed, researched and fermented over a number of years. I would like to recoup my costs but since I learnt everything I know from forums like this one and my personal research, I am happy to answer questions in a frank, open and transparent manner in the hope that others may learn from my experience and my mistakes.

It is however important that I do not tempt the devil and jinx the whole project which is already behind schedule. So I will wait for the horns to be finished (I am obviously not the one making them - I bought a lathe but then sold it when I realised I did not have the requisite skills) before I publish too much about it - I do not want to tempt fate. I have been let down by so many amateur would-be horn builders and myriad events and circumstances which conspired to delay and distract this project.

What you can see is a small (and the first) section of a fairly large 115Hz tractrix horn spinning.

Enjoy!

Best regards
Rakesh

Hi Nick,

Sure, I will contact you by e-mail if you prefer.

I, however, and I am sure I am not the only one, would prefer a straight answer to the straight questions that I asked.

I have read a very long thread about the USB3/Silverstone/Starteck/Tecknet card and I can see that you contributed regularly in a manner that everyone here, including Peter, found helpful.

You have invested your precious and valuable time in developing your "Chronos Reference PC" and I think there is nothing wrong with you trying to make sure that it is not for nothing if you think that it offers something others might appreciate and pay for.

True. Your pc might appear to compete with Peter's own offering and talking about it here might seem unpalatable self-promotion and competition on his website.

I think that if Peter authorises it, you should be able to contribute freely and everyone is likely to gain from that. The flow of knowledge should never be curtailed or hindered. You can of course refrain from discussing these aspects of your work that you think should be closely guarded, but in my estimation, you stand to gain more in stature and commercially by discussing ideas without giving away specifics.

Look at Peter's "XXHighend pc."  I now realise that I was an unrepentant idiot not to just buy it from him, as many here advised. His pc is however easy to replicate because he was so open with absolutely everything that went into it. My circumstances are slightly different as I got myself in a situation where I had some parts , and processors which I did not know were incompatible with his older generation motherboard. And with all due respect to Peter, I think that eventually he will revisit his "XXHighend PC" and upgrade some components to give people an upgrade path...at least that's what I think.

I personally think that, even with my limited understanding of such matters, and not knowing the personal aspects of your dealings with Peter, that both you and Peter stand to gain by having your Chronos PC openly discussed here. Peter's business is likely to gain as even more people interested in your solution might consider the Phasure Dac as a result. Rather than see your pc competing with Peter's, one might regard them, in crude economic parlance, complementary goods.

In short, I do not like this cold war atmosphere of hiding in the shadows, meeting under bridges and using cypher to communicate. I find mysteries tiresome and repellent especially in a hobby such as ours where we can move away from the politics that often engage us in our professional lives and be clear and honest with each other.

I will approach you privately as I might use some help with my project and I will get it wherever it is available for sure, and within my means. I will not however become part of some sort of  conspiracy and as long as I am free to communicate about whatever I learn from you, I would be very happy to do so. I do not want to be hindered as the reason I understand as much as I do is because a large number of people here have been very open about their own experiments and results, good or bad, and I read and learnt from these. You yourself have clearly benefited from that in  your travails. If you do decide that this does not suit any disclosure requirements that you might have in mind, then I am sure I will still manage.

One last thing. I know you said you do not feel comfortable answering my questions. In my humble opinion, you should reconsider. No business that I know has ever been able to survive and thrive without at least stating what its goods or services sell for, and what it is that they do...Just a thought.

I sincerely wish you all the best in your new venture and if I can make use of your help for a fee, even better.

Best regards
Rakesh

Hi Nick,

Great to hear that you have completed your "audio pc" project.

What is the price of the Chronos PC?

What is the nature of the modifications that you have carried out and what are the ones that you think resulted in the most improvement?

Best regards
Rakesh

Hi Alain,

Thanks for the detailed response. I have carefully noted the points you make and they have helped me to think more clearly about what I am trying to achieve.

The fact that you are very happy with the sound quality of your source is a hugely weighty factor even though at times, I do not follow the reasoning behind certain decisions. As you say, some of these decisions are based on trust.

But one should also note that many of these decisions seem to be based on a 3-5 years old approach, at a time when the rules of engagement were markedly different. For instance, at the time, Intel processors were not as efficient as they are nowadays. Most of these configurations assumed that Windows OS/XXHighend and Galleries would be on HDDs or the first generation SSDs. The relative newness of the SSD technology and the Sata bottleneck meant the starting point was very different to what it would be today.

The use of Ramdisks for the operating system, XXHighend and fast low power SSDs mean that we can approach the conception of an "audio pc" on a very different footing. I am nearly sure that if you put Peter, yourself, and others more knowledgeable than myself in a room, with time and resources, that you would come up with something very different, and undoubtedly superior to anything I can come up with from my particularly  limited vantage point. I do not have your wealth of experience, practical knowledge and your understanding of theory. In short, this is the sort of venture where the odds are so heavily stacked against me that I wonder everyday why I even bother on persisting with this project.

But I am me. And I am persistent. So something will happen, good or bad and more likely bad but at least I will have learnt.




So Alain, I take it you use a Linear PSU or maybe more.  It is not very clear from your signature what is the power supply arrangement of your system. The Intel processor you use, the i7-3930K is 130W, which even in a minimalist system like yours, alongside the X79 motherboard must mean a peak load of say 170W. Obviously the normal power draw for a system dedicated to a single purpose like yours will be considerably less -  still your PSU must be able to cope with a load of 150W when your computer is booting up. I suspect the Linear power supply you refer to somewhat enigmatically is the HDPlex 100W, but this looks to me as if it is not powerful enough for the task unless you are combining it with the HDPlex 160 or 250 DC-ATX PSU? I would be fascinated to know the power supply configuration of your system even though it will not work in the case of my proposed dual cpu "audio pc" which will likely have a power draw of 100W at idle, 170W at boot-up and 250-300W at peak load (where it will never be admittedly given it will be dedicated for use with the NOS1).

In the future this will be hopefully different, and better. The next generation of Skylake processors will maybe offer 12 cores for a total power draw of 45W someday (including motherboard) and the HDPlex 100W LPS will then be amply sufficient (or maybe even unnecessary given that so little demand will be made on the power supply.

Again thanks for the detailed and helpful response. I appreciated that. It helps me feel a little less left to my own devices in a field where I have no expertise of any kind to draw on, so the chances of me answering questions instead of asking them, as you kindly surmise will happen someday, are both very slim and very remote.

Best regards
Rakesh