Maybe we must "investigate" what the leakage atually is. I mean, I only copy words from others when I "claim" that Ethernet is isolated (knowing that transformers exist at the end points). But for how much current ? really no idea (easy to find out I suppose).
I also don't think that Ethernet was invented for its isolation behavior. It just is so (or ?). And it thus will also be "to some degree" I'd say.

But Peter, I have a question for you: why have the audio PC on the audio ring? Why not have it on the music server ring? The Intona gives galvanic isolation, and now no need to worry about using a linear PSU for the audio PC.

Mind you, while the two PC's (Music Server PC and Audio PC) are connected by means of Ethernet, this is a galvanically isolated connection.

A specific hazard stems from possible differences in ground potentials between network components, which when not properly isolated can result in a leakage current that can flow through the patient, which is dangerous, and potentially lethal. Such voltage differences can also arise through incorrect installation and wiring of network systems, electrical shorting within damaged cables and cabling, or shorting between damaged network cables and other voltage sources.

Network isolators work to remove this hazard, by electrically disconnecting medical devices from a network. Isolators may be used as network accessories, built into medical devices, or installed within a medical network system. Networks isolators should be installed as close as possible to the medical device in question.

3930 (or its newer variant for LGA2011, 4930) is a few years old indeed. What LGA2011-3 brings is 4 lane memory (was 3). So, useful, but required for totally nothing that I can see (possibly the CPU can run at a lower frequency now, but I don't know how to make it lower than I can at this moment (230MHz). The new 6900 brings nothing more that I can see. 6950 brings two more cores, so can be useful indeed. But mind the $. And don't forget xeon already does the same and way more (for way more $).

Hi Dave,

The real client-server thing goes like this :

I am on the Audio PC which is playing music, then I think "oh wait, I want to look for more Ray Brown's" and next I hand a command to the Server to sort out what's all available - that Server being connected to the Internet while the Audio PC surely is not, and the Server calling me (the Audio PC) back with the results. Nothing disturbed the Audio PC here, except for a few bytes the Audio PC sent out with the command and the few bytes the result occupies as was asynchronously returned by the Server (the result actually only messaging that things are ready to look at on the Server('s, hey, disk).
What next happens is that I choose for Albums to be prepared out of that result list which thus resides on the Server like all resides there, and after that command is handed out it may be after 5 minutes that I'm called back with an "All ready !". Or after 20 seconds that Album A is ready to be played; it is available like all else on the server.

Now, besides we can now see a real reason for a client (Audio PC) and a server (Music Server PC) to exist, we can also see some additional "tutorial", because it requires a few more Settings to set. Example below (field at the bottom). And with some TCP knowledge you can see that the communication is setup "internally" just the same, as 127.0.0.1 is the Local Address. So the Client-Server principle has been set up for in-PC processes and tasks just the same.

Technically this is all working already, including a nice protocol. It is only yesterday that I started working on the first real functionality for it, which indeed is Tidal. So in XXHighEnd 2.06 this will be there.

It is my intention that working exclusively from a Tablet, all can be done in integrated fashion. That some tasks are performed on the Music Server PC you will not notice. It is like you performed them on the Audio PC and that the Audio PC under the hood is dealing with them. But instead the Music Server PC does and Audio Quality remains 100% untouched, playing meanwhile).

Peter

... not built-in yet using a standard cable from PC to Intona and Clarixa to the NOS1b for the moment.

Counting errors the other way around and counting nothing now.

Plans are to built this Barebone Intona (just the PCB without plastic enclosure) into the PC directly and soldered to the USB input directly and use the output with a single cable towards the DAC.

I will place the PCB inside the PC first (with cables connected) to hear if that changes anything before making things final.

No idea when this is going to happen though... floating in the air as it is connected now sounds already awesome! 

Playing about 6dB louder too (according to the settings) but it does not sound any louder than before? Weird...



Bert