If this is a question for me: Mac mini (now Nucleus) to dCS Network Bridge and on to Nagra Classic DAC.
By the way, I understand (and have a lot of sympathy for) the “bits are bits” argument, but , for instance, Nucleus to DAC via USB doesn’t sound as good as Nucleus via ethernet to Bridge and S/PDIF to DAC. If I had to quantify the difference between these two, I’d say it was subtle but more significant than that between a 24/96 uncompressed file and the same thing converted to a 320kbps file. All subjective, of course.
I just installed a Nucleus in my system with stock switching power supply. Sonically, it trounched a modified Mac Mini. If you want a better endorsement, Jason Victor Serinus, of Stereophile uses a Nucleus+ with linear power supply as his reference. Check out the 5/2020 issue.
I do not have a Nucleus but an intel NUC modded with fan-less akasa chassis running win10 stripped down by audiophile optimiser.
The difference to my previous Mac Mini running roon server is noticeable with more detail and generally quieter background.
I switched my Roon Core from an iMac Pro to a Nucleus (long story), and while I’m not discerning enough to notice a sonic difference, there are definitely performance improvements (faster startup after I click “play”, fewer drop-outs, etc.)
its a pretty pricy piece of kit if theres no SQ improvement. I run a MBP too at the moment I was hoping id get an improvement if I went over to a nucleus
Have they not , I was of the option they have. That the premium price was for everything you said + improved SQ by not having a noisy computer in the chain
My Roon Nucleus+ definitely sounds better than the fanless QNAP NAS it replaced (which sounded better with all non-Roon-essential apps stopped or disabled, and also sounded better than a Naim Core). Adding a good LPS (in my case a Sean Jacobs DC3 with Mundorf capacitors) improved SQ still further.
The Nucleus has fewer processes running because it is a ‘lightweight’ Linux based operating system. It’s a lightweight operating system with fewer code in order to lessen the impact any software updates might have on Roon.
Who told you that fewer running processes result in less electrical noise?
I’ll read thru any source document you care to supply.
Processors are not spec’d based on their electrical noise, low or otherwise…
Again, I’ll read any document that speaks of some processors having lower electrical noise.
There are a couple of interesting posts from Danny about the noise of some of the higher spec processors, while reducing what was running certainly made a difference to the SQ from my NAS.
As for the impact of power supplies on digital equipment, try and experiment if you can: you’ll be surprised. I certainly was. Very…
I seriously doubt that the number of running processes is significantly smaller. I know exactly how many processes are running on my Roon Core machine (Ubuntu 19.10). Anybody care to tell me how many running processes there are on their Nucleus? (I thought not.)
In any case, the more relevant statistic is not how many running processes there are, but how many running threads. Roon is pretty heavily multi-threaded.
Even more relevant is total CPU usage. Which is totally dominated by Roon. The OS overhead, in terms of CPU usage is completely negligible (shows up as 0.0%).
Another ridiculous audiophile myth which has absolutely no basis in reality.
Just so we’re not just talking crap, here’s the actual CPU usage on my Roon Core machine.
“netdata” is the program capturing all the nifty real-time usage statistics. A true audiophile would never run such an abomination while listening to music, as it surely creates a horrid amount of electrical noise pollution.
Aside from “netdata”, everything else (“systemd”, “avahi”, “postfix” and “root”) on the system each register as 0.0% which is to say that they total less than 1/20 of 1% of the total CPU capacity (=400%). Roon’s CPU usage is more than 37 times greater than everything else combined.