I didn’t really get what you mean.
HQPlayer paid software. It has its own advantages over many other players. One of them - Roon plays great through it.
But to run HQPlayer we need a Windows10 machine? I use Roon Rock aldready in a dedicated silent PC, I need another one connected to the network?
No, I think you could run it on a Linux or Mac PC as well. You cannot run it on PC using RoonOS as it is a closed and locked down OS.
1 Like
It wouldn’t be too hard to get both Roon and HQPlayer on the same machine. You’d have to ditch ROCK but your efforts would probably be worthwhile.
Have a look at Sonore website. You will get the SonicTransporter with Roon and HQPlayer embedded installed.
This may be a very good solution for LinQ. Full Roon functionality and great HQPlayer SW.
1 Like
Hi all,
I just wanted to get back and let you know: The Aqua LinQ works amazing with the HQPlayer NAA module.
Aqua does provide the best setup in their manual for the LinQ that they are about to share.
I’ve been now testing the LinQ for quite some time and it is connected to my Aqua La Scala MKII Optilogic DAC. The sound ist amazing and I think even a little better when it comes to imaging with the HQPlayer. But of course that’s hard to tell just from the memory.
Anyway: I‘m really happy with the solution.
Best Robert
2 Likes
How annoying is the I2S compatibilty issue and why on earth isn’t there an industry standard. I have a Metrum Pavane L3 DAC and Antipodes streamer, they both offer connectivity via I2S but the ports are different (HDMI/RJ45).
I2S is meant to be an internal protocol for transmission of audio. It has no connection specification because it’s not meant to be used externally. The fact that some audio device manufacturers are using it externally is the problem. It’s like trying to trying to use laundry detergent to clean your dishes.
1 Like
Very nicely said. But it has nothing to do with reality. I use almost every possible way to transfer data, but i2s sounds the best of all.
Although, of course, as you said, it’s a protocol for internal transmission. There are no additional processes. And that’s just a plus.
Oh there is a reality, and it impacts everyone jumping on this trend. For example, the lack of a standardized connector means you get vendor lock-in every time you go I2S. It’s the proprietary connectors of the early days of computing all over again.
Another impact is that because I2S lacks basic data protections like error correction/retransmission, the signal can be degraded easily (for example, by electrical noise). This is because I2S is not meant to be run long distances or through cabling. USB and ethernet have added complexity, but they also huge advantages in this domain, as they are built to withstand the realities of signal transmission that exist outside the circuitboard.
3 Likes
And here you are completely right. But the sound of i2s is still better. Especially if you compare with the usb, in which the separation / assembly of packages leads to an increase in jitter, which is already heard by the ears in a direct comparison. Therefore, you have to constantly choose between convenient and speculatively best))) this leads to the fact that many can not stop only on one protocol It is not right.
But while there is no universal protocol that meets all the needs. In professional activities is a firewire or aes, but they are not so common and also have problems. Do not pass dsd, for example This is for most a big minus.
I’m pretty sure nobody tries to send raw i2S over cables anymore. So signal degradation is not the issue it once was. Now signals are launched from differential drivers the issue is only about connector standards.
So it’s not i2s? it’s some type of i2s with stuff added to make it safer? I guess with a proprietary connector, it might as well be a proprietary protocol.
It is just i2S launched using differential drivers to give it the legs to be able to travel more than the 10cm i2S is happy at. It works well and has the same resolution capabilities as USB. It’s only issue is the unwillingness or inability to agree a common standard. This may be in part because the first user of HDMI to transmit i2S wanted to keep it as a proprietary connector between their transports and DACs.