project86
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2007
- Posts
- 7,919
- Likes
- 4,746
Thank you for the sneak peak into the X Server. This seems like a potentially great product. Please answer a few follow-up questions.
Music Players
Which ones are compatible? Which ones sound best with the X Server? I know Roon requires a NAS or computer to create a Roon Server. Do any of the other X Server compatible music players require this configuration? From what I’ve read, Roon does not provide the best sound quality AS A MUSIC PLAYER, though I've read it's great for music library management.
Euphony OS
Is the Euphony OS on an SD card, an SSD?
Is Euphony strictly an OS or OS + Music Player?
Do you have a link to further info. regarding Euphony?
EDIT: I found the Euphony website. I think you can plug an SSD (pre-loaded with Euphony OS) into ANY PC (???)
and run it. The site suggests that you should put all your music files on the SSD, but that's limiting if you have 4 tb of files.
Does Euphony play from MEMORY?
Remote control
Does X Server require a NAS or router/switch in order to use a remote (via tablet, phone, etc.)?
Or, does the remote tie-in directly with the Matrix X Server?
Volume Control
Does the X Server have built-in pre-amp (volume control) functionality? And, if so, how good is the volume control?
Digital outputs
Are you implying the X Server usb output sounds better than the usb outputs of other transports? And, what about the AES output?
USB Ports
Are the usb ports usb 3.0 or the newer usb “C?
Thank you!
Let's take this line by line.
1) Not sure I understand the question completely but I think thus far Euphony has the best sound, followed by Roon which is still very VERY good. The difference is one of those "critical listening on a quiet night, with my best recordings, using my best gear" type of things. Roon is more than suitable for me in most cases. I don't use HQPlayer so I haven't tested that mode and probably won't.
I don't think you quite "get" Roon yet though. Read up on it and you'll see how some parts of this question don't quite make sense.
2) Euphony lives on an Msata card on the motherboard. Or at least it does with this prototype. The Euphony guys have talked about the ideal solution being a huge 1TB or 2TB NVMe SSD holding the OS plus the music library, but that's some futuristic stuff at the moment. Euphony is the OS, it's a variant of Linux built specifically for audio use. So it is also the player. You can check out their page HERE. Eventually they intend to sell drives with the OS loaded so you can build your own setup.
3) Euphony requires some way of controlling playback. Which would be a tablet, phone, or another computer on the same network as the Euphony system. No NAS necessary, that's a whole different thing relating to storage. But yes, you'll need a wireless router which most people already have. Or I guess a wired connection if you want to use a desktop PC to control it, but that's a weird setup. The X-Server does not accept direct WiFi or Bluetooth connections for control, if that's what you are asking.
4) There is no built in volume control for the X-Server. The next stand-alone X-Sabre DAC may or may not have that, but the version built into the X-Server does not.
5) X-Server USB out sounds excellent. Better than my laptop running JPLAY and connecting via USB to the same DAC. Better than the little SOtM sMS200 as well, though the differences get smaller in that case because the SOtM is pretty damn good. The AES/EBU output also sounds excellent, though I don't have another transport with that same format at the moment for direct comparison. But comparing an Oppo 105 via coaxial out, I like the X-server better, whether the Matrix uses USB or coax or whatever. Again, the difference between a good transport like the Oppo and a really good transport like the X-Server is not always obvious.
6)USB ports on the prototype are normal 3.0 variety. Not sure if they will go with 3.1 or C on the final version.