Thinking about the importance of the front end certainly includes the server and software for me…I really hear the differences with optimized operating systems, player software and settings. I had not looked at the Small Green Computer (SGC) site for quite a while, but am reminded how sensible their approach is.
Your current choices sound like they will make a quite nice front end Scott, a notable step up from your original choices I suspect. Do you still have a ZBIT on order? You may still want to consider it and/or CSP3 after getting used to your new system. “Gain Riding” where you can increase or decrease clarity and body to bring out the best of a recording is essential for me. I have a heavily modded CSP3, a souped up ZBIT I made, and pretty heavily modded Torii MKIV. Each have great qualities but effect different areas of beauty in how they influence the music. My Torii is solid, transparent and neutral. The ZBIT is a good signal clarifier that can increase or decrease body and clarity in its own unobtrusive way, good across the spectrum, but particularly nice for tightening up bass here. And the CSP3, OTL beauty if all is right, dynamic in clear inner space, its magic, also good for adjusting clarity, body and dynamics. Subtly balancing their volumes to best bring out different recordings can be pretty amazing.
Conceptually Small Green Computer (SGC) is no doubt onto the right stuff. But to try and fill out the digital saga a little, looking at some of the reviews linked on their site, I have a bone to pick, not with SGC but with reviewers.
In many server reviews I read: “better than my Macbook,” better than my Mini,” better than any PC!” To me these comments are too simple, not explaining what model they are referring to, if and how much they have been tuned for audio, whether they are dedicated for audio only, etc.
These comments make some sense based on my tests with Macbooks and perhaps Minis that are not fully optimized for Audio. But really, Small Green Computers are computers too.
I think Minis just happened to be good for audio because of parts and design for the small desktop concept, efficient (more costly but quiet) parts essential to fulfill Steve Jobs’ design objectives for quality of experience and size. Then audio people took off, making them better for music. But based on the many ways one can tune the many models of “stock” Minis, the reviewer’s “my Mini” or “my Macbook Pro," implies that all these different computers are kind of the same…
In fact, I and many others have found out just how much even the same model Mini can sound like different computers depending on how it is setup, software, and whether synergy is optimal. As examples, I can change feet, USB cables, USB filtering and regenerators, power filters, weight on the top, power cables (and much more), and clearly hear the differences. This points to how different we can make them, but also to how critical synergy is...something every designer determines differently, but the bottom line for beauty with home music.
In 2011, I started computer audio with a new model Macbook Pro, using it for music only, then decided to try a used 2010 Mini, both audio only using a somewhat better than stock Kimber USB cable, some simple vibration management, the same player software and settings...otherwise stock. The Mini sounded noticeably better than the Macbook even though the Macbook had a better processor, more memory, a better drive, and I used battery power... I reasoned that the Macbook's monitor and keyboard, and need to pack things together to make it thin, caused more computer gremlins to damage fragile digital data and pass more noise with it.
Since then, I have had a few more Minis as dedicated servers with different: year models; computing power; memory types and amount; power and vibration treatments; noise filtering and regeneration for power supply and USB; serious exploration in power and USB cables (finally making both and liking them best); a few nice software players including lots of settings exploration and different schemes for turning off background processing; optimized internal drives; optimized external drives....and more. Each of these can notably improve the sonics of a Mini as music server, and collectively, they can create a different audio computer altogether...night and day for retaining fragile and subtle information...ideally revealing the data mostly unmolested by computer born artifacts... not truncated, masked, or damaged.
Taking clarification from reduced unnecessary-for-audio processing further, I got DbAudioLab's Revolution Server OS. 200,000 lines of code turned off from MAC OS Mavericks, a serious (sort of shocking) difference. Cutting out unneeded OS processing clearly causes less damage to fragile digital information and less noise! Compared to all of the hardware optimizations, this OS may be as transformative as the rest combined. Refinements manifested as liquid, dynamic, smooth body, spacious, complex and clear throughout….Big stuff.
https://www.decware.com/cgi-bin/yabb22/YaBB.pl?num=1525543779 if you want more on that. My latest 2012 i7 Mini, optimized for audio, including the Revolution OS and Audirvana player software, is sort of lightyears better than the first 2010 Mini even with many overlaid tune ups.
I should qualify this with an observation though….if a system/room can reveal the source fully, I think how well we resolve and balance the last 10-15% in computer audio can define it as good, great, or amazing. Generally, if the more fragile fine information is present, the rest is there more clearly. And when that last few percent present without damage, wow!
With damage however, even pretty subtle damage many of us have grown accustomed to with digital, we end up with "glare," "ringing," hardness, weird distortions, smearing, truncation of fine detail and spacial information, etc, seemingly all reflecting damage to very important musical information that makes digital music more like "analog."
So what is a Macbook, Mini or "any PC"??? Obviously they are many things depending on model and how they are set up.
All that said, “my Mini,” sounds truly amazing, enough so that it would surprise me if even the best offerings of SGC with ultra rendu could sound better. A dedicated server setup, parts chosen and optimized with intelligent listening as well as dedicated tech and dedicated software, should sound better, whether a tricked out Mini, or Small Green Computer!
Then there is balance. There are a few great audio designers around, and what seems to make one better than the other is their subtlety and completeness of perception, along with the abilities to utilize creative tech and parts to awaken beauty synergistically. This depends so much on what the designer is listening for, and sadly, there is not enough focus on the very fine space and detail information that is possible with great digital audio. Without it, other aspects of the sound are also compromised, and this is pretty “normal” unfortunately.
Small Green Computer to me is conceptually on a really good track, having designed and built their gear for quiet and clean computer audio, including minimized OS activity. Though the SGC OS limits software players, they have chosen very popular and apparently quality software to support. Also quite costly, but for quality sound and interface, HQ Player and Roon together are reported to do things right enough for them to have become a standard.
Hopefully this story fills in some blanks on the digital scene. Long story...but I bet your front end will be very good, and I am glad you chose this route over the original. If not there from the source, it does not exist!
Fun!