My take-away… Once all is settled in regard to UPnP performance, it is a matter of price and a rationale for dealing with platform related configuration(s)… The factor that is not being addressed here between the two platforms is a salient one, and concerning the integrity of the digital-audio signal being delivered to the DAC… You either trust that Filtlet3 platform architecture and software implementation does not do too much damage to the signal or you trust the Zen Stream platform has been specifically designed for purposeful handling of digital-audio signals and delivering a high level of optimized signal integrity through the system topology, all the way to the output buses…
Apparently the UPnP issue with ZEN Stream has nothing to do with functionality beyond identification in Audirvana…
As noted above, you can actually measure damage or benefit to the signal with the Fitlet3, something not possible with proprietary streamers. So I don’t have to trust, whereas someone using a conventional streamer does.
Anyway, you started out saying you didn’t want to argue, and you certainly don’t have to. Use or recommend a manufactured streamer if you prefer. This thread is not for the purpose of persuading anyone to do the same as I’ve done, it’s to point out a very helpful document from Intel should they choose to do so.
Yes, that’s the note Antoine had to add when the NEO Stream wouldn’t work with the other available settings. I have no such problems or special requirements to get UPnP to work properly with my setup. And to be fair, the problems aren’t at all limited to iFi products.
Now it’s true I’m using purpose-built software on a general purpose computer rather than a purpose-built hardware streamer. But since this forum is dedicated to Audirvana, purpose-built software made to run on a general purpose computer, I don’t suppose most folks here will have a big problem with that.
[quote=“Derek, post:5, topic:37581”]
This is my Audirvana 3.5 listing Zen Stream
I bought Zen Stream few weeks ago and this was listed like this from day first on Windows 11 PC
It is working like a dream! iFi Zen Stream Missing?
What I discern from the above thread, there are no real functional UPnP problems that are not being addressed…
Good point…
(In the context of your steaming configuration) It is made plainly obvious by your posting of this BIOS tweak, that your employment of Fitlet3 + software is a rather esoteric scenario, and is not supported by the hardware manufacturer and software provider in that context… So obviously, the burden is on the the individual user/integrator to handle any possible gotcha’s should they arise at any time. This is something that must be considered in juxtaposition to vertically integrated platform like Zen Stream from a well known and respected company of audiophiles.
I think what you have built with the Fitlet3 + software is neat and obviously reliable… Is it pragmatic in juxtaposition where something like ZEN Stream is in the marketplace? I’m not convinced that it is for the general audiophile community. However for those audiophiles that like do-it-yourself projects, your streaming configuration is compelling.
BTW… I really enjoyed your use of the colloquialism “lagniappe”… very esoteric… Is this common lexicon in your neck of the woods there in the South West?
Esoteric scenario, to the extent we are talking about use for home audio, is fair. I don’t know what percentage of Fitlet3 customers use it for such applications, when it’s built like a tank for high availability embedded industrial uses.
Not supported, though, is probably inaccurate. Running headless Linux OSs and apps, as I’m doing, is very much the primary purpose for which the Fitlet3 is built. And of course the Linux server OS and apps I’m running are built to run, and quite commonly are run, on hardware just such as mine. Regarding the BIOS changes, the very large, detailed Intel document is more support than I’ve ever seen in, for example, the owner’s manual for any piece of audio equipment or any computer motherboard I’ve ever had. It really does make the process quite simple.
All that being said, of course this is very much for people who want to do things themselves rather than buy a piece of equipment and hopefully have it just work as intended. The problem specifically with high end audio and the UPnP protocol is (as the literally hundreds of posts in this forum alone illustrate so well) that many manufacturers have done their own tweaks to the standard spec. And so we frequently have situations like the one I’ve experienced, where a purchased piece of equipment from a reputable manufacturer doesn’t “just work,” and there are annoying bugs. Or Antoine has to provide specific notes on setup. By controlling the UPnP implementation myself I’ve managed to eliminate these annoyances and actually reach the goal of a setup that simply and reliably does the job it’s supposed to do.
Certainly not everyone who wants to enjoy music with Audirvana will want to go to the extent of learning a bit of Linux or poking through an Intel document on BIOS adjustments, and this thread isn’t for them, except to the extent they may be idly curious. But for those who don’t mind learning about such things, I’ve put the reference here.
Yes… I understand the premise of your posting… I see it as part of a broader conversation about digital-audio playback via UPnP network configuration potentials and where budgetary concerns are part of the equation…
I was specifically juxtaposing your Fitlet3 exploitation to ZEN Stream…
In this juxtaposition, where we see, just as you have eventually found a reasonable solution to UPnP streaming (as I remember you previously employed the Sonore devices) to ZEN Stream, where it appears there is a very reliable UPnP implementation where it fundamentally matters in application. Where vertically integrated, distinctly audiophile-centric, performance elements are integral in the platform hardware and software topologies of the ZEN Stream… These differences, make a salient argument leaning towards the simplicity of employing the iFi-Audio streamer with Audirvana…
We would expect from an OEM of CPU devices to provide engineering details for implementation purposes on a variety of platform topologies and under specific software application support… Outside of this, in the case of the Fitlet3 implementation, the CPU resides on a circuit/component design platform topology that is not controlled by the CPU OEM… This makes a distinct difference… Parameters like trace design, power and ground plane/topologies, data transport clocking topologies, board materials, etc, etc… These things are not in the control of the CPU and software OEM and in the context of the “final foot” of a digital-audio distribution network architecture, we see a focused digital-audio design dogma in the iFi-Audio device(s) and there is little technical acumen required by the end-user to implement and where a centralized technical support is readily available in most cases, that can resolve complications if they arise in any given device application scenario.
I personally don’t see the transport of digital-audio signals over a network as being codified in the general home-network scenario and UPnP is just a stop-gap protocol today…
How much of its $400 price is devoted to the built-in DAC? This is fairly easy to guesstimate, since the IFi Zen non-streaming DAC sells for $200. So that will work as a rough guess, leaving $200 of the sales price to devote to the streamer.
The streamer section is built around an off the shelf 64-bit quad core ARM Cortex CPU. It runs an open source Linux OS aimed at audio aficionados called Volumio, which is packed with features (able to run Roon, Tidal, run searches through your recordings, multiroom playback, streams over Sonos and Chromecast, suggests new or related artists based on your listening, etc.). Get Started - Volumio
Mini-PCs with this CPU capable of running a full-featured Linux OS like this run in the neighborhood of $135 and up. The mini-PC market is subject to much larger sales, much greater competition, and therefore much lower price markups than the audiophile streamer market. It’s therefore doubtful that iFi has been able to customize the streamer section to any great extent or it would take up considerably more than the $200 of the Zen Stream’s sales price that we’ve been able to estimate by subtracting out the price of the Zen DAC. In other words, the streamer section of the Zen Stream is very probably built much like a $135+ range mini-PC.
In its marketing copy about the CPU, iFi emphasizes its power. This is natural, since it has to run the many Volumio OS features. More power output, more noise.
In my setup, I’m using a mini-PC that starts at $265 and is a little under $200 more than that as I’ve furnished it. Thus the parts cost of the design is very probably somewhere between double and 3 times the parts cost of the Zen’s streamer section. It is running a minimized Linux server OS, which means it doesn’t need to run any graphics, and it is not packed with features I don’t use. Thus, besides having its BIOS optimized for low jitter, the CPU is not called upon to provide a lot of power, and therefore noise is minimized.
The mini-PC is connected to an iFi DAC that retails for 4 times the price of the Zen DAC, so again at a rough guess, parts cost for my DAC is approximately 4 times that of the Zen Stream’s DAC section.
Now obviously the customer for the $400 Zen Stream is likely not going to be the same as the one for a mini-PC and DAC that together cost something more than $1200. And that’s fine - choices are good.
You are presuming iFi-Audio engineers have not designed their own system to run on the ARM FPGA… I presume they have designed the software specifically optimized for their platform design(s) and application scenarios… This allows them to bias performance parameters.
I configured a minimal build-to-order Atom x6425E [CX6425] Fitlet3 for $515 USD before taxes and shipping…
I believe as an audiophile, not all is as it seems, however there is a track-record to take into consideration in the case of the dedicated use-specific design of Zen Stream in any given audiophile playback system. And as an audiophile, nuanced subtleties make appreciably audible difference, in the final audition… Many years ago I designed circuit-board layouts for Hewlett Packard FPGA DUT fixtures (Device Under Test)… believe me, circuit topology alone has a huge impact on subtle performance parameters of all devices involved. The design engineers sweat the small stuff in my experience, and the results are evident in the performance of the system.
Volumio isn’t their own system. I see an ARM CPU; is there an FPGA called out somewhere?
Yes, the reason I presume the software isn’t customized to any great extent is two-fold. First, they say they started with Volumio and “optimized” it, but the capabilities appear to be much the same. Second, the cost constraints would dictate not paying for a great deal of software engineers’ design time.
Regarding hardware, again we have the cost constraint, particularly in the world of audio manufacturing.
Apparently IFI-Audio engineers are using a custom software implementation, that is vertically integrated in the platform design architecture in-order to bias the performance of the system as required, to realize their audiophile design goals…
I understand there is an Arm Cortex FPGA combination available (made together with Xilinx). I’m reasonably certain this is different than the quad core 64-bit ARM CPU used in the Zen Stream, unless you have specific information to the contrary.
As already noted, iFi, as mentioned in their overview and also their media release regarding the Zen Stream, are using an open source Linux OS for software, which may have some in-house tweaks done to it.
Now regarding their hardware platform, if you look at photos of the Zen Stream’s circuit board you’ll see that’s not designed in house either, but is bought in from a company called Firefly. (You can search for Firefly Core boards and match the ID number seen on the board in the photo that appears in iFi’s overview.)
Okay I see…
What programming language is used to create Volumio? In today’s world of code, all software is derived from source-code… I see when source-code is modified to suit, it is purposefully customized for specific reasons…
I see the Core-3288J board uses a ARM® Cortex™-A17 Quad-Core up to 1.8GHz that is not off-the-shelf, because the empty pad seen in the ZEN Stream board image, is probably for the GPU that is specified on the Core-3288J board… I can see at an economy of scale, the purchase of ‘stuffed’ boards makes economic sense… and FireFly being an OEM most likely will do custom stuffing for customers…
Customization
With over a decade of experience in product design, R&D, and manufacturing, Firefly not
only consistently launches market-ready standard products, but also provides
customized services, including hardware, software, devices, and OEM. https://en.t-firefly.com/businesscustomization
I am going to presume the quality of these board designs suit the audiophile needs of the iFi engineering/design team… and will presume that the critical software and component topology that is not already part of the Core-3288J board is customized by iFI-Audio engineering… It does not look like iFI-Audio is employing an off-the-shelf FireFly I/O board… and if it is, I presume it is customized for iFI-Audio…
