On measured performance, I see no reason to acquire this to have better sound compared to a computer driving your DAC. Both the architecture of the device and my measurements confirm the same.
I have spent a few days comparing the following:
- NUC playing Roon —> M1 Mac Mini (with HQPlayer desktop) —> basic Audioquest Evergreen cable —> RME ADI-2 DAC FS (version 2) [NUC and M1 Mac Mini are connected to gigabit network using CAT6 cables]
- NUC playing Roon —> M1 Mac Mini (with HQPlayer desktop) —> SMS-200Ultra (using Sbooster BOTW P&P MKII Power Supply) —> basic Audioquest Evergreen cable —> RME ADI-2 DAC FS (version 2) [NUC, M1 Mac Mini, and SMS-200Ultra are connected to gigabit network using CAT6 cables]
Speakers are fairly resolving (Focal Electra 1038Be). Parasound Halo electronics.
In each case, music was upsampled to 384k using exact same settings.
Anyone could make out that the SMS-200Ultra provided a much better sound - better ‘blackground’, with much better low end resolution and high end detail. It is night and day. Now, not sure if this is due to the LPS or the NAA or both.
Sad. Because my M1 Mac Mini does not sit far from my HiFi setup (easy enough for me to connect my Mac directly to the DAC via USB). If the difference was close, I’d sell the SMS-200Ultra and the LPS and use that $1k towards something else more useful.
I don’t doubt the measurements, Amir. Perhaps, measuring well is a necessary condition for good sound but not sufficient (ie: perhaps, there is some other set of measurements that the audio community does not currently capture but hopefully shall in the near future).
FWIW: I do have an electronics engineering degree and have spent my entire working life trading interest rate derivatives with the decision-making based very heavily on stochastic calculus / probability theory. In short, I am a numbers guy.
PS: when I say that perhaps, measurements might not be sufficient (Amir has already measured a very similar device), please don’t ask me to submit measurements of both setups.
