Jump to content
  • The Computer Audiophile
    The Computer Audiophile

    Simple Design Rendu Ethernet to S/PDIF Converter Review

    P1040190-thumb.pngHigh end audio can be a polarizing hobby. Audiophiles like to select a product or technology and support it vigorously as if they have a large financial interest in its success. I was born an audiophile. I completely understand the desire for one's selection to be validated by the audiophile community. I also completely understand how unhealthy that desire for validation is and the neurosis it can cause. Audiophiles, myself included, must realize the products we select today will sound just as good in five years regardless of competing products, newer technologies, and others' opinions. One polarizing topic in computer audio is digital interfaces. Two digital interfaces that have strong vocal support from users are USB and Ethernet. Users of one technology frequently turn a blind eye to the merits of the other technology and won't even consider its use. Many users selected one technology a few years ago based on the information available at that time and refuse to update their own knowledge for any number of reasons. This leads to armchair engineer arguments based on half truths and old information. These discussions are a disservice to all readers. Based on my experience with both USB and Ethernet interfaces it's clear to me that both can sound excellent and both will have a strong presence in high end audio for the foreseeable future. One Ethernet interface that caught my attention a couple months ago is the UPnP AV 2.0 / DLNA compliant Simple Design Rendu Ethernet to S/PDIF Converter. Admittedly I was drawn in by the features and specs, notably its ability to play DSD, 24/192 PCM, and gapless audio streamed over Ethernet. I've since listened through the Rendu for countless hours and put it through a number of network audio tests. At first the Rendu was a bit picky and had some playback issues. Today using the newest firmware I'm happy to report the Rendu works very well and continues to sound very good. The Simple Design Rendu Ethernet to S/PDIF Converter is a product to watch in both two channel and whole house network audio. [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

     

    P1040183-800px.jpg

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

     

     

     

     

    Simple Design Rendu Ethernet to S/PDIF Converter

     

    P1040218-thumb-mid.pngThe Simple Design Rendu is an Ethernet to S/PDIF all digital converter. The Rendu could be considered an audio appliance. It has one switch on the outside that turns the unit on/off and zero user configurable options. The Rendu is simple to understand. Ethernet in, S/PDIF out. Its only input is an Ethernet port that's connected to a home network via CAT5 or better cable. Its only output is a transformer coupled true 75 ohm BNC S/PDIF port that connects to a Digital to Analog Converter (DAC). Connecting to a DAC with an RCA S/PDIF port requires a very inexpensive BNC to RCA adapter. Simple Design can also supply a Cardas BNC to RCA cable. In addition to the Ethernet to S/PDIF model reviewed here Simple design offers an HDMI i2s model and a version with a built-in DAC among others.

     

    The Rendu features a low noise, low output impedance linear power supply. This power supply no doubt has roots in the extensive research Simple Design has done for its USB converters and Sonore music server PSUs. Critically important in converters such as the Rendu is the clocking scheme. Simple Design uses two fixed frequency low jitter clocks in the Rendu. This is frequently seen as one of the best, if not the best, way to lower jitter. One feature that may seem un-audiophile at first blush, but is very nice, is the integrated, 32 bit, high precision volume control. I really like this feature for controlling volume in independent zones. For example, when using several Rendu units and streaming the same or different audio to each unit it's possible to control the volume from an iPad / iPhone app such as JRemote. Using JRemote enables the user to not only control the volume of each zone independently but also from anywhere in one's house as long as the iDevice is on the network. During the review period I spent limited time with the volume control feature as my main use was two channel audio where my preamp remote was always available. In the next week or two I will publish a complete article on multi-zone audio using several Rendu units. In this upcoming article I will touch on the digital volume control of the Rendu.

     

    Careful selection of internal components by Simple Design enables the Rendu converter to stand out with a great set of features that work. Fans of Ethernet audio understand very well that UPnP / DLNA audio renderers often fail to meet the marketing hype from many manufacturers. The Rendu Ethernet to S/PDIF converter can do everything as advertised by Simple Design. This is a company that understands computer audiophiles and the Internet. Simple Design knows people will rant far more than they rave about a product. If the Rendu doesn't work as promised the company will never hear the end. A few of the Rendu's great features are DSD / DoP support for DSF and DFF files, 44.1 through 192 kHz support, AIFF, ALAC, WAV, and any FLAC compression level support, and (the mother of many heated internet rants) gapless audio support.

     

    The Rendu digital converter has some specific requirements in order to use its full potential. The Rendu hardware is ahead of most software applications with its DSD / DoP streaming capability. Readers looking to use the Rendu as a simpler PCM only converter without gapless support can likely use almost any UPnP / DLNA server / controller combination to feed audio to the unit. I have several DSD albums and live albums that require gapless playback for full effect. Thus I setup my system to meet the Rendu's requirements (at first). Then I strayed from the requirements and succeeded in producing a better user experience with my own configuration. According to Simple Design, "Gapless is currently supported via Android with Bubble UPNP as controller, J-River on PC and Mac as controller with local storage." In addition, "DSD/DoP pass thru requires the use of MinimServer." Once I verified the aforementioned configurations worked OK I moved to my preferred setup that I knew would also work. I used JRiver Media Center v18.0.175 as the server and an iPad with JRemote v2.31 as the control point. All my music is stored on a Synology DS1812+ NAS that isn't running any UPnP / DLNA software. JRiver's newest Media Center build features what it calls Bitstream DSD. This feature must be enabled deep within the Media Network settings for Media Center to stream DSD content as DoP to a compliant device. DoPE (DSD over PCM Ethernet) is supported by JRiver Media Center and MinimServer with the dopwav transcoder option. I used both during this review, but mainly JRiver because I like all its features, support forums, and using JRemote. The Simple Design Rendu supports gapless playback using SetNextAVTransportURI. There are other methods to accomplish gapless playback but I believe using SetNextAVTransportURI is the best method. JRiver Media Center sends a SetNextAVTransport call to the Rendu and identifies the upcoming track. It's then up to the Rendu to play the next track gapless. I put the Rendu through the ultimate torture test by attempting to play a gapless DSD album. Let's just say playback was a little less than great, but I believe JRiver Media Center had a hand in this subpar performance as well.

     

    Note: No question is a dumb question. Some readers have asked what is gapless playback. Gapless playback is simply playing the tracks on an album or in a queue without a time gap between tracks. When listening to The Dark Side of the Moon the tracks bleed into each other as do the tracks on most live albums. Without gapless support there is a pause of one or two seconds while the next track loads before playback continues. Gapless playback eliminates this time between tracks for smooth playback of all tracks just as the artist intended.

     

    P1040203-middle.png

     

     

     

    Testing Rendu's Features

     

    The Rendu not only had to sound good it had to work as advertised. Playback of 16 bit / 44.1 through 24 bit / 192 kHz material may seem like a standard feature that should work on every device, but that's not the case. Many UPnP / DLNA devices based on the Stream Unlimited Stream 700 board have a difficult time playing uncompressed FLAC files at 176.4 and 192 kHz. The Rendu doesn't use the Stream 700 board and doesn't have any problem playing 24/192 material bit perfect. The ability to play all relevant sample rates in whatever file format I use is a big deal. Devices that require transcoding one's entire library to a different format or compression level can tun off potential users and steer people from network based audio for no good reason. I connected the Rendu to my Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC for much of the testing as this DAC enables me to check for bit transparency. The sound quality of the Rendu was very good in my Berkeley / Spectral / TAD system. I really didn't know what to expect as I've never seen measurements for this device and I've only heard from Simple Design about the sound quality. Based on my extensive listening to the Rendu it's a terrific converter at all PCM sample rates.

     

    DSD over PCM Ethernet (DoPE) is a feature that intrigued me very much. At first I asked Simple Design why I would need this because the DoP devices I had used were all USB based and the Rendu was S/PDIF. Simple Design said DoP isn't interface specific and will work on S/PDIF, USB, and AES. Once I learned that major piece of information I was on a mission to find a DAC that supported DoP on its S/PDIF inputs. As luck would have it the dCS Vivaldi stack with DAC, Upsampler, and Clock arrived shortly thereafter. The Vivaldi DAC and Upsampler both support DSD DoP on all inputs. With the Vivaldi in place I could test the Rendu's DSD playback capability and sound quality. Much like it was with PCM the Rendu sounded very good with DSD material. My usual Nat King Cole album The Very Thought of You streamed via DoP from my computer to the Rendu then through the Vivaldi Upsampler was impressive. My only problem with DoPE playback was related to software. When selecting a DSD track playback started in JRiver MC but sound didn't come through the system for about 15-20 seconds. The tracks suffered a majorly delayed start, but weren't shortened in any way. MinimServer didn't produce this long of delay but my MinimServer library was vastly different as it resided on my Mac with five albums. Right now I consider MinimServer a testing tool because the JRiver interface with JRemote is so much better. However, for many people MinimServer is perfect because it is very low profile as it runs in the background and can be directed at a user's existing iTunes library. Perhaps if DoPE was of great importance to me and much of my collection was DSD encoded I would switch to MinimServer. I'm willing to bet JRiver will improve DoPE streaming in the coming weeks and months. The feature was only recently enabled. Without many test users for such a feature it's hard to get user feedback for improvement in a short period of time.

     

    Note: The EMM Labs DAC2X doesn't support DoP on S/PDIF or AES inputs yet. I've been told the Mytek Stereo 192 DAC and Benchmark DAC2 HGC support DoP on S/PDIF and AES inputs.

     

    Gapless playback over Ethernet has been the bane of many manufacturer's existence. Thus, I tested gapless playback extensively throughout the review period. The original version of Rendu firmware didn't support gapless playback. Simple Design furnished a firmware update, version 1.36.1.5, that enabled gapless playback at all sample rates. My music library contains gapless albums of all sample rates from 44.1 through 192 and even DSD. As noted earlier gapless DSD didn't work, but I don't hold that against Simple Design and the Rendu. I started with simple 44.1 albums such as The Dark Side of the Moon. Rendu didn't blink upon each track change. Playback was gapless or seamless from Dark Side track to track. I moved up to The Dark Side of the Moon at 24/96 ripped from the Blu-ray in the Immersion Box Set. My experience was identical to playing 44.1. The Rendu didn't blink and the sound was very good. After playing some gapless 24/176.4 material I moved to Stevie Ray Vaughan and Albert King at 24/192 kHz. The entire album start to finish played gapless through the Rendu. I also stopped and started a few tacks to simulate what a real user may do while listening. The Rendu / JRMC combo performed flawless. I thought I'd find issues with gapless as I moved up in sample rate. Fortunately there was no difference in gapless performance from 44.1 to 192. There was no way to identify the sample rate of the current album based on gapless performance. Either it's gapless or it's not and the Rendu is gapless at 192.

     

    Near the end of the review period I connected the Simple Design Rendu to the EMM Labs DAC2X's S/PDIF input and my CAPS Carbon server to the DAC2X's USB input. I wanted some reference with which to compare the sound quality through the Rendu. This comparison isn't the most real world comparison as most people with computers within 16 feet of their audio systems will simply select USB. The remaining users must user a longer distance technology like Ethernet. I don't see the Rendu as a competitor to products like the Berkeley Audio Design Alpha USB converter because the technologies are like apples and oranges. Users will likely require one or the other. During the comparison I was able to move directly from the USB to S/PDIF input and back with ease because the EMM Labs 2X remote has discrete input selection. I much prefer long term listening to compare components, but I did both short and long term for this review. Overall the Rendu holds its own very well versus the USB input of the DAC2X. Readers should consider that the 2X resamples all data to DSD rates as part of its jitter reduction scheme. I don't know if this equalizes the sound quality of the inputs a little bit or majorly. Music via the direct USB input was a bit tighter with a more solid image. When switching between inputs the first thing I noticed was the tightness of the images when using USB. I don't mean smaller image or soundstage rather the sound in the image just appeared tighter. The other noticeable sonic difference was a slight soft edge at the top and bottom frequencies through the Rendu. This softness was really minor. It's likely that many users wouldn't notice it unless presented with these two options for comparison and very familiar music. The Rendu was at a large disadvantage because the direct USB input is asynchronous and controls the clocking. Yet music played through the Rendu sounded very good. This is a terrific Ethernet to S/PDIF converter that works and sounds very good.

     

     

     

    Conclusion

     

    cash-logo-black-thumb.jpgThe Simple Design UPnP AV 2.0 / DLNA compliant Rendu Ethernet to S/PDIF Converter is a fairly unique device. Its features such as true gapless support from 44.1 through 192 kHz and DSD DoPE playback for streaming DSD over Ethernet help set the Rendu apart from the competition. Features are one thing but sound quality and a device that delivers on the manufacturer's promises is another. The Rendu sounded very good in all systems I used during the review. Both PCM and DSD playback was impressive through the Rendu. It's linear power supply likely plays a significant role in its sonic quality. The Rendu delivers on all its advertised features from DSD to 24/192 PCM playback to gapless audio all streamed over Ethernet. These features simply work as they should. The Simple Design Rendu Ethernet to S/PDIF Converter is a great solution for Ethernet based audiophiles, those tempted by Ethernet audio, and multi-zone music aficionados among others. Highly recommend and CASH Listed.

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

     

     

    Product Information:

     

     

     

    • Product - Sonore Rendu Ethernet to S/PDIF converter
    • Price - $1,369
    • Product Page - Link ex.png

     

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

     

     

     

     

    Associated Equipment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    1-Pixel.png




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    The Rendu is a no compromise design, built to give the best sound quality possible when paired with a high end DAC. It features an onboard ultra low noise, ultra low output impedance power supply, which is critical in achieving low jitter. Additionally, all the clocking components are very high quality, in order to achieve the lowest jitter possible. Now, is this difference going to be meaningful to you, I cannot answer that question, only you can. All I can say is that the Rendu is designed to provide the highest sound quality possible, whereas the SBT was a mass produced consumer product, designed to suit the sound quality needs of average consumers.

    It is up to the audiophile to decide if the gains in performance are worth the cost of the unit.

     

    To Barrows and others...

    a little off or side-topic...

     

    Some people do not believe that a streamer can equal a very good dedicated CD transport.

    What do you think, has anybody made a comparison between the Rendu and a high-end transport (imagine something like a Esoteric P02) connected to the same DAC, and same interface (had to be spdif in this case...)...?

     

    And to Jesus, also a question.

    High-end transports usually can improve their performance with an external and more precise clock.

    Would this option make any sense on a streamer (for example to have an optional output to an external clock)??

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    To Barrows and others...

    a little off or side-topic...

     

    Some people do not believe that a streamer can equal a very good dedicated CD transport.

    What do you think, has anybody made a comparison between the Rendu and a high-end transport (imagine something like a Esoteric P02) connected to the same DAC, and same interface (had to be spdif in this case...)...?

     

    And to Jesus, also a question.

    High-end transports usually can improve their performance with an external and more precise clock.

    Would this option make any sense on a streamer (for example to have an optional output to an external clock)??

     

    It would and the unit has the ability to except a master clock input via a custom module. I have not made the custom module for this, but I'm using the unit's ability to be clocked with the DSD DAC module I'm developing:) Also, keep in mind that the format of the master clock provided has to match and there are a few variations on the scheme in the market.

     

    Jesus R

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It would and the unit has the ability to except a master clock input via a custom module. I have not made the custom module for this, but I'm using the unit's ability to be clocked with the DSD DAC module I'm developing:) Also, keep in mind that the format of the master clock provided has to match and there are a few variations on the scheme in the market.

     

    Jesus R

     

    Thanks for the quick reply. Where is said "ability to except" I think you mean "ability to accept", right?

     

    If I remember well my experience with the m2 tech evo stack, at that moment the data flow was

    evo usb/spdif, output to > evo clock, out to > external dac spdif input.

     

    Would something similar be feasible, like:

    rendu output to > external clock, out to > external dac spdif input?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thanks for the quick reply. Where is said "ability to except" I think you mean "ability to accept", right?

     

    If I remember well my experience with the m2 tech evo stack, at that moment the data flow was

    evo usb/spdif, output to > evo clock, out to > external dac spdif input.

     

    Would something similar be feasible, like:

    rendu output to > external clock, out to > external dac spdif input?

    If using a true external clock the audio never flows through the clock. For example, I'm using the dCS Vivaldi stack right now. The Master Clock feeds the clock signal to the DAC and the Upsampler (UPnP/DLNA device). I send audio over Ethernet to the Upsampler and it sends the audio to the DAC. The Master Clock's only job is to send the most accurate clock signal to the components.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Somsak: Let me try and answer your question. Please consider that I do some consulting with Sonore. If you are very familiar with the SBT, perhaps you aware of all the people adding many modifications to it to improve its performance? I have seen many folks spend hundreds of dollars on external power supplies for the touch, and clock upgrades are also quite popular for folks trying to eek out some more performance from the SBT. No doubt, the Touch is great at what it does, and offers outstanding value. Perhaps, it offers adequate sound quality for you to be happy with it, there is nothing wrong with that, but, considering how much money and effort some folks are spending on upgrades to the Touch, it is clear that some people are looking for higher performance in terms of sound quality.

    The Rendu is a no compromise design, built to give the best sound quality possible when paired with a high end DAC. It features an onboard ultra low noise, ultra low output impedance power supply, which is critical in achieving low jitter. Additionally, all the clocking components are very high quality, in order to achieve the lowest jitter possible. Now, is this difference going to be meaningful to you, I cannot answer that question, only you can. All I can say is that the Rendu is designed to provide the highest sound quality possible, whereas the SBT was a mass produced consumer product, designed to suit the sound quality needs of average consumers.

    It is up to the audiophile to decide if the gains in performance are worth the cost of the unit.

     

    Firstly, yes, people add mods to the SBT. But that doesn't mean they actually do anything! I've listened to the Touch with linear power supply vs. stock for example, and must say that this adds very little if anything to the sound IMO. Likewise, I find the TT software mod doesn't sound any different to me nor am I able to measure a difference when using a good outboard DAC.

     

    Secondly, you say "It features an onboard ultra low noise, ultra low output impedance power supply, which is critical in achieving low jitter". I'd like to see this being shown to be the case. How is this even logically correlated? Given that this "simple" device is just a converter to SPDIF, it's much more important that the DAC performs up to par in the jitter arena especially given the reclocking mechanisms used these days like Chris' DAC2X or the Benchmarks...

     

    "All I can say is that the Rendu is designed to provide the highest sound quality possible, whereas the SBT was a mass produced consumer product, designed to suit the sound quality needs of average consumers." Sorry, got to disagree on this one. It's not rocket science to convert ethernet PCM packets to SPDIF. It's not hard to find a good DAC that converts said SPDIF PCM with excellent if not almost perfect jitter reduction these days. The Touch does an admirable job when connected to a good DAC and has impressive features built in like the ability to control music selection on the touch screen, TosLink output, built-in WiFi, reasonable built-in DAC, reasonable headphone jack. Also, with the EDO plugin, sample rates up to 24/192 are available by TosLink (yes, this works with my ASUS Essence One), coaxial, and compatible USB DAC.

     

    I'm not saying the Touch is the "ultimate" streaming device, and it has it's limitations. But to argue with blanket statements like that quote in the previous paragraph is just ridiculous. Unless one needs DoPE, UPNP/DLNA support, don't like SqueezeServer/LMS, there's really no reason not to take that $1000 difference and buy some good music!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If using a true external clock the audio never flows through the clock. For example, I'm using the dCS Vivaldi stack right now. The Master Clock feeds the clock signal to the DAC and the Upsampler (UPnP/DLNA device). I send audio over Ethernet to the Upsampler and it sends the audio to the DAC. The Master Clock's only job is to send the most accurate clock signal to the components.

     

    Thanks Chris...

    By the way, to you have the CD transport as well....?

    If you do, you could also give your input about how the two sources (CD vs Ethernet) compare...

     

    I was lucky to listen to that rig for a brief 30 minutes...quite impressed! The Fat Lady (Morel) really sang very well...I wish I could listen to more of it...detailed, non fatiguing, true sound impact originating from completely beyond the loudspeakers positions, with credible presence!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thanks Chris...

    By the way, to you have the CD transport as well....?

    If you do, you could also give your input about how the two sources (CD vs Ethernet) compare...

     

    I was lucky to listen to that rig for a brief 30 minutes...quite impressed! The Fat Lady (Morel) really sang very well...I wish I could listen to more of it...detailed, non fatiguing, true sound impact originating from completely beyond the loudspeakers positions, with credible presence!

    Me have the transport? No way :~)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hi Guys - Let's not get too far off into discussing items like,

    "It's not rocket science to convert ethernet PCM packets to SPDIF. It's not hard to find a good DAC that converts said SPDIF PCM with excellent if not almost perfect jitter reduction these days."
    It's a never ending argument with no winners. I encourage discussing the merits of the Rendu versus competitors but not general statements that take the conversation over the edge.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thanks for the quick reply. Where is said "ability to except" I think you mean "ability to accept", right?

    yes..

     

    If I remember well my experience with the m2 tech evo stack, at that moment the data flow was

    evo usb/spdif, output to > evo clock, out to > external dac spdif input.

     

    Would something similar be feasible, like:

    rendu output to > external clock, out to > external dac spdif input?

    There are a couple of ways this could work. One way is to send an external master clock into the source and the DAC at the same time. Another way is that the DAC sends a master clock to the source. The M2Tech Evo Clock would appear to be compatible with the Rendu based on a quick look at the unit's spec...

     

    Jesus R

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Firstly, yes, people add mods to the SBT. But that doesn't mean they actually do anything! I've listened to the Touch with linear power supply vs. stock for example, and must say that this adds very little if anything to the sound IMO. Likewise, I find the TT software mod doesn't sound any different to me nor am I able to measure a difference when using a good outboard DAC.

     

    Secondly, you say "It features an onboard ultra low noise, ultra low output impedance power supply, which is critical in achieving low jitter". I'd like to see this being shown to be the case. How is this even logically correlated? Given that this "simple" device is just a converter to SPDIF, it's much more important that the DAC performs up to par in the jitter arena especially given the reclocking mechanisms used these days like Chris' DAC2X or the Benchmarks...

     

    "All I can say is that the Rendu is designed to provide the highest sound quality possible, whereas the SBT was a mass produced consumer product, designed to suit the sound quality needs of average consumers." Sorry, got to disagree on this one. It's not rocket science to convert ethernet PCM packets to SPDIF. It's not hard to find a good DAC that converts said SPDIF PCM with excellent if not almost perfect jitter reduction these days. The Touch does an admirable job when connected to a good DAC and has impressive features built in like the ability to control music selection on the touch screen, TosLink output, built-in WiFi, reasonable built-in DAC, reasonable headphone jack. Also, with the EDO plugin, sample rates up to 24/192 are available by TosLink (yes, this works with my ASUS Essence One), coaxial, and compatible USB DAC.

     

    I'm not saying the Touch is the "ultimate" streaming device, and it has it's limitations. But to argue with blanket statements like that quote in the previous paragraph is just ridiculous. Unless one needs DoPE, UPNP/DLNA support, don't like SqueezeServer/LMS, there's really no reason not to take that $1000 difference and buy some good music!

    This post seems a little personal. In addition, you draw some conclusions that are just wrong...*

     

    I'm not surprised by your linear supply test into the Touch. I hope your not trying to insinuate that a clean PS has no affect on the source. That upgrade is three steps forward and two steps backwards. The reason for this is that a clean external power supply does nothing to improve the quality of the two (2) downstream regulators that are next in line at producing power for unit. If your keeping track that is three (3) regulators just from a quick look inside. The Rendu uses one (1) regulator on the ethernet board and it's a kick ass regulator!

     

    You take issues with something that everyone knows and accepts. The power that feeds the on boards clocks need to be as clean as possible....everyone knows this.

     

    Then you want to promote the idea that it's okay to send shit into the DAC. I have never heard a DAC that didn't benefit from a better source.

     

    Then you go off on the merits of the Touch. I don't have anything again the Touch and I have used LMS on many projects. In fact, I'm working on a project right now that uses LMS to pump 384K and DSD via a USB. However, the emphasis of the Rendu is simply the quality of the SPDIF output. **

     

    BTW this post wasn't meant to change your opinion. It was for the benefit of CA readers who actually care and support this project.*

     

    Jesus R

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Firstly, yes, people add mods to the SBT. But that doesn't mean they actually do anything! I've listened to the Touch with linear power supply vs. stock for example, and must say that this adds very little if anything to the sound IMO. Likewise, I find the TT software mod doesn't sound any different to me nor am I able to measure a difference when using a good outboard DAC.

     

    Secondly, you say "It features an onboard ultra low noise, ultra low output impedance power supply, which is critical in achieving low jitter". I'd like to see this being shown to be the case. How is this even logically correlated? Given that this "simple" device is just a converter to SPDIF, it's much more important that the DAC performs up to par in the jitter arena especially given the reclocking mechanisms used these days like Chris' DAC2X or the Benchmarks...

     

    "All I can say is that the Rendu is designed to provide the highest sound quality possible, whereas the SBT was a mass produced consumer product, designed to suit the sound quality needs of average consumers." Sorry, got to disagree on this one. It's not rocket science to convert ethernet PCM packets to SPDIF. It's not hard to find a good DAC that converts said SPDIF PCM with excellent if not almost perfect jitter reduction these days. The Touch does an admirable job when connected to a good DAC and has impressive features built in like the ability to control music selection on the touch screen, TosLink output, built-in WiFi, reasonable built-in DAC, reasonable headphone jack. Also, with the EDO plugin, sample rates up to 24/192 are available by TosLink (yes, this works with my ASUS Essence One), coaxial, and compatible USB DAC.

     

    I'm not saying the Touch is the "ultimate" streaming device, and it has it's limitations. But to argue with blanket statements like that quote in the previous paragraph is just ridiculous. Unless one needs DoPE, UPNP/DLNA support, don't like SqueezeServer/LMS, there's really no reason not to take that $1000 difference and buy some good music!

     

    Respectfully, if you haven't heard the Rendu, then you're in no position to comment on its sound quality or the viability of its design I have heard it, and it's at least the equal of my Sonore server, which in turn bested every Mac based system I've had including a Mac Pro with Lynx AES16e, Mac Mini, and Macbook Pro.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Quick question

     

    Does anyone know if the dCS Debussy supports DoP over SPDIF?

     

    I think the Debussy's SPDIF is capped at 24/96 though.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    reasonable built-in DAC, reasonable headphone jack. Also, with the EDO plugin, sample rates up to 24/192 are available by TosLink (yes, this works with my ASUS Essence One), coaxial, and compatible USB DAC.

    In a forum like this you should not find "strange" that many people find the "reasonable" as something to avoid.

     

    I'm not saying the Touch is the "ultimate" streaming device, and it has it's limitations. But to argue with blanket statements like that quote in the previous paragraph is just ridiculous. Unless one needs DoPE, UPNP/DLNA support, don't like SqueezeServer/LMS, there's really no reason not to take that $1000 difference and buy some good music!

     

    I would say UPNP / DLNA opens the door to many other products. For me, it's a must to try to work with standards...or you find yourself confined with a closed solution with limited support and evolution...see what happened with Logitech...now the SBT customers are left to their own....

    This was one of the reasons that I choosed the linn over the SBT....

     

    Archimago, when you say "It's not rocket science to convert ethernet PCM packets to SPDIF."....

    -.the whole know-how to make a complete experience, seems to have some science...

    check "gapless"; see that ps audio is trying without success to attain that goal for a long time...

     

    Also, your faith in the DAC jitter rejection capabilities seems to ignore that "noise" and power affect sound greatly...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Quick question

     

    Does anyone know if the dCS Debussy supports DoP over SPDIF?

     

    I think the Debussy's SPDIF is capped at 24/96 though.

     

    It does not support it via SPDIF and it is capped at 96K via that input.

     

    Jesus R

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Why not use a Linn Sneaky DS instead? Cheaper, sits on your network, has an s/pdif output (and a built in DAC if you prefer), works with minimserver and many others, has been doing gapless playback for years ... and it's cheaper.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Why not use a Linn Sneaky DS instead? Cheaper, sits on your network, has an s/pdif output (and a built in DAC if you prefer), works with minimserver and many others, has been doing gapless playback for years ... and it's cheaper.

    Hi andyv - Other than build quality and internal component differences, the two devices have some show stopping differences. The Linn unit requires playlist mode for gapless playback. With the Rendu I just play whatever I want and it's gapless. If I'm listening to Nat King Cole then switch to Dark Side of the Moon at 24/96, it will be gapless automatically.

     

    Rendu also supports DSD DoPE.

     

    Does the Sneaky DSM have S/PDIF output that supports 24/192 like the Rendu?

     

    Hopefully others can share knowledge about the differences between products.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Does the Sneaky DSM have S/PDIF output that supports 24/192 like the Rendu?

     

    I just confirmed the Akurate DSM supports 192 digital so I'm guessing the Sneaky DS does as well (not DSM).

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Why not use a Linn Sneaky DS instead? Cheaper, sits on your network, has an s/pdif output (and a built in DAC if you prefer), works with minimserver and many others, has been doing gapless playback for years ... and it's cheaper.

     

    Using a SMPS in our design was not a consideration. Sure it could reduce the cost, but I don't fell our customers are looking for this option....

     

    Jesus R

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hi andyv - Other than build quality and internal component differences, the two devices have some show stopping differences. The Linn unit requires playlist mode for gapless playback. With the Rendu I just play whatever I want and it's gapless. If I'm listening to Nat King Cole then switch to Dark Side of the Moon at 24/96, it will be gapless automatically.

     

    Rendu also supports DSD DoPE.

     

    Does the Sneaky DSM have S/PDIF output that supports 24/192 like the Rendu?

    Yes, of course...

    "The Linn unit requires playlist mode for gapless playback. With the Rendu I just play whatever I want and it's gapless"...

    ok, I can see an improvement here...because some controllers just know the sneaky as a upnp zone (JRMC) instead of a "linn playlist zone"...

     

    Hopefully others can share knowledge about the differences between products.

     

    I wish I could review the Rendu.

     

    So, why am I in the market for another streamer if I have the Sneaky?

     

    Because (1) I could use the sneaky in a second room, using it as an integrated solution (stream DAC, pre/power) to not very demanding speakers (rega rs1, awaiting for a partner)...

    and (2) because I suspect the quality of the Linn ds output can be improved...for example using another solution for the power, like jesus just mentioned...

     

    but don't discard the sneaky if you find one used I think is a good buy...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Using a SMPS in our design was not a consideration. Sure it could reduce the cost, but I don't fell our customers are looking for this option....

     

    Jesus R

     

    Hello Jesus,

    Indeed the Sneaky was the network player to extend the linn network of streamers for the kitchens. Therefore the smps is probably their most basic, and I suspect it would be a source for enhancement.

     

    However they claim (and their retailers) that their recent smps are something very special. And hearing their flagship amps...I must agree that I detect to noise issues of dynamic restrictions, or bass articulation and weight.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hello all,

     

    This review and subsequent thread are well-timed since I'm trying to decide how best to integrate a music server with my stereo rig. I don't really relish the idea of adding a computer to the audio system so something like the Rendu is really intriguing, and I appreciate everyone's questions, answers, challenges and counter arguments. This has helped a lot - I've learned a lot.

     

    I have a few questions. I thought about emailing Simple Designs (or is the company Sonore?) directly, but thought others might have the same questions, so I'm adding them here.

     

    1. Is there a warranty for the Rendu?

    2. How are firmware updates made available and how are they applied?

    3. I know the parts are high quality and expensive - any chance we can get a list of what the parts are?

    4. Any interior shots of the Rendu?

    5. Lastly, I'm not sure I understand how volume can be controlled at this stage of the playback chain. I would expect volume to be controlled in the analog domain after conversion by the DAC. What does volume control do at the renderer, does it affect the signal at all? If so can the volume control be bypassed?

     

    Thanks - that's probably a lot to answer. Any info will be greatly appreciated!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Let me pose a beginners' question. If the client device (the Rendu in this case) is UPNP compliant, does it follow that the user can elect to use either Foobar2000 or JRiver Media Center (depending upon their preference) as the server software?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Let me pose a beginners' question. If the client device (the Rendu in this case) is UPNP compliant, does it follow that the user can elect to use either Foobar2000 or JRiver Media Center (depending upon their preference) as the server software?

     

    I believe that's correct, at least for JRiver, and I think that's what was described in the review, using JRemote as the control point. There's more info here: DLNA - JRiverWiki

     

    I'm less familiar with Foobar2000, so I'm not sure the same is true there. FWIW there's this on the Foobar2000 wiki: foobar2000: Components Repository - UPnP/DLNA Renderer, Server, Control Point

     

    I'm willing to be corrected, though, if I have any of that wrong - I'm new to this....

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hello all,

     

    This review and subsequent thread are well-timed since I'm trying to decide how best to integrate a music server with my stereo rig. I don't really relish the idea of adding a computer to the audio system so something like the Rendu is really intriguing, and I appreciate everyone's questions, answers, challenges and counter arguments. This has helped a lot - I've learned a lot.

     

    I have a few questions. I thought about emailing Simple Designs (or is the company Sonore?) directly, but thought others might have the same questions, so I'm adding them here.

     

    1. Is there a warranty for the Rendu?

    2. How are firmware updates made available and how are they applied?

    3. I know the parts are high quality and expensive - any chance we can get a list of what the parts are?

    4. Any interior shots of the Rendu?

    5. Lastly, I'm not sure I understand how volume can be controlled at this stage of the playback chain. I would expect volume to be controlled in the analog domain after conversion by the DAC. What does volume control do at the renderer, does it affect the signal at all? If so can the volume control be bypassed?

     

    Thanks - that's probably a lot to answer. Any info will be greatly appreciated!

     

    Yes it has warranty. Firmware updates are done via the unit's webpage. We don't publish the parts list and reserve the right to upgrade things as we go. Also, each option has a module and it's own power supply and they are all different. There are some pics of the modules on our webpage. It's a 32 bit digital volume attenuator. The volume level is selected at the controller. You bypass volume attenuation with a 100% volume selection in the controller.

     

    Jesus R

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Let me pose a beginners' question. If the client device (the Rendu in this case) is UPNP compliant, does it follow that the user can elect to use either Foobar2000 or JRiver Media Center (depending upon their preference) as the server software?

     

    The Rendu is not the client and is instead the renderer. It's up to each controller to see and use the server (Foobar2000, JRiver Media Center, etc..). I have not tried Foobar2000 as a server, but I have tested LMS as a server and it works great.

     

    Jesus R

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Guest
    This is now closed for further comments




×
×
  • Create New...