Jump to content
  • The Computer Audiophile
    The Computer Audiophile

    Sonore microRendu Review, Part 1

    microRendu_1024px.jpg

    1-Pixel.png

    In mid 2014 I received a call from Sonore's Jesus R. He wanted to discuss an idea. Jesus and his team had decided they needed to move the needle, in a huge way, with respect to computer audio playback. They had built, sold, and supported custom high end music servers for years, but were ready to innovate beyond this somewhat traditional approach. Jesus told me they wanted to design and build both the hardware and software for a tiny microcomputer the size of a credit card, that had a single purpose, to reproduce the best sound quality possible. Then he semi-jokingly asked me if I knew anyone with really deep pockets who'd like to bankroll the endeavor. At the end of our lengthy conversation I concluded that this was another great idea that would never come to fruition because it was simply cost prohibitive for a boutique manufacturer.

     

    Fast forward to summer 2015, when I received an email from Jesus with the subject, code name = Toaster. The first two sentences said, "For your eyes only. The small board goes on top of the larger board and it's to scale if you want to print it." Attached was the schematic for prototype units numbered 1, 2, and 3 that were already being made as I read the email. I was pleasantly surprised to say the least. Jesus and his team had successfully pulled off the initial hardware design phase of a project I never thought would see the light of day.

     

    Seeing a product brought to life from its infancy was pretty cool, at least for me. Readers putting two and two together are probably asking what happened from mid 2014 to mid 2015 to the end of April 2016. As anyone with knowledge of hardware design, prototyping, software development and testing, and sourcing components can tell you, there are more trials and tribulations involved in bringing a high precision product to market than Joe Sixpack could ever imagine. But, that's an interesting story for another time. Today, April 28, 2016 marks the launch of the highly anticipated custom designed Sonore microRendu, a purpose-built audiophile microcomputer designed to unprecedentedly process USB audio. [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]

     

     

    The Team

     

    I want to take one step back before diving into the microRendu because it's important to understand who brought this from an idea to a purchasable product. The microRendu came about through a collaboration between Sonore by simple Design, Small Green Computer and JS Electronics. All three entities have been very active in the development of high quality computer audio for many years. Members of the Computer Audiophile Community are likely well aware of Sonore's products (music servers, signature Rendu, high quality customer support, etc...) and perhaps are as familiar with the Small Green Computer products developed by Andrew Gillis, namely Vortexbox. What most people are completely oblivious to is the fact that Jesus from Sonore and Andrew from Small Green Computer have worked tirelessly behind the scenes with software developers to improve high quality Linux based audio playback. The two have worked for years, herding cats and influencing without authority, to get a global cast of characters to update, adapt, and improve their individually or group maintained Linux software packages. Many improvements to UPnP, DLNA, LMS, MPD, and DSD playback have been driven by Jesus and Andrew, without seeking applause from the countless companies and end users worldwide who have benefited form this work. Then there's "Mr. Wizard", John Swenson. If you want to feel uninteresting and undereducated, have dinner with John. I did at Rocky Mountain Audiofest 2015 and walked away thinking he is one of the smartest people I've ever met, certainly the biggest Shakespeare fan I've ever met, and one of the nicest guys I've ever met. John has been building and designing audio components for decades, including his first DAC that was a whole 4 bits. Around 2000 John started digging deep into computer audio, sound cards, USB DACs, and Linux systems. He has designed some great products over the years, most recently the UpTone Audio JS-2 power supply and the USB REGEN. To pay the bills John has worked at a very large semiconductor company for over thirty years, designing power networks inside custom chips that are used in many devices we depend on every day and the internal circuitry of these chips effects the surrounding components. Trust me, it's way more complicated than that layman's description, but just remember John has likely forgotten more that most of us will ever know.

     

    All three came together to produce the Sonore microRendu. To oversimplify things, you could say Andrew developed the software, John developed the hardware, and Jesus managed the entire project and handled QC. The gritty details are much more intertwined than that description, but the general gist of it holds true.

     

     

     

    What Is The microRendu?

     

     

    To say the microRendu is a computer or microcomputer is true but it's also a bit misleading and may lead to miscategorization. People like to categorize and group things in order to better "understand" them. This is human nature, but it may lead to placement of the microRendu in the same category as Macs and PCs or custom music servers. The microRendu is in a category all by itself. Sure it contains a CPU, RAM, USB, Ethernet, etc..., but that's where the similarities end. The microRendu is a combination of software and hardware, designed to work in concert, to keep processing and ground plane noise a low as possible, while receiving audio over Ethernet and outputting audio over USB to deliver the best possible signal to a digital to analog converter. The end goal is to reproduce the best sound quality possible. How it accomplishes this goal is discussed below in great detail.

     

    First, let's look at this from a more general perspective.

     

    Input bread, depress lever, wait, receive toasted bread. Toasters are dead simple and work every time. Thus, the microRendu's code name of Toaster. Not only must the microRendu produce sonically, it was designed to function like a toaster. Connect to network, play music, hear music. At least that was the idea, and based on my extensive testing, the microRendu is the configurable toaster of computer audio.

     

    The microRendu has a single audio input (Ethernet) and a single audio output (USB). Installation entails connecting the unit to your network and to a USB DAC (or D to D converter like the Berkeley Alpha USB) and powering it up (power options discussed later as well). Configuration, calling it that is a stretch, is done via a web browser by selecting one of about five audio output modes. There are other options that may be necessary depending on one's desired use of the unit, but for the most part it works like a toaster.

     

    I'm sure some readers are wondering why they'd ever need the microRendu or wondering how they might use it in different scenarios. I get it, these same questions were popular when USB DACs entered the market. People used to say, "Why use a computer, can't I just use my CD/SACD player?" The answer is, you can stick with the status quo if that feels more comfortable. You don't need the microRendu in the same sense that you need food and water, but I believe many people reading this will very much want a microRendu. Here are five scenarios where the microRendu really shines.

     

    1. Simplification in combination with sound quality. These two don't often go hand in hand, but the microRendu makes this possible. Currently many people are using a NAS for storage of TBs worth of local music and a music server (Mac Mini, PC, CAPS, etc...) connected via USB to their audio systems. Control is frequently handled by an iOS or Android device. Inserting the microRendu into this chain enables one to remove the music server entirely. This simplifies the audio chain and removes the maintenance and cost of an "extra" computer and all its accessories. The new playback path is simply NAS to microRendu to audio system. All controlled by the an iOS or Android device.

     

    nas-mr-as.png

     

     

     

     

    2. A few people in the industry frequently talk about removing the computer from the listening room. Whether this is because their computers are noisy or they just don't like having computers in their listening rooms, that's beside the point. They just don't want one, but they still want all the benefits of using a music server. In essence, the microRendu takes care of this issue. Even though it's really another computer, it's more appropriate to think of it like an audiophile appliance. Once installed, it just works without requiring maintenance. One example of this scenario is the person who has a music server with a few TBs of internal storage sitting in his audio rack and connected to his USB DAC. Maybe the server runs JRiver Media Center or Roon, and it's controlled by an iOS or Android device. This music server can now be placed in any other room of the house, as long as it's network connected, and send audio to the microRendu that is dropped right into the system where the music server was located. Same Ethernet input and same USB output, but now the "computer" has been removed form the audio room and I'm willing to bet the sound quality is even better.

     

    3. Many audiophiles have components with AES, S/PDIF, or USB inputs and they wish they had an Ethernet interface for sending audio the network. Based on the cost of replacing one's component(s) to get that Ethernet interface or the fact that they may have to switch to an inferior product just to get a networkable component, I don't think many people are lining up at HiFi shops to get this functionality if they are already down the non-networkable road. This is where the microRendu comes into play. Connect a microRendu to a USB DAC or D to D converter and one instantly has a networkable audio system. No need to replace one's favorite DAC with something of lesser quality or greater price, when all that's needed is a microRendu.

     

    4. High quality multi-room audio. Using multiple microRendus connected to any number of USB audio devices in different locations throughout one's house is a great way to get the highest of resolutions to almost any system. Streaming 24 bit / 192 kHz or DSD256 to the same or different microRendus is a piece of cake. Use Roon or JRemote for music selection and control of each zone and call it a day.

     

    5. Audiophiles want the best sounding playback system they can afford. Based on my functionality tests and listening sessions, the microRendu could be the solution. I've never had better sounding audio in my room with any other device or server or streamer. Period. Much more on that later. Those who want the best must give the microRendu a spin.

     

     

     

    Hardware Details

     

     

    The microRendu's hardware was no small task to design. It took John Swenson over a year to get it right. This often meant getting new boards produced with the smallest of tweaks to eke out the final ounces of performance. In fact very close to the data of launch, Jesus decided to throw away all the newly delivered boards because of a single design change. This change could have been made to the existing boards after the fact, but this team is all about perfection. So, out went the "production" boards and a new order was placed.

     

    At a high level, the microRendu consists of a tiny processor module (System On Module) that's directly connected to a carrier board. The processor module contains an i.MX6 chip with a dual core processor and RAM. The processor module is attached to the carrier board via two 80 pin headers. It's this carrier board combined with custom software that separates the men from the boys and turns the microRendu into a true audiophile class component.

     

    The carrier board contains the regulators, oscillators, USB port, and Ethernet port. Let's start with the Ethernet input and work our way to the USB output. The microRendu contains a 10/100/1000 Gbps Ethernet interface. This interface is limited to 470 Mbps due to the internal i.MX6 bus. Audiophile needn't worry about this "limitation" because 470 Mbps is still hundreds of Mbps more than is required for even the highest resolution audio files. The microRendu features signal conditioning, signal isolation, and EMI suppression on this Ethernet input in part by using a radical power network with multiple regulators between the power to the Ethernet PHY and the power to the USB subsystem. These regulators have a very high power supply rejection ration or PSSR. The PSSR is used to describe the amount of noise that can be rejected from a source of power. Readers familiar with commercial motherboards built to hit the lowest price point will understand this is a huge difference because those cheap boards don't contain much isolation between the power to the Ethernet PHY and USB subsystem. This extensive design may be responsible for some of the network immunity or lack of sensitivity I've found with the microRendu. No matter what I do prior to the Ethernet input of the unit, the sound remains the same. Even using CAT7 shielded cables that break the inherent galvanic isolation of Ethernet by using connected shields on both ends.

     

    The carrier board features a very low jitter oscillator that feeds the hub chip, PLL, and clock network that has anything to do with the USB subsystem. The other on-chip oscillator is used to drive the processor and memory. This is where the software customization comes into play. The design team was able to shut off the processor module's internal oscillator circuit and externally clock the chip from the much better oscillators on the carrier board. Just like externally clocking a DAC, Sonore changed the reference clock of the PLLs to point to the external clock that's fed with the low jitter main clock.

     

    The microRendu has extremely low ground noise due in part to its design and linear regulators, but also because everything not used for audio purposes has been eliminated or completely shut off. There are many noisy processor circuits not simply unused, but totally shut off.

     

    The USB output of the microRendu is equally as special as anything else contained on the carrier board. Most, if not all, commercial motherboards contain extremely noisy DC to DC converters and switch mode regulators. Thus, even though an expensive linear power supply may be used on the outside, the power signal is going through a gauntlet of garbage once it hits the motherboard on its way to the USB output that feeds power to the USB DAC. It's like running a linear supply though a terrible switching supply in order to feed one's DAC. This isn't the case with the microRendu. The incoming power goes through a linear regulator on its way out the USB port and on to the USB DAC. This ultra clean path completely avoids switching regulators.

     

    In addition the design of the microRendu's USB architecture generates a completely new USB data signal and is highly optimized for signal integrity and impedance matching. To quote John Swenson, designer of both the microRendu and USB REGEN, "The microRendu does contain a circuit which is essentially an improved REGEN. There is no need to add an external REGEN between it and a DAC."

     

    The microRendu requires between 6 and 9 volts of power. During its approximately twenty-five second boot time it peaks at about 0.4A and during regular playback settles in at about 0.2A. Using the forthcoming Sonore 7V power supply provided for this review by Sonore, the microRendu uses 1.4 watts during playback.

     

    One of the beauties of the microRendu's design is its' separate power supply domains. The individual supply domains receive the appropriate regulation scheme for their functions. The processor domain uses a high quality switching regulator since it requires low voltage at high current.

     

    The PLLs that generate clock signals for many different systems use a single ultra low noise regulator, while the USB subsystem uses three ultra low noise regulators.

     

    One additional note about the hardware design. One of the first items I noticed upon receiving my unit was the SD card. This card is required, as it's loaded with the operating system. I figured that storing the OS on FLASH (eMMC embedded MultiMedia Card) or NVRAM would have been a better option. It's a good thing I didn't attempt to design the microRendu because my figuring was a bit off. According to John Swenson, "The i.MX6 has three memory subsystems, the DDR3, which we need to use for the main memory of the system, a very small simple, low power SD card subsystem, and the generic everything else memory subsystem. The later is what you use for NVRAM, flash chips etc. It is a large complex system designed to run very fast. This uses a lot of power and generates a lot of noise in the chip. "

     

    The SD card controller is slow, low power and generates very little noise, and on top of that has its own power supply pins on the chip which cuts down even more on the noise it generates. So by using the SD card rather than something like NVRAM I can drastically cut down on the noise in the chip. There are also things like SSDs, but they all need some form of high power bus to talk to (SATA, PCIE etc), which would mean I would have to turn on those subsystems.

     

    On the reliability front, I have actually found that using on board FLASH or NVRAM is actually less reliable. I have worked with several embedded boards over the last few years that have had flash chips, that have had problems far more often than ones that run straight off an SD card. I think it has to do with where the controller is. With SD card the flash controller is built into the card, the software doesn't have to know anything about that. The inexpensive flash chips used with these systems do not have a built in controller, they require the OS to deal with the issues specific to flash memory. Linux has some good code for this, but if something happens with the kernel during runtime, it is very easy for the flash to get corrupted. I had one board that if power went out during boot the flash was guaranteed to be corrupted."

     

    The SD card simply clicks into the microRendu and sits there without requiring any user intervention. If the OS is somehow corrupted or there's a problem with the unit, a new SD card can be placed into the slot very easily. I like this option much better than sending the unit back to Sonore to get re-flashed if onboard solid state storage was used.

     

     

     

     

    Part 1 Wrap-up

     

    This is it for part one of the Sonore microRendu review. I hope readers have an understanding of how the product came to be, who designed and brought the product to market, what the product is, how it works, and some of the main hardware design elements. Of course there are some proprietary features that Sonore won't tell me about and some that I can't tell you about, but that's to be expected with a bold new product like the microRendu.

     

    In part two of this review I'll dig deeper into the Sonicorbiter operating system, selectable audio output modes, and compare the microRendu to the Sonicorbiter SE, and discuss the external power supply options. I'll conclude the review with my assessment of how my audio system sounds with the microRendu connected to different D to A and D to D converters. Before heading off to the Super Bowl of audio shows that is Munich High End, I'll leave readers with this listening impression - I've spent hours on end listening to music since I took delivery of the microRendu. I wanted to make sure I wasn't burned by expectation bias, so I compared it to many other sources and methods of audio playback (both blind and sighted). After all this, I can unequivocally say that with the microRendu in place, my audio system has never sounded better than right now.

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

     

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]25628[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]25629[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]25626[/ATTACH]

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]25627[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]25625[/ATTACH]

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Product Information:

     

     

     

    • Products - Sonore microRendu
    • Price - $640
    • Product Pages - Link
    • User Manual - Link
    • FAQ - Link
    • Purchase - Link

     

     

     

     

     

    1-Pixel.png




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Skikirkwood, no that is YOUR bottom line. Have fun comparing those and let us know. I, myself, have already been through enough poor USB implementations to completely understand the specific focus of the uRendu project. But since you do not have that experience, and assume bits are bits, then I understand your need for comparisons. And it's nice to hear your plans to commit to your ideas. Please let us know what you find.

     

    With a few days of the uRendu inhouse it certainly has a sound quality that utterly redefines what a $600 appliance should be able to do, let alone it's multiple modes/feature-sets. And I would bet that it most improves systems that, unbeknownst to the user, have poor USB signal integrity, be it an average USB ansynch DAC or a previous pedestrian design from the source. USB was never considered to be the best choice for a DAC interface, but has become ubiquitous. It's nice that companies like Sonore and Uptone have decided to tackle that aspect of computer audio gremlin DNA.

     

    Flame on Ted!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hi John, well the bottom line is how do all of these systems sound in comparison to one another. So with the Bryston unit about to ship, I'd be interested in any group of people who could compare the sound of the microRendu, the BD-Pi, and an off the shelf Raspberry Pi 3 with a $10 power supply.

     

    My bias is that with any good asynchronous USB DAC they would all sound exactly the same, but I'd welcome any data points that showed otherwise.

    My only "data point" is my ears - the ONLY one that counts here.

    This is something you'll prob have to do for yourself. If a product doesn't do what you need it to do then it's not for you.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think the biggest problem for DIY folks (which I have respect for, being an electronics Engineer myself) is that they tend to be unable to comprehend everyman's needs, but always transfer their own perspective to others. I am not sure if it is some kind of a salvation attempt or that it is a need for greater recognition....(?)

    Hopefully it is only a mutual interest thing.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Flame on Ted!

     

    Huh? I simply wanted to say that it seems unfair to come on here and disparage a product you have no experience with, then conclude that the bottom line is to ask a group of people to invest their time and money to compare products and let you know, so you can prove your own point. Get some skin in the game! You clearly wouldn't believe their feedback anyway. You haven't believed ours. Which is your right.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    My only "data point" is my ears - the ONLY one that counts here.

    This is something you'll prob have to do for yourself. If a product doesn't do what you need it to do then it's not for you.

     

    Totally agree with you there Doak. But since I don't have my hands on a Sonore microRendu or Bryston BD-Pi, and don't see that happening anytime soon, I need a proxy to do the listening for me.

     

    What's interesting about my IQAudio DAC is that it sounded fantastic out of the box. Best $45 I ever spent. :) But I recently discovered the TI PCM-5122 DAC chip it uses has 4 different digital interpolation filters, and you could set choose any of them through the alsamixer Linux app. So quite to my surprise, I discovered that I preferred the "Ringing-less low latency FIR" filter over the default "FIR interpolation with de-emphasis". It wasn't a blind test, and perhaps it was expectation bias, but to my ears, the Ringing-less FIR filter sounds better, so yes, it's all about what sounds best to your ears. But if you can't test alternatives, you need a trusted source to do it for you.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hi skikirkwood - Good post / questions. I think your comments are indicative of both sides of the wonderful hobby of ours. Some people have the skills, knowledge, time, desire to build a Pi based player. These people are also satisfied with forum only support for their self-built product. That's totally cool. The other side of the coin is most people who want to purchase a well built, well designed product from a reputable company who will call them up or remote connect if there is a problem, and these people believe in doing everything possible to squeeze every ounce of sound quality out of their systems.

     

    Actually this brings up another question: Is the microRendu product more for (a) a hassle free playback device with multiple platforms support OR (b) An audiophile tuned device for best sound?

     

    I understand of course that it is both, but in my case, I have a Mac Mini with an SSD boot drive and a few Squeezebox Touches, I do not find significant differences between the mini or the Touch, and both sound good playing through the Devialet D400. I tried Regen and I cannot say I heard significant differences.

     

    To me the Squeezebox Touch is just about the most versatile network player ever built, and with ROON support now it makes seem like the longest standing player platform there is.

     

    Being the itchy audiofool, I thought about getting the uRendu for better sound. I guess my question is would it represent a significant step up in sound compared to my current 2 platforms? Would it bring me up near the level of the "supposedly" much better sounding Aurender or the Weiss MAN301?

     

    Or is it mostly just a handy box for people who cannot be bothered with messing with a computer or an "obsolete" box like the Squeezebox?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    But if you can't test alternatives, you need a trusted source to do it for you.

     

    There are many on this forum, but you don't want to take their word for it.

     

    The thing with DIY is not everybody has those skills, I certainly cannot handle a soldering iron and also its not always cheap and/or better as its made out to be.

     

    Case in point, I tried to DIY a NAS. Add up all the h/w and it comes to what Synology costs (and quite often more). And the s/w is nowhere near what DiskStation Manager (DSM) offers. In the end I went with Synology because none of the others (FreeNAS, OpenMediaVault, FlexRAID, UnRAID, NAS4Free, etc.) really measure up, at least to a Linux noob like me. Synology OS takes like 5-15 mins to be and running.

     

    Coming to audiophile DIY, I know folks who are into DIY. One guy I know makes TLs and rather well infact. They blow the socks off some commercial speakers, but end of the day he does not make them real cheap. For that price there are excellent budget offerings from many companies like Mission, KEF, Monitor Audio, etc. that compare and then there is the question of support and service. Do you think the DIY guy is going to be able to give unlimited support like the big guys? If Logitech could not, how will a DIYer?

     

    DACs, Schiit again. Not many will have DACs that perform better than Schiit and also cost a fraction of what they cost at the same time.

     

    The list can go on... but DIY is not all its made out to be unless you have some mad carpentry and electronics/electrical skills.

     

    Most of us folks just want to listen to music and enjoy it, at the best budget we can afford.

     

    PS: I'm a huge fan of the Pi, in fact use it and even recommend it. My DIY for the Pi is limited to the OS, nothing h/w. Just so you know I'm not biased against the little guy. It's unbeatable for $35 and for how excellent it sounds as a streamer, believe me I've tested it against $2500 PCs and $1000 to $2000 AVRs and in the streaming department (and you could also say as a media server) it was unbeatable. The open source Linux distros in fact offer more features than commercial AVRs, streamers, etc. And I've seen enough Pi's hooked up to excellent DACs like 2Qute and USB Regens and hold their own against just about everyone. That said its not for everybody. I cannot imagine my dad ever writing the OS on an SD card or even physically assembling the Pi in a case and putting together the cables. A Sonos makes more sense for him.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Totally agree with you there Doak. But since I don't have my hands on a Sonore microRendu or Bryston BD-Pi, and don't see that happening anytime soon, I need a proxy to do the listening for me.

    <SNIP>

    But if you can't test alternatives, you need a trusted source to do it for you.

     

    skikirkwood,

     

    That is what I believe Chris is doing in his review, along with the many other people who have reported on the SQ of the uRendu. Spend a little time looking at some of these poster's previous posts about their setups. Read Barrows posts about his DIY'd battery powered music server coupled to his DIY'd Twisted Pear Buffalo-based DAC (using a best-in-breed Sonore Async USB->I2S card and with all upgraded power supplies) and then fast forward to how the uRendu handily beat his battery-powered server. Read Chris' other reviews and see the caliber of the gear he has pass through his hands and the care he takes in reviewing it... and then re-read his uRendu review part 1. You appear to be making statements without the benefit of available knowledge and saying things at odds with those who have listened to the uRendu.

     

    The microRendu looks like a fine device, but I'd question why I'd want to spend $640 when I could buy a single board computer like the Raspberry Pi 3 (which has a quad-core CPU vs. the dual-core in the microRendu) for $35 and achieve exactly the same level of audio quality with any decent USB asynchronous DAC.

     

    <SNIP>

     

    Again, nothing wrong with commercial offerings such as the microRendu, but for many people I believe you can get a much better solution at a fraction of the price and more flexibility with software updates by choosing a Raspberry Pi or ODroid SBC and any one of the audiophile Linux distros under constant development.

     

    Here's a recent blog posting by one of my favorite audio bloggers on the renderer he put together with an ODroid-C2 and Volumio 2:

     

    Archimago's Musings: MEASUREMENTS: ODROID-C2 with Volumio 2, and USB digital music streaming.

     

    skikirkwood,

     

    Again, you are posting without doing your homework. Read up on the tech in the device. You have about as much chance of DIY'ing a USB-output network attached audio appliance that even begins to approach the uRendu out of a Pi, a BBB, an Odroid, or any other commercial embedded system board out there as you have of taking the audio out from one of those boards and with some SW and HW tweaks getting it to match an Ayre or PS Audio or Schitt top-end DAC. You are NOT going to take any general purpose computer board built to a sub-$100 price level (or even a $1000 price level) and do anything even in the same realm as the uRendu. Good engineering, engineering for sound quality, and custom, purpose-built HW are key attributes of the uRendu. I have a few tweaked R-Pi player setups in my stable and yah, I've gotten them to sound pretty darned good. I tweaked a motherboard player with extensive linear supplies for the ATX power and a super-modified sound card / add-on-DAC with another 3 linear supplies just for that output, including using a super-cut-down XP based OpSys/Player that was only 15Mb total. I am familiar with what one can get in the DIY world at an extreme level beyond where virtually no one else would go. And I am quite comfortable saying that IF I needed a USB output player appliance, I'd get the uRendu because I know I cannot do any better, for any price I am willing to spend or any effort I can expend.

     

    Please spend some time to educate yourself before throwing out wild, unsubstantiated conjecture here.

     

    Greg in Mississippi

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Actually this brings up another question: Is the microRendu product more for (a) a hassle free playback device with multiple platforms support OR (b) An audiophile tuned device for best sound?

     

    I understand of course that it is both, but in my case, I have a Mac Mini with an SSD boot drive and a few Squeezebox Touches, I do not find significant differences between the mini or the Touch, and both sound good playing through the Devialet D400. I tried Regen and I cannot say I heard significant differences.

     

    To me the Squeezebox Touch is just about the most versatile network player ever built, and with ROON support now it makes seem like the longest standing player platform there is.

     

    Being the itchy audiofool, I thought about getting the uRendu for better sound. I guess my question is would it represent a significant step up in sound compared to my current 2 platforms? Would it bring me up near the level of the "supposedly" much better sounding Aurender or the Weiss MAN301?

     

    Or is it mostly just a handy box for people who cannot be bothered with messing with a computer or an "obsolete" box like the Squeezebox?

     

    I have a standard and a modified Touch (Empirical Audio, with mods and battery PS, it is about a $2000 product). The modded Touch sounds better than the standard one.

     

    My SMS-100 (off the shelf board, runs software similar to the mR) with an upscale PS sounds better than the modded Touch.

    I have reasonable hopes that a bespoke product like the mR will sound even better.

     

    For those with the constant DIY refrain that "I can do the same thing for $35 or $100" is simply silly. You can't. You can do something similar that won't sound as good and takes lots more user intervention. If you are happy with that, great.

     

    Skikirkwood, don't try to tell those of us that are willing to spend another $500 to get the ultimate device of it's type that we are wasting our money. You aren't on that side of the cost/returns arc, some of the rest of us are. Yes, there are articles telling me Power Supplies make no difference, but IME, they can. I've heard it.

     

    And, I know from experience that the support from Sonore is way better than anything on any forum, and takes less time.

     

    When my mR gets here in a few days I'll be able to hear if there is any improvement. I will post.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have a standard and a modified Touch (Empirical Audio, with mods and battery PS, it is about a $2000 product). The modded Touch sounds better than the standard one.

     

    My SMS-100 (off the shelf board, runs software similar to the mR) with an upscale PS sounds better than the modded Touch.

    I have reasonable hopes that a bespoke product like the mR will sound even better.

     

    For those with the constant DIY refrain that "I can do the same thing for $35 or $100" is simply silly. You can't. You can do something similar that won't sound as good and takes lots more user intervention. If you are happy with that, great.

     

    Skikirkwood, don't try to tell those of us that are willing to spend another $500 to get the ultimate device of it's type that we are wasting our money. You aren't on that side of the cost/returns arc, some of the rest of us are. Yes, there are articles telling me Power Supplies make no difference, but IME, they can. I've heard it.

     

    And, I know from experience that the support from Sonore is way better than anything on any forum, and takes less time.

     

    When my mR gets here in a few days I'll be able to hear if there is any improvement. I will post.

     

    Thanks.

     

    I wonder how it will compare with the more "mainstream" products like the Aurenders? Or even a Weiss MAN301? Are those products overkill compared to the uRendu?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thanks.

     

    I wonder how it will compare with the more "mainstream" products like the Aurenders? Or even a Weiss MAN301? Are those products overkill compared to the uRendu?

     

    I think they fulfill partly different needs. Aurender have local storage, and the Weiss can also rip.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thanks.

     

    I wonder how it will compare with the more "mainstream" products like the Aurenders? Or even a Weiss MAN301? Are those products overkill compared to the uRendu?

     

    In terms of pure sound, Chris' review he prefers it to Aurender - he said it's the best he's heard in his system.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    In terms of pure sound, Chris' review he prefers it to Aurender - he said it's the best he's heard in his system.

     

    Actually, Chris said the following: ". . . my audio system has never sounded better than right now."

     

    So, per his own wording, the Micro Rendu may not better than the other items he's reviewed, but is at least as good.

     

    Joel

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Actually, Chris said the following: ". . . my audio system has never sounded better than right now."

     

    So, per his own wording, the Micro Rendu may not better than the other items he's reviewed, but is at least as good.

     

    Joel

     

    Yes, that is technically what he wrote. I'm willing to bet that his further review will show what he meant is closer to what I understood him to be trying to say.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yes, that is technically what he wrote. I'm willing to bet that his further review will show what he meant is closer to what I understood him to be trying to say.

     

    I'm not taking that bet, Firedog. :)

     

    Joel

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Actually, Chris said the following: ". . . my audio system has never sounded better than right now."

     

    So, per his own wording, the Micro Rendu may not better than the other items he's reviewed, but is at least as good.

     

    Joel

     

    That's quite an analytical interpretation in my opinion.

     

    I very much read the closing sentences as 'it's the best I've ever heard in my system', but since I've probably not read all of Chris reviews, and am unfamiliar with what other equipment he's used in his system, I'm none the wiser really. My best guess is the W20.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    In terms of pure sound, Chris' review he prefers it to Aurender - he said it's the best he's heard in his system.

     

    I was wondering about that statement as well. That sounds like an off-the-cuff comment though. Audio memory tends to be short.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    .... That sounds like an off-the-cuff comment though. Audio memory tends to be short.

     

    The full concluding sentences of the review (my bold):

     

    I've spent hours on end listening to music since I took delivery of the microRendu. I wanted to make sure I wasn't burned by expectation bias, so I compared it to many other sources and methods of audio playback (both blind and sighted). After all this, I can unequivocally say that with the microRendu in place, my audio system has never sounded better than right now.

     

    Doesn't seem that off the cuff or involving much audio memory to me..... It reads like it's been quite thoroughly tested, both sighted and blind, against what we can only assume are the best source components Chris has available - which we'd hope would be his favourite sources.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hi John, well the bottom line is how do all of these systems sound in comparison to one another. So with the Bryston unit about to ship, I'd be interested in any group of people who could compare the sound of the microRendu, the BD-Pi, and an off the shelf Raspberry Pi 3 with a $10 power supply.

     

    My bias is that with any good asynchronous USB DAC they would all sound exactly the same, but I'd welcome any data points that showed otherwise.

     

    No one who has actually made these kinds of comparisons has had those results, at least no one I have ever heard of. In my experience, i have experienced improved sound quality at every one of the following steps, into a good asynchronous USB DAC:

     

    1. Mac laptop via USB using iTunes

    2. Mac laptop via USB using Pure Music

    3. Custom Server (linux) via USB with SOtM card and dedicated high end power supply

    4. New custom server (linux) via USB with SOtM card and internal LiFePO4 battery power, separate regulated/filtered rails

    5. µRendu via USB with Sonore Signature Power Supply

     

    If you need to understand why, there is plenty of that information available on these forums. Specifically to the µRendu, I would suggest you read all of John Swenson's posts regarding USB audio.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    My only "data point" is my ears - the ONLY one that counts here.

    This is something you'll prob have to do for yourself. If a product doesn't do what you need it to do then it's not for you.

     

    Well said, "data point" to me suggests something that is easily measured/quantified in some sort of exacting way that is the same for everyone.

     

    I find the mRendu somewhat inexpensive based on the performance level I am experiencing, however that is of course a subjective thing and based on my own wallet, not anyone else's.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Another twist would be that some people out there actually do not want new COTS gear to arrive at the market competing with the gear they have built themselves?

    Let say I have spent hundreds of hours making my own gear and take pride in this, just to discover that no one is interested anymore because of this new kid on the block.

    I guess this would not be to my liking and I would consider it a hostile competitor.

     

    regards

    The DiY spin doctor :)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Another twist would be that some people out there actually do not want new COTS gear to arrive at the market competing with the gear they have built themselves?

     

    This is not uncommon. A couple friends invested both time and dollars in DIY cables and power cords. They were the most resistant to trying the OTS items the rest of us were raving about. They came around eventually.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There are many on this forum, but you don't want to take their word for it.

     

    The thing with DIY is not everybody has those skills, I certainly cannot handle a soldering iron and also its not always cheap and/or better as its made out to be.

     

    Case in point, I tried to DIY a NAS. Add up all the h/w and it comes to what Synology costs (and quite often more). And the s/w is nowhere near what DiskStation Manager (DSM) offers. In the end I went with Synology because none of the others (FreeNAS, OpenMediaVault, FlexRAID, UnRAID, NAS4Free, etc.) really measure up, at least to a Linux noob like me. Synology OS takes like 5-15 mins to be and running.

     

    Coming to audiophile DIY, I know folks who are into DIY. One guy I know makes TLs and rather well infact. They blow the socks off some commercial speakers, but end of the day he does not make them real cheap. For that price there are excellent budget offerings from many companies like Mission, KEF, Monitor Audio, etc. that compare and then there is the question of support and service. Do you think the DIY guy is going to be able to give unlimited support like the big guys? If Logitech could not, how will a DIYer?

     

    DACs, Schiit again. Not many will have DACs that perform better than Schiit and also cost a fraction of what they cost at the same time.

     

    The list can go on... but DIY is not all its made out to be unless you have some mad carpentry and electronics/electrical skills.

     

    Most of us folks just want to listen to music and enjoy it, at the best budget we can afford.

     

    PS: I'm a huge fan of the Pi, in fact use it and even recommend it. My DIY for the Pi is limited to the OS, nothing h/w. Just so you know I'm not biased against the little guy. It's unbeatable for $35 and for how excellent it sounds as a streamer, believe me I've tested it against $2500 PCs and $1000 to $2000 AVRs and in the streaming department (and you could also say as a media server) it was unbeatable. The open source Linux distros in fact offer more features than commercial AVRs, streamers, etc. And I've seen enough Pi's hooked up to excellent DACs like 2Qute and USB Regens and hold their own against just about everyone. That said its not for everybody. I cannot imagine my dad ever writing the OS on an SD card or even physically assembling the Pi in a case and putting together the cables. A Sonos makes more sense for him.

     

    Wow, when I composed my original post I didn't realize I would be causing such an uproar - yours is about the only reply I've seen that is well mannered and not trying to personally attack me based upon asking a few questions - thanks!

     

    Regarding DIY, I'm really just talking about getting a Pi, a case, an I2S DAC, putting the DAC onto the PI (no soldering needed for a HAT-compliant board), assembling the case (requires screws and tape), and then flashing a microSD card. Yes, I would not ask my wife to do such a thing, but she wouldn't know how to install/configure any commercial renderer as well.

     

    But for those who do have the skills to flash a card and assemble a case, my original post really questioned two things. 1) Can you accomplish the same audio quality with a SBC and "audiophile" linux distro such as Volumio? 2) How future-proof is any commercial renderer option that is based around open source software - how can you be sure that in the future as new open source packages are made available they will run on your proprietary commercial hardware?

     

    A friend of mine is a member of a San Francisco audiophile club and they have been meeting up on weekends and doing blind listening tests of equipment, DAC's most recently. There seemed to be widespread agreement that the Schiit Yggdrasil blew away DAC's many times its price. Based upon that, if I was to be in the market for a new USB DAC today, I'd probably choose the Schiit. So I'd be interested in hearing if there have been any similar bake-off of renderers, including one reviewed in this thread, along with an off-the-shelf Raspberry Pi, and later this month the Bryston BD-Pi. One without confirmation bias, which is why I'm not giving weight to many/most of the listening results people on this thread have done.

     

    Regarding 2), I don't believe anybody has commented on that yet. As a technology early adopter, when new release of piCorePlayer, Volumio or Moode comes out, I want to try them. I have a LMS running on one of my Pi's right now, indexing music from my networked drives, thanks to the latest release of piCorePlayer. It seems that it would be hard for any commercial hardware company to validate and support the range of open source audio platforms that keep appearing, and are evolving so rapidly. And at least for me, it's a lot of fun playing with all of these audio-centric Linux distros.

     

    And finally, the one thing I really like about the audio DIY world to date is that their communities are full of friendly and helpful people.

    My one post here has elicited a set of replies that are for the most part are arrogant and condescending. Too many highly insecure people for me, so I'll be dropping out here - it's not a community I want to be a part of.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I saw maybe one post here that was arrogant and condescending, so maybe the insecurity isn't where you located it.

    A lot of people don't like to do DIY and prefer having a seller who gives support, as opposed to a forum. A lot of people here have done the comparisons you asked about, but you didn't seem interested in their answers.

    Your question about the software - I never understood in the first place.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    First impression after 10 minutes. Incredibly easy to set up. Seems less grainy than my Mac mini system (tricked out internals with JS-2 PSU and Regen). Not yet sure about bass depth, but I'm using the ifi PSU and PSU had tremendous impact on bass with my Mac mini. Also, it's literally been 10 minutes.

     

    I'm not sure about Aurender, but This seems like trouble for Aurelic. I tried their streamer and did not like it on SQ or GUI. Again, This took me less than 10 minutes to get working with Roon, which is class leading library management versus the Lighning App that gave me trouble.

     

    Can't make a really critical SQ analysis after 10 minutes, but this thing seems extremely legit to me.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Guest
    This is now closed for further comments




×
×
  • Create New...