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



    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.

     

    Hi Mark

    how are you using the URendu, as you say it is less grainy than your Mac mini. Does that mean you are no longer running your Mac mini? What are you running Roon on?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    And try powering the microRendu with the JS-2 for kicks?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Running Roon Core on a desktop iMac and using microRendu as a Roon endpoint.

     

    Will try the JS-2 soon. 9v or 7v? Anyone know for sure. I think 9v.

     

    I've always wanted to try lan based music delivery. This microRendu is part of the way.

     

    Vivaldi Upsampler 2.0 coming next week. I hope it's better than the microRendu :)

     

    Continue to think there is a little grain out using the microRendu vs. Mac mini into the DAC usb, but the stage is a bit smaller and bass is not as deep. Will try the JS-2 when I confirm voltage setting for microRendu.

     

    Already certain the microRendu is worth more than the money. At worst, I'll use it in my office system with the NuPrime IDA-8.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Ok, about 4 hours in and 3 immediate takeaways below. Going to let it run for a few days then will listen again.

     

    1. PSU matters (JS-2 better than ifi - tighter and deeper bass, more dynamic, more detailed, wider stage, very precise imaging, but more forward presentation so far).

    2. It's better than my Mac mini system

    3. I think Chris is right :)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

     

    Your approach will not achieve anywhere near the sound quality of the µRendu into a DAC via USB. A better approach to utilizing a small MoBo unit like Raspi or BeagleBone Black (better) is to add external clocking/reclocking with isolation. The masterclock provided directly on these boards is very high in jitter, and the board itself produces so much noise that getting a good clock onboard would be nearly impossible. you can get very good performance out of such an approach, but only with a more sophisticated implementation and more parts.

    the discussion of how to do this better is interesting, but very OT for this thread.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Your approach will not achieve anywhere near the sound quality of the µRendu into a DAC via USB. A better approach to utilizing a small MoBo unit like Raspi or BeagleBone Black (better) is to add external clocking/reclocking with isolation. The masterclock provided directly on these boards is very high in jitter, and the board itself produces so much noise that getting a good clock onboard would be nearly impossible. you can get very good performance out of such an approach, but only with a more sophisticated implementation and more parts.

    the discussion of how to do this better is interesting, but very OT for this thread.

     

    He would still be using a general-purpose computer rather than one designed end-to-end for the best SQ.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    He would still be using a general-purpose computer rather than one designed end-to-end for the best SQ.

     

    Ah, so many ways to skin this (or any) cat.

     

    Comes down to how you use it.

     

    The way I use it, 100% DLNA, the Pi is no different and certainly no less than the likes of Auralic (both), a PC, Mac Mini, or even a NAS. Unless folks want to sell us cleaners and conditioners for WiFi (that will clean wireless noise) or gold audiophile interconnects that connect wireless devices - I fear all of that may be coming - but let's not go there just yet and for now enjoy the music.

     

    Even a general purpose - and even a multi purpose PC - while its multi tasking would sound the same when running DLNA for audio, easily achieved with the UPnP/DLNA Renderer for Foobar.

     

    And my money would be on a general purpose PC (obviously an i7 with 16 GB or more RAM) running Bug Head Emperor to destroy just about any other purpose built for audio streamer/server/player.

     

    Obviously the last will need head to head or toe to toe DBTs, but I deem it very unlikely that any Aurender, Auralic, Sonore, etc. would compare to the Bug and its myriad of filters that make 16/44.1 redbook sound like full blown vinyl - all coming from the venerable general purpose PC.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Your approach will not achieve anywhere near the sound quality of the µRendu into a DAC via USB. A better approach to utilizing a small MoBo unit like Raspi or BeagleBone Black (better) is to add external clocking/reclocking with isolation. The masterclock provided directly on these boards is very high in jitter, and the board itself produces so much noise that getting a good clock onboard would be nearly impossible. you can get very good performance out of such an approach, but only with a more sophisticated implementation and more parts.

    the discussion of how to do this better is interesting, but very OT for this thread.

     

    I replaced my beloved HRT MusicStreamer II+ DAC with an IQAudio Pi-DAC+ I2S DAC, so I'm not actually using a USB DAC any longer. That said, while I agree the Pi has a poor master clock and is very noisy, when feeding an asynchronous USB DAC I don't see how any of that matters. If the renderer is feeding the DAC with the right bits, at the approximate right timing, and the DAC's clock is driving the timing, how would the renderer change the sound quality of the DAC's analog output? And yes, I've read John Swenson's articles.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I replaced my beloved HRT MusicStreamer II+ DAC with an IQAudio Pi-DAC+ I2S DAC, so I'm not actually using a USB DAC any longer. That said, while I agree the Pi has a poor master clock and is very noisy, when feeding an asynchronous USB DAC I don't see how any of that matters. If the renderer is feeding the DAC with the right bits, at the approximate right timing, and the DAC's clock is driving the timing, how would the renderer change the sound quality of the DAC's analog output? And yes, I've read John Swenson's articles.

     

    Experience dictates otherwise. I have lots of experience using DACs which "re-clock" and "eliminate jitter", and in every case they still respond to a lower jitter input stream with better sound quality.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I replaced my beloved HRT MusicStreamer II+ DAC with an IQAudio Pi-DAC+ I2S DAC, so I'm not actually using a USB DAC any longer. That said, while I agree the Pi has a poor master clock and is very noisy, when feeding an asynchronous USB DAC I don't see how any of that matters. If the renderer is feeding the DAC with the right bits, at the approximate right timing, and the DAC's clock is driving the timing, how would the renderer change the sound quality of the DAC's analog output? And yes, I've read John Swenson's articles.

    OMG... knew it would eventually get to the (very, very) old and monotonous "bits is bits" thing.

    Please take this elsewhere, if you must take it anywhere. This stuff is OT and NW (not welcome) on this thread.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Not to beat a dead horse, but even IF the DIY solution is better (which it isn't), why this compulsory need of telling ordinary customers wanting a simple and holistic solution that they should buy a batch of PCB's etc and assemble this into something useful. If you DIY guys have seen the light in order to save a few bucks, just sit back and enjoy your ultimate technological superior solution.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There is a weakness in the story of all these USB devices (and I also own them): not a single manufacturer has published measurements showing that the output from his device is superior to the output without it.

     

    I also subscribe to the "only trust my ears" argument, because in the end, even if I'm fooling myself, I enjoy listening more with the device installed.

     

    But it would be nice if someone could actually show improvement that these devices bring.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There is a weakness in the story of all these USB devices (and I also own them): not a single manufacturer has published measurements showing that the output from his device is superior to the output without it.

     

    I also subscribe to the "only trust my ears" argument, because in the end, even if I'm fooling myself, I enjoy listening more with the device installed.

     

    But it would be nice if someone could actually show improvement that these devices bring.

     

    It sure would.

     

    It would also help with forums like WBF, which although I find utterly unpleasant and in general dislike the tone and manner of many contributors, I do think its fair to pose the question about a products effectiveness and ask for some sort of proof. After all, if manufacturers are making claims about weaknesses in USB digital data, noise on ground planes, noise in PHYs etc etc and making statements that such things exists in general in most or all devices, then surely they must have done a huge amount of research and measurement to determine this, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of their prototypes etc, and it doesn't seem unreasonable to ask to see some if it. I can see there are various reasons to not do so - from trade secrets and competitive advantage, right through to there not being any because its based on pure hypothesis.

     

    I found the Regen didn't bring any change I could detect in my system, and I was intrigued by the discussions. It's a shame the main discussion was on WBF really as I would have quite liked to follow it.

     

    Let's see what the microRendu does when it finally arrives..... like you say, for the average home user, all we have are our ears and they aren't calibrated measurement instruments as such and are part of a system that can be easily influenced, albeit we can justify the results to ourselves....

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I highly value HiFi News effort to show measurements on several transports such as Aurender N10 and Melco.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The way I use it, 100% DLNA, the Pi is no different and certainly no less than the likes of Auralic (both), a PC, Mac Mini, or even a NAS.

     

    How is the inevitable crunch in bandwidth because of the combined Ethernet/USB controller in the Raspi no different than Auralic, a PC, Mac Mini, especially for high-rate DSD?

     

    Even a general purpose - and even a multi purpose PC - while its multi tasking would sound the same when running DLNA for audio

     

    It never will sound the same as a motherboard, a set of components, interfaces and power distribution designed from the ground up to do one thing and one thing really well: computer for the best SQ.

     

    This device is not in the same league as a general-purpose SBC at all. One is a Lamborghini Countach, the other is a Lada. Both can make you travel from point A to B faster than by foot and you can sure work on a Lada to improve it...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It would also help with forums like WBF

     

    I think we can forget about that for a while until things settle there (check my thread on the microrendu there to see what I mean...).

     

    I believe some independent measurements with eye pattern were posted on the pinkfishmedia forum by another John (unless it was that other forum with an animal name like hifipig?, memory fails).

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think we can forget about that for a while until things settle there (check my thread on the microrendu there to see what I mean...).

     

    I believe some independent measurements with eye pattern were posted on the pinkfishmedia forum by another John (unless it was that other forum with an animal name like hifipig?, memory fails).

     

    I did, and it reminded me why I never go there ;) Actually thats not fully fair as like I say being inquisitive and questioning is good for all of us, but it's just so, er, DULL, repetitive and ego central over there. :)

     

    Yes, the eye patterns for the Regen were John Westlake via pfm (and not Wigwam? - not aware of an animal one!), but again some disputed whether that was indicative of an audible improvement. I don't have the kit, interest or inclination to do measurements, or the background to decipher them, but I do appreciate others doing it - whatever the conclusion - providing there's no predetermined agenda. As far as I'm aware nothing ever came from the manufacturers, unless I missed something....

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There is a weakness in the story of all these USB devices (and I also own them): not a single manufacturer has published measurements showing that the output from his device is superior to the output without it.

     

    I also subscribe to the "only trust my ears" argument, because in the end, even if I'm fooling myself, I enjoy listening more with the device installed.

     

    But it would be nice if someone could actually show improvement that these devices bring.

     

    But would sales increase if they published measurements? I think not.

     

    There's obviously enough business to be had amongst those who don't really need measurements to convince them to buy. A smart company is going to apply scarce resources to where they are most needed (supporting existing customers, developing new products, bringing in new customers).

     

    I've found that most (but not all) of those seeking measurements aren't easily satisfied. As soon as measurements are shown, they make it their mission to discredit those measurements. "Where's the proof that can be heard in a controlled blind test", they'll ask. Why would a company waste precious resources trying to satisfy such people when they could instead be applying those resources to taking even better care of their actual customers?

     

    A company also has to be mindful of their competition. A company that publishes measurements could actually end up giving away their competitive advantage and killing their own sales.

     

    Just my two cents.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I did, and it reminded me why I never go there ;) Actually thats not fully fair as like I say being inquisitive and questioning is good for all of us, but it's just so, er, DULL, repetitive and ego central over there. :)

    <SNIP>

    Well put. They're off my "go to" list. Not worth the trouble.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    FWIW, I just compared my microR NAA upsampling to DSD 64 (that's what I can do with the mR and my DAC) to a direct connection from the same server to the DAC with a CAPS PC (Windows), which allows me to do upsampling to DSD 128 to my DAC.

     

    To my taste, the mR sounded better. The only words I can describe it with are that the direct to PC playback had what I'd call sort of a "hollowness" - it was more upfront, but not as solid. The mR sound was a bit more recessed, but had more "solidity". To my taste, plus for the mR. That may mean the mR sounds better, or that it is adding some kind of pleasant distortion. Doesn't matter to me.

     

    Of course someone else might have had an opposite reaction, but I can only go on what I hear.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    l

    To my taste, the mR sounded better. The only words I can describe it with are that the direct to PC playback had what I'd call sort of a "hollowness" - it was more upfront, but not as solid. The mR sound was a bit more recessed, but had more "solidity". To my taste, plus for the mR. That may mean the mR sounds better, or that it is adding some kind of pleasant distortion. Doesn't matter to me.

     

    Well said. I hear this too. My take is that there is some kind of noise present that creates that hollow sound. Strip that away and you end up with greater solidity and coherence. I heard the Aries do this relative to a Mac. And I now hear the microRendu doing this relative to the Aries.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Not to beat a dead horse, but even IF the DIY solution is better (which it isn't), why this compulsory need of telling ordinary customers wanting a simple and holistic solution that they should buy a batch of PCB's etc and assemble this into something useful. If you DIY guys have seen the light in order to save a few bucks, just sit back and enjoy your ultimate technological superior solution.

     

    Well, let's keep on beating that dead horse. First of all, I didn't choose a DIY solution to save a few bucks. I had a Squeezebox Touch and after several years was curious as to what might provide a better streaming component for my stereo. So investing $50 was a low cost and low risk experiment to see what could be done as a possible replacement. I'm not naturally a DIY kind of guy - but the risk/reward ratio here seemed worthwhile to try it.

     

    A friend of mine replaced his HRT MusicStreamer II+ with a $6500 Playback Designs MPD-3, and let me have the HRT DAC on permanent loan. Comparing the sound of the Squeezebox (with its built-in DAC) to the Raspberry Pi B+ and MusicStreamer, I heard a significantly better sound on my Bryston/B&W system. As part of that experiment, I tried out various Linux distros and found them hard to work with and configure for audio - until I stumbled upon Volumio. It's a highly tuned Linux distro designed for a headless SBC acting as an audio streamer.

     

    Then I started reading about the advantages of I2S DAC's, and thought for $45 it would be fun to try one and compare the sound to the HRT DAC, so I bought an IQAudio Pi-DAC+. IQAudio is as far as I can tell a one man company from Glasgow who recently moved to England. I like supporting small companies with innovative products, and everything I read about his DAC indicated it was pretty remarkable. When I received the DAC it took 5 minutes to add it on top of the Pi, power it up, and use Volumio's Web-based UI to choose it as the audio output device, as well as enable the hardware volume control it supports. The sound was stunning. No soldering involved, which is good, since I've never soldered anything in my life.

     

    I was blown away how good this little DAC sounded. And I've had my friend's Playback Designs DAC in my music room. Perhaps the MPD-3 had a bit better soundstage and depth, but not a very big difference. And that's before I discovered I could change the default digital interpolation filter on the DAC to one which I thought sounded even better.

     

    After that I forked up another $15 and bought a case for the Pi/DAC combo - that was the hardest part of the whole DIY effort - taping the corners of the case components before screwing them in.

     

    Since then I bought another Pi, the 3, and another IQAudio DAC, along with a bunch of microSD cards, having tried out Moode and Rune Audio distributions. I'm currently running Volumio on one, and piCorePlayer on the other. I then added the open source Spotify Connect module to Volumio, so even though Volumio supports Spotify now I can use the Pi as a Spotify Connect device, which is a big improvement.

     

    None of this was to "save money". It was due to my curiosity, and I think it's a lot of fun to play around with the various "audiophile" linux distros.

     

    I'm also not saying the solutions I stumbled upon are "superior" to commercial solutions such as the microRendu. Different people have different requirements and weights as to what provides the superior solution to them. I am, however, questioning whether the "purpose built" approach that is being advocated by Sonore provides any better audio quality. I don't believe it does. Apparently the engineers at Bryston agree with me, with their approach of using the Raspberry Pi 2 and HiFiBerry Digi+ board as the core of their new BD-Pi.

     

    I am also questioning the longer term approach of packaging a bunch of open source modules with a proprietary hardware product like this and how future-proof it will be. Actually, I'm questioning how usable is the current software packaged with the Sonore unit compared to integrated Linux distros such as Volumio and Moode. Yes, Squeezelite is one option for the microRendu, but the piCorePlayer platform incorporates the latest releases of Squeezelite with other options and software (e.g. Shairplay), providing what I am guessing (since I haven't used the Sonore software) is a more integrated, functionally complete and easy to use interface. Third party apps that control the Linux MPD player (an option for the microRendu) are pretty weak, whereas Volumio, Moode and Rune offer highly usable UI's that run in standard web browsers but with CSS tuned to smart phones and tablets above and beyond PC's.

     

    And regarding Doak's comment that I'm not welcome here, this is, after all, a comment thread on a review of the microRendu. So in any critical review, and the comment thread to follow, I believe the basic design approach and "benefits" of the product should be questioned and debated. I also believe alternatives should be compared. Hence, my motivation for my original posting.

     

    Now, to end here by adding more fuel to the fire, after reading up on digital audio over the last year I decided to post my first article on Medium about what I found. Here it is:

     

    https://medium.com/@skikirkwood/truth-lies-and-fraud-in-the-audiophile-world-a365e56c97c4#.nhblwvrgi

     

    And I followed that with a post on how I evolved from an early CD player to my current gear:

     

    https://medium.com/@skikirkwood/how-to-play-2000-cds-without-a-cd-player-d6f231057971#.xikszxv5l

     

    I'm sure the above two Medium postings will provide a bunch of you with a lot more ammo for snarky comments. Bring it on.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, let's keep on beating that dead horse..........

     

    And regarding Doak's comment that I'm not welcome here, this is, after all, a comment thread on a review of the microRendu. So in any critical review, and the comment thread to follow, I believe the basic design approach and "benefits" of the product should be questioned and debated. I also believe alternatives should be compared. Hence, my motivation for my original posting.

    <SNIP>

    Despite your attempt at justification, I (still) see no valid relation between your posts and the topic of this thread.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I am, however, questioning whether the "purpose built" approach that is being advocated by Sonore provides any better audio quality. I don't believe it does. Apparently the engineers at Bryston agree with me, with their approach of using the Raspberry Pi 2 and HiFiBerry Digi+ board as the core of their new BD-Pi.

     

    I hope you realize the breakdown in your logic.

     

    Your opinion = Purpose built component isn't better than Raspberry Pi 2 and HiFiBerry Digi+ board

    Bryston selected the Raspberry Pi 2 and HiFiBerry Digi+ board for one of its products

    Thus, Bsyston agrees with you that purpose built products don't provide better audio quality.

     

     

    That makes no sense.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    I am also questioning the longer term approach of packaging a bunch of open source modules with a proprietary hardware product like this and how future-proof it will be. Actually, I'm questioning how usable is the current software packaged with the Sonore unit compared to integrated Linux distros such as Volumio and Moode. Yes, Squeezelite is one option for the microRendu, but the piCorePlayer platform incorporates the latest releases of Squeezelite with other options and software (e.g. Shairplay), providing what I am guessing (since I haven't used the Sonore software) is a more integrated, functionally complete and easy to use interface. Third party apps that control the Linux MPD player (an option for the microRendu) are pretty weak, whereas Volumio, Moode and Rune offer highly usable UI's that run in standard web browsers but with CSS tuned to smart phones and tablets above and beyond PC's.

     

    Nothing is future-proof.

     

    You're making comments about software you've never seen and it's showing. microRendu has Shairplay.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    And regarding Doak's comment that I'm not welcome here...

     

    Everyone is welcome here as long as they are respectful. You've been very respectful with your comments so far, although I don't agree with them. No big deal.

     

     

     

     

     

    Now, to end here by adding more fuel to the fire ...I'm sure the above two Medium postings will provide a bunch of you with a lot more ammo for snarky comments. Bring it on.

     

    This makes me think you came here with a hidden agenda and weakens any arguments you tried to make. Bummer. I thought some of your comments were worthy of discussion, but it appears you were really interested in an open discussion.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Guest
    This is now closed for further comments




×
×
  • Create New...