Article: Aurender S10 Music Server Review

[Priaptor]

I have not.<br />

<br />

It is something I will check out.

[beetlemania]

You have a very interesting build. The Scythe fan appears to be a reasonable compromise to a fanless design. I've read differing opinions as to whether lower power or greater CPU leads to higher SQ. Sounds like you prefer the better CPU route.<br />

<br />

"measured to 40W max at the wall outlet"<br />

<br />

That's good to know. I wish Chris would tell us what the CAPS 2.0 draws. I suspect it's even less.<br />

<br />

I want a server that can double as a DVD movie player. Does Jplay turn the PC into a music only server (ala cMP)?

[ted_b]

n/t

[beetlemania]

Yeah, I do feel somewhat guilty for helping steer this off topic. Chris' review of the Aurender, however, naturally leads to discussion of different music server solutions. The Aurender appears to be a really sweet product but not everyone has 7 large or will find its feature set to fill their need.

[Priaptor]

Unfortunately there are so many products and so many variables and while I give Chris all the credit for a great review on a product I am seriously considering, he raises, unintentionally more questions than he answers.<br />

<br />

In his review he states:<br />

<br />

"Currently none of my Mac OS X based machines can best the sound quality of the Aurender S10 in my system. Compared to the Aurender via AES my Macs connected via USB sound very sluggish and washed out. There is no life to the Mac based music compared to the S10's all around vibrance and solid yet controlled bass reproduction"<br />

<br />

as well as:<br />

<br />

"But no matter how much I like the Aurender S10 I continue to use my C.A.P.S. v2.0 server frequently as I consider it sonically equal or slightly better in certain circumstances"<br />

<br />

So, from perch, in trying to read between the lines, Chris, who has probably had more exposure to more equipment/players/etc, is basically saying that Mac players basically suck, compared to the Aurender and C.A.P.S. 2.0. "Sluggish, washed out and no life" is pretty damning comments about Mac players.<br />

<br />

So in the context of the Aurender, in trying to make sense of the choices, I think the questions being raised on this thread are exactly dead on and not being hijacked. I personally have noticed a great variability among the three Mac players I have used. I haven't tried a C.A.P.S. solution, but before shelling out 7K on an Aurender, which is back on point, it would make sense to try to get a handle on the many variables being raised by Chris as well as other posts on this thread.<br />

<br />

Just my opinion.

[ted_b]

discussion is great, and deserves its own thread.

[Priaptor]

Having been in medical practice in South Florida since 87, I am used to getting them busted more than you can imagine. <br />

<br />

You are probably right. I think Chris's review of the Aurender really raises a fair # of questions, that would make for a more broad discussion that hopefully he could chime in to clarify some of the remarks he made in his review.<br />

<br />

[Afveep]

While Chris compares the Aurender to Mac and Windows-based servers, a natural comparison would also seem to be the Sonore Signature with upgraded PS and the closest Auralati.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi Guys - Please take think in good spirits. Don't read between any lines in the review. I don't write evasively. I write exactly what I think. Since I didn't say Macs suck I don't believe Macs suck. Plus keep in mind I wrote about my current Mac playback. As we all know this can change with a single update or configuration change. Also, my opinion is based on my system, not yours :~)

[Priaptor]

being evasive. Quite the opposite. <br />

<br />

I was just reading what you wrote. I take your opinions pretty seriously and when you state that the Mac is "sluggish, washed out and no life" in comparison to C.A.P.S. 2.0 and Aurender that is a BIG statement.<br />

<br />

You probably have more experience with players/DACs/etc., than most so, personally, I look to your statements for guidance. I know you also use a DAC 8, so I while we have different systems, you have heard a lot.<br />

<br />

By no means am I criticizing your observations, just for more clarity.<br />

<br />

Thanks

[netchord]

rather than comparisons to mac/windows, i'd like to see comparisons to other dedicated servers, particularly the Transporter. I appreciate the TP is end-of-life, but in my system, it sounds better than a mac mini connected the same dac using the Halide Bridge.<br />

<br />

in other words, even when used strictly as a transport, bypassing it's built in dac, the Transporter, taking it's data over ethernet, and feeding the same dac (in this case, a Meridian G61 controller) sounds better than a mini running itunes/Pure Music, connected via Halide Bridge, to the same meridian controller.<br />

<br />

i suspect this is because ethernet is inherently better than USB, even asynch, for audio data transportation.

[Elprior]

SoundQCar : You can select your tracks from MC but it will not intercept MC audio route, so I guess the response to your answer is no.<br />

What's more, it does not support asio, because that's an ugly road according to its creator (KS being the purest one, on theory). I guess your dac should support KS too, in which case you are good for a test <br />

<br />

Beetlemania : I too thought that less power was better, but that's just not what real field tests show here. I have not gone to the i7 extent as I wish to keep my source silent too.<br />

Yes CAPS v2 is sure to consume even less power, but you have to make choices at some point in designing your source. The seasonic psu had great measurements backing it up, so I had to cope with its power handling. The efficiency is still very good at such low power consumption (versus its 400W rating).<br />

Should I want to watch movies too, I would use JRiver, as Jplay will offer nothing to support this feature. But it does no harm to your pc neither. You can use both, as I do on a daily basis (my wife does not even know how to use Jplay). When listening to music, Jplay transforms your pc into almost dead meat, just barely alive enough to play music. But when music stops, your pc is back from coma <br />

<br />

ted_b : YES ! sorry <br />

<br />

Priaptor : great, as soon as you can dedicate a 'serious' pc to Jplay, you are not going back. V4, to be announced, is a tremendous step forward what is already the best player available (imho of course).<br />

<br />

I'm done, sorry for all the hijacked users.<br />

We could continue this on the Jplay thread, if I can be of any help to someone here.<br />

<br />

Elp<br />

<br />

PS : @Barrows : I am 100% with you about not using wireless tools at all. You can count me on your camp

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi Priaptor - Thanks for the clear response :~)<br />

<br />

[Elberoth]

Chris,<br />

<br />

Thank you for another excellent review and bringing our attention to what seems to be an excellent, and really well executed product.<br />

<br />

If I hadn't started building my own hi-end PC music serwer (using some of the SOtM bits you had recommended + Win7 and Jplay) I would definately consider buying the Aurender as my #1 option.<br />

<br />

Nonetheless, I had already asked my dealer for a loaner, which should arrive in the next few days, so who knows ... maybe my newly build serwer will go for sale, as Aurender will stay ? <br />

<br />

I should be able to compare it directly to my server in 2 weeks time (server is not ready yet - waiting for the upcoming Jplay release).

[Encore]

Chris, <br />

Just for completeness' sake: Having read your Meitner MA-1 review, where you write that an MBP was pretty close to the performance of the Aurender and the CAPS 2.0, I was also a little confused with your statement about the MBP being washed out. <br />

<br />

For several reasons, one of them being that my boss has just sponsored a paid-by-my-work MBP to me, I have pretty much settled on my own current MBP as my future source, so I sort of ignored your statement in the Aurender review. But nevertheless an uneasiness about that decision now resides in the depths of my audiophile soul ...<br />

<br />

I guess it's just part of the deal of being a reviewer whose evaluations are trusted that readers read every word you write almost as if it's holy writ.

[k-man]

First statement (close performance) is during the evaluation of the Meitners<br />

<br />

Second statement (the washed out part) is the comparison using BADA.<br />

<br />

As mentioned, software updates (iTunes, Lion) may have played a part for the differences in either scenario.<br />

<br />

[SoundQcar]

Elp....thank you for the info.<br />

<br />

netchord...<br />

<br />

I owned for three years a Modwright Transporter/Music Vault combo, and loved it.....until I tried the Meitner DAC via USB input with a very plain-jane Toshiba XP laptop. Sonically the computer rig really embarrassed my transporter to a level I didn't think was possible. You'd have to turn my lights out before I'd even consider going back. It wasn't even close.<br />

<br />

My $.02<br />

<br />

Bob<br />

<br />

The Aurender sounds like a wonderful unit, but until they go all-in with their USB interface, I'll look for another end-of-game avenue.

[netchord]

Hi- i'm assuming you used the analog out of the TP- did you compare the TP into the meitner vs the laptop/USB?<br />

<br />

Also, was the TP connected to the network via ethernet or wifi?

[SoundQcar]

Initially when buying the Meitner, I hooked the TP to it via Kubala Sosna Emotion aes/ebu. This configuration bested using the TP's internal DAC by a noticeable margin. It was after a couple of weeks that I thought I'd give the USB input of the Meitner a try, and haven't looked back since.<br />

<br />

My connection to the TP for all of the time I have had it was via Wi-Fi from my vault. I tried it via ethernet early on and slightly preferred a wi-fi connection.<br />

<br />

Bob

[Part-Time Audiophile]

So, is the Mac-based playback via the Alpha USB "washed out" by comparison to the Aurender-direct-over-AES, or not? <br />

<br />

I read that Chris said "playback is flawless" -- does that mean "it worked without a hitch" or "it sounded amazing"?<br />

<br />

More clarity here: "Compared to the Aurender via AES my Macs connected via USB sound very sluggish and washed out. There is no life to the Mac based music compared to the S10's all around vibrance and solid yet controlled bass reproduction." <-- is this comment in reference to a comparison of the Alpha USB playback into the Berkeley Alpha (when sourced from a Mac)? And if not, what other gear is it referring to?

[barrows]

Scott, apples to apples, or apples to falafel? It is hard to even begin to draw any conclusions or even suppositions without these details.

[earflappin]

Yep, this point has been made 2 - 3 times already. I had hoped Chris would have responded by now.

[MikeJazz]

Cris, great review.<br />

<br />

It would be interesting to compare to other digital transports, like PS Audio's PWT and Linn DS's.<br />

<br />

Also, I wonder why Aurender was not designed to be UPNP compliant, because it would became even more user friendly, and would open the possibilities to other sources at home. The limitations of 2 TB hard drive will be annoying, sooner or later.<br />

<br />

I also second many other who question the price tag, but it seems that Widealab is not planning to sell enough Arenders to appropriate R&D costs enough to bring down to a more competitive price. <br />

<br />

So at 7k, I would how it will perform against, for example, a Linn Klimax DS. That already has a DAC and a free ipad app.<br />

<br />

Regarding usability, Linn is becoming better each day, with a very good kinsky iPAD app. In my case, and using a sub-optimal network (everything hanging on the ISP's router) it has been a positive experience, despite the occasional disconnections.<br />

<br />

Thanks Cris!

[Part-Time Audiophile]

Barrows: "Scott, apples to apples, or apples to falafel? It is hard to even begin to draw any conclusions or even suppositions without these details."<br />

<br />

I think the issue is source-as-a-whole, isn't it? If playback with the Aurender, <em>without</em> an outboard converter like the Alpha USB, sounds better than a server <em>with</em> an outboard converter like the Alpha USB, that's a valid comparison, isn't it? Like comparing different amplifiers or different preamps, with all else the same in the system.<br />

<br />

earflappin: "Yep, this point has been made 2 - 3 times already. I had hoped Chris would have responded by now."<br />

<br />

Not sure what you mean? That my question has been answered -- or not?<br />

<br />

Look, I wouldn't focus on it if I didn't find the question interesting or relevant. I mean, I have an Alpha USB. If it's the case that even with a tweaked out Mac that I could do better with an Aurender, that'd be interesting to know. The question then would be "how much better", which is an interesting question IMO, too. I mean, what's under review is a server -- comparing with other servers is only fair, and that's totally on-point (again, IMO).<br />

<br />

I've had some time to play with the S10 on my own (there's a dealer near me that's evaluating the unit). In my opinion, the Aurender does sound very nice and it's probably the nicest looking and most elegant server I've ever seen. The user interface (on the iPad) works fine, but it's a little clunky. Selecting a song for playback adds it by default to a playlist -- but it adds it to the end of the playlist, so you end up having to find and click the song twice in order to get it to actually play. Irritating, but nothing major. For me, I still think iTunes is the easiest to use (which is why I like Audirvana so much), but I've been told that my preference may primarily be because I've been using iTunes (in one form or another) for 10 years now. Newbies apparently find it confusing, I'm told, which is just odd for me to even consider. ;-)<br />

<br />

BTW, I'm also told the Aurender is now retailing for $6500 -- up from $5500.

[earflappin]

Hey Scot,<br />

<br />

I meant that several people (myself included) had asked questions similar to yours asking for clarifications regarding Chris's negative comments concerning Mac/USB playback performance versus the S10/AES. AFAIK, Chris has not responded to any of these posts.<br />

<br />

The following is from his review:<br />

"The sound quality achieved in my system when connected via AES to my Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC Series 2 was wonderful. Currently none of my Mac OS X based machines can best the sound quality of the Aurender S10 in my system. Compared to the Aurender via AES my Macs connected via USB sound very sluggish and washed out. There is no life to the Mac based music compared to the S10's all around vibrance and solid yet controlled bass reproduction."<br />

<br />

After re-reading this my assumption (right or wrong) is that he only used the BADA as the basis for his Mac/USB conclusion. I noted that the only DAC listed in the "Associated Equipment" section was the BADA DAC and BADA USB box. In other words, it appears he only compared S10->AES->BADA vs Mac(s)->USB->BADA. Since the BADA needs the USB/AES-SPDIF box to "talk USB" this box was in the comparison as well.<br />

<br />

My take is that many readers potentially mis-interpreted his conclusion to mean the Mac sounds dull and lifeless on ALL DAC's that use a USB interface. <br />

<br />

BTW, do you have your BADA USB box yet? Any comments about performance versus the Legato?