Auralic Aries (Hardware) - Impressions and Information

[Hailey]

T.

[mikey8811]

Lightning DS Beta 4.1 has expired. You need to download Release 3.1. It doesn't revert automatically via an app update as other apps do.

 

Going back to 3.1, it seems to sound different. Less open and more midrange - less sibnilance in the highs.

 

It also seems to work slower when you skip to tracks in the queue.

[eintom]

LightningDS is just the control software, how this can sound different?

Firmware can.

[wanta911]

Well I have been running the current Beta firmware almost from the time of it's release. There is no doubt that there is a difference to version 3.3 with the immediate impression being one of improved clarity & definition but I have noticed that I have been listening to music for shorter periods. I am home a lot and there is usually music playing when I am, but lately I find myself switching it off a lot earlier than usual.

 

I recently switched back to version 3.3 to compare and whilst it isn't initially as impressive as the Beta firmware, the presentation is smoother and less fatiguing for longer listening sessions.

 

I suppose it could be argued that the new firmware isn't as forgiving on less than stellar recordings but if your library is predominantly Rock or Popular music, then the chances are that a very large percentage of it would fit into the less than stellar category and I'm not sure that the new firmware is a good "all round" solution in this case.....at least in it's current incarnation.

 

So, I've given my feedback to Auralic and I'll stick with 3.3 and see if there is any further tweaking by them before the new firmware is officially released. If it remains as is I might have to look at an alternative, I hope this isn't the case as I love the convenience of my Aries.

[Doak]

Well I have been running the current Beta firmware almost from the time of it's release. There is no doubt that there is a difference to version 3.3 with the immediate impression being one of improved clarity & definition but I have noticed that I have been listening to music for shorter periods. I am home a lot and there is usually music playing when I am, but lately I find myself switching it off a lot earlier than usual.

 

I recently switched back to version 3.3 to compare and whilst it isn't initially as impressive as the Beta firmware, the presentation is smoother and less fatiguing for longer listening sessions.

 

I suppose it could be argued that the new firmware isn't as forgiving on less than stellar recordings but if your library is predominantly Rock or Popular music, then the chances are that a very large percentage of it would fit into the less than stellar category and I'm not sure that the new firmware is a good "all round" solution in this case.....at least in it's current incarnation.

 

So, I've given my feedback to Auralic and I'll stick with 3.3 and see if there is any further tweaking by them before the new firmware is officially released. If it remains as is I might have to look at an alternative, I hope this isn't the case as I love the convenience of my Aries.

 

To each his own.

IMO Beta 4.06/7 are overall more resolving.

Since there is more apparent air and possibly more apparent high frequency I can see that in systems that tend towards over-etched or in the face may push things too far and become as you say "fatiguing."

I'm hearing nothing that fits that description, though my system, by some, may be considered a bit laid back but is in every way "full-range."

To me the current version sounds excellent,,, and I'll be sure that Auralic also gets that message.

[wanta911]

To each his own.

IMO Beta 4.06/7 are overall more resolving.

Since there is more apparent air and possibly more apparent high frequency I can see that in systems that tend towards over-etched or in the face may push things too far and become as you say "fatiguing."

I'm hearing nothing that fits that description, though my system, by some, may be considered a bit laid back but is in every way "full-range."

To me the current version sounds excellent,,, and I'll be sure that Auralic also gets that message.

 

Yes it will definitely be system dependent. It's funny because my setup was always described as "laid back" or "analog sounding" before installing the Beta firmware, it has me wondering about a couple of tweaks I put in place with the older firmware to get a bit more definition.....I might go and "undo" something to see if it makes a difference.

[Doak]

Yes it will definitely be system dependent. It's funny because my setup was always described as "laid back" or "analog sounding" before installing the Beta firmware, it has me wondering about a couple of tweaks I put in place with the older firmware to get a bit more definition.....I might go and "undo" something to see if it makes a difference.

Good idea.

IME every time a change is made, rebalancing the system needs to be considered.

Sometimes it's as simple as a minor change in speaker placement, height, tilt.

Yes, tweaks that pushed things in a certain direction may no longer be needed, or be in need of adjustment.

There are many many ways to push in a newly desired direction.

Good luck. Hope it works out for you --- and me.

[plp1965]

Good idea.

IME every time a change is made, rebalancing the system needs to be considered.

Sometimes it's as simple as a minor change in speaker placement, height, tilt.

Yes, tweaks that pushed things in a certain direction may no longer be needed, or be in need of adjustment.

There are many many ways to push in a newly desired direction.

Good luck. Hope it works out for you --- and me.

 

Ditching a source component before trying minor adjustments seems drastic to me. In my system, changing speaker angle even by a little, makes a big difference in terms of focus and treble perception. I agree on your take on the new firmware. Much more resolving and better for good and not so good recordings.

[mikey8811]

Good idea.

IME every time a change is made, rebalancing the system needs to be considered.

Sometimes it's as simple as a minor change in speaker placement, height, tilt.

Yes, tweaks that pushed things in a certain direction may no longer be needed, or be in need of adjustment.

There are many many ways to push in a newly desired direction.

Good luck. Hope it works out for you --- and me.

 

I have always been confused by speaker rake, height and tilt. My speakers, Vienna Acoustics Kiss are quite adjustable. I can toe in or out the bass module. I can also separately toe in or out the midrange and treble drivers. I find toe in solidifies the image and toeing out gives a more open sound, wider soundstage with better instrumental separation and less sibilance.

 

However, what does speaker rake, height and tilt do? I can lower the mid and tweeter driver to angle down towards me or raise them to point higher but what effect would I get? I would like a warmer balance.

 

Thanks

[petarst]

Dear friends,

I am new to this forum, as well in computer audio streamers etc..

I would like to ask if this auralic is able to play as good as high end player connected to very good DAC. I have heard that it can't.

I have yamaha CDS1000 with spdif pure silver cable to my DAC and i would like to start using my qnap NAS and forget on yamaha transport. What are your opinions? Thank you.

[Doak]

Dear friends,

I am new to this forum, as well in computer audio streamers etc..

I would like to ask if this auralic is able to play as good as high end player connected to very good DAC. I have heard that it can't.

I have yamaha CDS1000 with spdif pure silver cable to my DAC and i would like to start using my qnap NAS and forget on yamaha transport. What are your opinions? Thank you.

In my experienced opinion>You heard wrong.

[petarst]

In my experienced opinion>You heard wrong.

 

I am glad to hear that. Can you elaborate more, please? What about android support?

[plp1965]

Dear friends,

I am new to this forum, as well in computer audio streamers etc..

I would like to ask if this auralic is able to play as good as high end player connected to very good DAC. I have heard that it can't.

I have yamaha CDS1000 with spdif pure silver cable to my DAC and i would like to start using my qnap NAS and forget on yamaha transport. What are your opinions? Thank you.

 

This little story might help. I always thought cd's sounded better than a file. After all, how can a copy be better than the original? One day out of curiosity, I tried a flac from a pen drive to my Oppo 103. (The Oppo as transport to my DAC). The file sounded noticeably better than the cd. In this case, all things being equal, the copy was better. The reason? Possibly lower jitter from not having a noisy drive with moving parts involved in the process. Who knows. I thought the difference in SQ was enough for me to go to the trouble of buying a NAS and ripping +2,000 cds.

 

Sometimes, for fun, I compare the Oppo as a file transport to the Aries. The difference between them is much greater than the difference between the Oppo as cd transport/file transport. The Aries might not look like much, but is gooood.

[Doak]

I am glad to hear that. Can you elaborate more, please? What about android support?

Disc spinners leave out hires anyway, so simplify and get it out of the system while sacrificing nothing.

Oh, and get an iPad. You'll be glad you did.

[plp1965]

I'd like to add that for someone like me, with zero interest in becoming a computer expert, the Aries, or something similar (Moon 180, etc.) makes perfect sense.

[Doak]

I'd like to add that for someone like me, with zero interest in becoming a computer expert, the Aries, or something similar (Moon 180, etc.) makes perfect sense.

Moi aussi.

[petarst]

Hi,

 

please check here:

 

High Fidelity

 

I would mark this:

 

A result of this test wasn't really surprising to me. It was the same as in many other cases before and the conclusion was still the same – there was still a lot to do before computer audio could sound as well as a CD. Same music played from CD seems more spacious, less focused on foreground and more resolving. Differences were pretty clear to me despite the fact that Aries played files in such a coherent, friendly way that I would hardly call it's presentation flawed. I'd say it is a characteristic feature of computer audio for today. The advantage of computer based source is their upgradability – every now and then manufacturer releases new software which usually improves also Aries' sonic so it is possible that even the next release will bring some improvement. But today CD still sounds better directly from disc then from a ripped files, and it sound more like analogue master-tapes and LPs – these two are my personal references.Summary

I wouldn't make much of a problem of it. Without direct comparison to high-end CD drive differences are almost unnoticeable. Simple multi-format drives used in Blu-ray players when playing a CD sound surely worse then Aries playing rip from same CD. There is less focus, sound is smeared, and there is some sort of sound “diffusion”. The device under review does a much better job at it, and I think today it simply has no competition on the market that I know of.The fact is that you will get most of its performance when playing Hi-Res files. Listening to them is simply comfortable and pleasant. Modifications I mentions also here apply. But we have to remember that there are no perfect audio devices, so when choosing one you have to consider your needs and available option and forget about wishful thinking of some ideal, non-existent devices. It is a well balanced, “mature” sound. It is not as smooth and rich as the sound ofLumin, nor has it such a deep base of the sound of Aurender and Ayon, but these are much more expensive devices. But it is surely as clear, dynamic sounding as them. It is a small, well equipped device. It can easily be used even in quite expensive audio systems. RED Fingerprint.

 

It seems my fear was right, but for this price it seems it is jack pot.

[petarst]

Moi aussi.

 

Doak I have seen that you had sonore micro rendu. How you can compare it SQ vs Aurelic a.? Thx.

 

What player do you have now? thx.

[Doak]

Doak I have seen that you had sonore micro rendu. How you can compare it SQ vs Aurelic a.? Thx.

 

What player do you have now? thx.

 

System info in my sig is current/accurate.

[MNG]

The different Aries software/firmware configurations do sound different but a constantly changing sound structure is not what I am after - I want consistency. I have spent a lot of effort in getting my system tuned and getting the 3 sources in the main system sounding as close to each other as possible. I've switched to Roon now for the control software - because it has an excellent user interface, is quick, robust and, importantly, will control all my devices around the house, irrespective of brand. You can even multi-room with different brand hardware. After several years, I'm tired of switching software all the while for different devices and, as for my wife, forget it! She just drops a CD in and presses play.

 

Using Roon with the Aries does have the advantage of protecting me from the sonic variances which come with new software releases as well, which is a bonus. The latest Aries SW/FW combo which utilises a memory cache for playback does have merit, but there is too much bass emphasis for my liking.

 

The new forthcoming high level Aries sounds interesting, but I don't think that its intended audience will welcome constant changes to the sound signature. It will be interesting to see how that developes though.

[Doak]

Using Roon with the Aries does have the advantage of protecting me from the sonic variances which come with new software releases as well, which is a bonus. The latest Aries SW/FW combo which utilises a memory cache for playback does have merit, but there is too much bass emphasis for my liking.

Why do you think that Roon will never make changes to its playback engine?

 

IMO they should consider doing so since in my experience it has fallen behind others.

To my ears, in my system Roon did not sound as good as HQPlayer OR the latest beta firmware of the Auralic Aries.

Anyone using Roon with the Aries is giving up something in doing so.

[pl_svn]

Why do you think that Roon will never make changes to its playback engine?

 

IMO they should consider doing so since in my experience it has fallen behind others.

To my ears, in my system Roon did not sound as good as HQPlayer OR the latest beta firmware of the Auralic Aries.

Anyone using Roon with the Aries is giving up something in doing so.

 

I truly hope they do, as to my ears too it doesn't sound as good as A+

 

though on their forum... the prevailing attitude is "bits are bits" and all bit perfect players sound the same so... must be something else in your settings/system

[2string1]

The different Aries software/firmware configurations do sound different but a constantly changing sound structure is not what I am after - I want consistency. I have spent a lot of effort in getting my system tuned and getting the 3 sources in the main system sounding as close to each other as possible. I've switched to Roon now for the control software - because it has an excellent user interface, is quick, robust and, importantly, will control all my devices around the house, irrespective of brand. You can even multi-room with different brand hardware. After several years, I'm tired of switching software all the while for different devices and, as for my wife, forget it! She just drops a CD in and presses play.

 

Using Roon with the Aries does have the advantage of protecting me from the sonic variances which come with new software releases as well, which is a bonus. The latest Aries SW/FW combo which utilises a memory cache for playback does have merit, but there is too much bass emphasis for my liking.

 

The new forthcoming high level Aries sounds interesting, but I don't think that its intended audience will welcome constant changes to the sound signature. It will be interesting to see how that developes though.

Where are you reading about the forthcoming high level Aries sounding interesting?

[MNG]

Why do you think that Roon will never make changes to its playback engine?

 

That is a fair point. However, I haven't experienced such wide variances in tone as with the Aries updates and I am after consistency. From comments made by users, it is clear that what are considered improvements to some are seen as adverse by others.

 

I don't want variances and inconsistencies in tone. My MBL CD transport is my benchmark and it sounds almost identical to my Melco NAS, both being played through my Chord Dave DAC. To my mind, that is how it should be as I believe that means that I am getting pretty accurate results from both. The Aries deviates from the other two by some degree which, to my mind, means that it must be inaccurate.

 

Of course, everything sounds different through different systems and to different ears, but if one item stands out significantly, then I suspect that that item is inaccurate. The Aries currently sounds a bit like a loudness button on old style Hifi amps to my ears - that is a slight exaggeration, but it makes the point.

[MNG]

though on their forum... the prevailing attitude is "bits are bits" and all bit perfect players sound the same so... must be something else in your settings/system

 

I agree with that. I love the software whilst on trial period, but was not convinced initially by the sound quality I was getting and, when I raised it with them, I got a similar response. In fairness, there are so many variables that they are probably safer staying well out of it.

 

I did resolve the sound quality issues in the end which persuaded me to go for a Lifetime subscription.