New streamers from Aurender!

[Elberoth]

Let's hope they solved the cover art issues as that was always the biggest problem with Aurender and NAS !

[Elberoth]

You can always buy the McIntosh wall clock. I did just that, when I sold my McIntosh integrated for a lil Naim Unity Qute 2 in my family room. McIntosh looks + Naim versatility and small size.

[Elberoth]

So the N10 is a replacement for the S10 ?

[Elberoth]

...jumping in....

 

Auralic Aries vs aurender X100 comparison:

 

On weekend a friend had an Auralic Aries on loan. For further evaluations he asked me for a quick comparison with my aurender X100.

 

The test setup was:

 

A: Aries with USB SSD ---> SPDIF --> Lyngdorf TDAI 2200 --> Piega Coax 90.2

B: aurender X100 /USB -- > ar_t Legato /SPDIF -- > Lyngdorf TDAI 2200 --> Piega Coax 90.2

C: HTPC with JRiver/Wasapi / USB -- > Audiophilleo 1 / SPDIF -- > Lyngdorf TDAI 2200 --> Piega Coax 90.2

 

All levels have been matched to +/- 0.5 dB at 1 kHz (Level meter)

 

The unit under test was selected by the Lyngdorf input switch.

 

Test files :

- Manu Katche - 4rd round, “Senses”

- Holly Cole - Holly Cole

- FIM Super Sound – Carmen Habanera

- Katie Melua – Piece by Piece (3rd track “piece by piece)

 

Attention: below mentioned results are based on individual perceived impressions and overall system setup

 

Results/summary:

 

Considering key SQ properties (soundstage, sibilance, perceived black background, details, etc….) the Aries has been perceived close to the HTPC.

My friend told me that he came almost to the same conclusion by comparing the Aries with his mac mini / Pure Music / Audiophillio1 setup.

 

Side effect: a cell phone call could be recognized on the LS during the Aries test …

 

The overall SQ as well as specific criteria’s have been different on the aurender. We got the impression being closer to the musicians. More details, fuller soundstage, blacker background, you name it…

 

Example: in the beginning of Katie Melua’s “piece by piece” track 3, the sibilance seems to be harsh recorded.

 

The aurender presents this part less harsh but with a hall/noise in the background. So the recording seems to be ok.

 

Ok, the test is not fair as the aurender X100 cost at least twice as much compared to the other UUT’s.

But anyway…

 

mabe

 

I do not understand the point of this comparo. Why have you introduced another variable to the equation, in the form of various USB/SPDIF converters ?

 

What you have heard, may equally well be differencies between the USB/SPDIF converters.

 

A valid comparo would be comparing Aries vs Aurender vs HTPC all using the same ar_t Legato converter.

[Elberoth]

Bottem line - we couldn't realise any significant change on SQ (44.1/16 only). But the level was different so for a valid comparison we needed to match the various levels by a level meter.

 

There should be no difference in level when comparing digital transports. If there was one, then one of the transports had the digital attenuation applied - weird, and makes the whole comparo even more questionable.

[Elberoth]

Theory and real world...

 

Some findings in the real digital world:

 

1. Different player implementations can result in different levels.

 

I.e. if the player also addresses ICC (Inter-sample Clipping Correction) the level may be reduced by some dB. Very often the audio level exceeds 0 dBFS (loudness war) resulting in “harsh” sound if not processed properly.

 

2. The input sensitivity of amplifiers could be set to an unknown level.

 

So care should be taken even in the digital world.

 

Therefore, some Class-D amplifiers enables you to match levels from different sources.

 

The TDAI 2200 provides sensitivity adjustments of +/- 12dB in 0.1 steps.

 

In my case, running 16 Bit material in the 24 Bit processing environment means, that adjustments in the 1-2dB range doesn’t matter at all.

 

Ignoring the real digital world is questionable.

 

No if they all provide bit perfect output. If they don't - there is little point in doing a comparo.

 

PS. Audio level can never exceed 0 dBFS in digital, although any samples at 0 dBFS can still clip when converted to analog due to the signal reconstruction process.