Article: Sonore microRendu Review, Part 2

[sdolezalek]

You are missing the ineptness of the measurements - publishing a measurement that showed an 8dB amplification by the microRendu, purely digital device. Does he not have any common sense - it makes absolutely no sense & anybody who didn't have an agenda would say hold on a minute that couldn't be right! Worse then this he then went on to claim that those who heard an improvement using the mR was probably down to this 8dB increase in volume - I mean come on!!

 

It has been pointed out that he has a ground loop issue in his measurement setup, likely introduced by the iFi PS & whatever other device is causing the ground noise but he refuses to investigate this.

 

From this strawman he then builds his obviously skewed opinion about the compactness of the device being it's flaw because it can't put in the necessary PS filtering to clear up his ground loop noise seen in his measurements.

 

Again, his bias & lack of technical common sense is in evidence all through that thread while at the same time putting forth the pretense that he represents "the voice of engineering"

 

You must have missed this?

 

I was trying hard to give him the benefit of the doubt. He has admitted to his errors on the 8db differences and now X'd out that language even in the early postings. He has not admitted that his testing methods are the likely result of the iPower noise levels.

 

I was more reacting to the folks who read his result of equal noise performance as meaning the microrendu had no benefit. To me that implies this single test (if it was valid at all) was being given far too much signficance.

 

By directly attacking him and assuming he has bad intentions, we tend to enable others to then rush to his defense. I'd prefer we leave the intentions out and just dismiss it as a test that really doesn't tell us much.

[mmerrill99]

I was trying hard to give him the benefit of the doubt. He has admitted to his errors on the 8db differences and now X'd out that language even in the early postings. He has not admitted that his testing methods are the likely result of the iPower noise levels.

 

I was more reacting to the folks who read his result of equal noise performance as meaning the microrendu had no benefit. To me that implies this single test (if it was valid at all) was being given far too much signficance.

 

By directly attacking him and assuming he has bad intentions, we tend to enable others to then rush to his defense. I'd prefer we leave the intentions out and just dismiss it as a test that really doesn't tell us much.

 

Sure, there are two obvious approaches to his thread

- ignore it as of little consequence (probably the best option)

- query/question the measurement technique, results & conclusions to try to get to some semblance of a balanced view

 

The issue is that there are many non-technical people who are swayed by plots & graphs without understanding them but they look scientific so they must be true - especially if some guy interprets them into sound bites for them. It's really the duty of those who are interested in the scientific principle to keep these people honest as can be seen on that thread a lot of false assumptions, false conclusions & opinion is being passed off as fact. This is accepted & allowed to stand if the opinion is in line with the forum bias - much the same as the Hydrogenaudio & other such forums.

[speshal]

One good thing about Stereophile is that they give you both measurements and subjective opinions.

 

This guy probably isn't as qualified as JA to perform measurements, but it's still good to wait until "professional" measurements refute things before drawing conclusions as to whether he is a fraud or not.

 

Of course, if you don't care about measurements, you can ignore him now. Just say..."I don't care about measurements" versus making definitive conclusions about his skills/intentions.

 

Manufacturers have set JA straight on numerous occasions and, conversely, JA has provided measurements that led to changes by the mfg. (i.e. More than one product by PS Audio had some issue which either needed an firmware update or new sample to be sent due to a defect found in the measurements.). Thus, I question the logic behind those who ignore measurements altogether.

 

In addition, some JA measurements have totally embarrassed the subjective reviewer...and rightly so. (I.e. He found one piece that Art Dudley reviewed to have something like over 3db channel imbalance which Art never heard. You'd have to be deaf to miss that because even my 90 year old great grandmother would here if I changed the channel balance by over 3db)

 

In other cases, I don't think half the differences JA measures are audible and no matter what the measurements say, I trust brands like ARC where I have many years experience first hand with my own ears liking what they do.

 

Overall, it's probably wise to analyze both measurements and subjective opinions. We just don't have enough information yet, IMO, to definitively make accusations one way or another yet with this product.

 

People would be better served by patience at this stage. Chris said he is working on it.

[JJinPDX]

In the meantime, I think I'll buy one, mainly because I'm sick and tired of dealing with my Windows Zuma (I actually love it, but I'm the only one in the house who can trouble shoot it if anything goes wrong with it or the network, and the grief I get when something does go wrong and I'm gone.....well, I'm sure many have been there.). I want something purposefully designed to take my music off my NAS and serve it up to my DAC and do so reliably, unseen, with high quality and reasonable cost, and if the damn power goes out or Windows decides it needs to reboot, or the router goes down and the IP addresses are all screwed up, that this little device will not leave the house with no music. It can be the greatest server on earth, but it needs to just work, period.

 

Plus, it has gained thumbs up from many on this site who have no reason not to give anything but their honest impressions. Many of these individuals have not hesitated to spend enormous sums of money on their equipment, yet this relatively "cheap" device appears to do exactly what was intended of it, while bringing a greater sense of musical quality. Quite a feat. I am happy to buy on faith and support this design effort.

 

BTW, there are little toasters out there supplying really great services to many who just want reasonable music at low cost. Chromecast Audio comes to mind. I recently set up a system for friends who could not spend more than $500. This was a challenge, as you can imagine. So they could get music from a laptop in a different part of their house to the system in their living room without running any cabling, I gave them a Chromecast Audio. Hooked it up via toslink and now they have music good enough that the woman of the house cried. FLAC at 24/96 sounds pretty damn good, even in very modestly priced systems.

 

In short, yes measure, measure, measure, and be straight up with everything, but in the end, it's about getting us to the music and the joy of it all.

 

Not sure if any of what I wrote makes any sense, but for some reason this debate and others like it on other threads seems to go down rabbit holes and to me misses the point. Namely, a $650 (or $35) toaster is bringing smiles and in some cases tears to folks because of the music. I will support those efforts.

[mmerrill99]

One good thing about Stereophile is that they give you both measurements and subjective opinions.

 

This guy probably isn't as qualified as JA to perform measurements, but it's still good to wait until "professional" measurements refute things before drawing conclusions as to whether he is a fraud or not.

 

Of course, if you don't care about measurements, you can ignore him now. Just say..."I don't care about measurements" versus making definitive conclusions about his skills/intentions.

 

Manufacturers have set JA straight on numerous occasions and, conversely, JA has provided measurements that led to changes by the mfg. (i.e. More than one product by PS Audio had some issue which either needed an firmware update or new sample to be sent due to a defect found in the measurements.). Thus, I question the logic behind those who ignore measurements altogether.

 

In addition, some JA measurements have totally embarrassed the subjective reviewer...and rightly so. (I.e. He found one piece that Art Dudley reviewed to have something like over 3db channel imbalance which Art never heard. You'd have to be deaf to miss that because even my 90 year old great grandmother would here if I changed the channel balance by over 3db)

 

In other cases, I don't think half the differences JA measures are audible and no matter what the measurements say, I trust brands like ARC where I have many years experience first hand with my own ears liking what they do.

 

Overall, it's probably wise to analyze both measurements and subjective opinions. We just don't have enough information yet, IMO, to definitively make accusations one way or another yet with this product.

 

People would be better served by patience at this stage. Chris said he is working on it.

 

It's not a fight between measurements & listening - it's finding a balance between the fallibility of measurements & the fallibility of listening - neither one is pre-eminent. There are times when listening doesn't reveal what is measurable & measurements don't reveal what is heard.

 

In that thread there is an example given of a Stereophile review of the M2Tech Young DAC + Palmer battery supply. The reviewer said that there was a huge difference between the DAC run off wallwart or battery & yet JA found only small differences @-110dB on the DAC's output between the two PSes powering the DAC.

 

There comes a point in each of these conflicting views where one has to decide which is the correct view & without listening to the device oneself, one looks at the consensus of listening impressions Vs the comprehensiveness of the measurements & decides which is most likely to represent your personal listening impressions.

 

In the case of the Young DAC above, the consensus of opinion is that the battery power makes a significant sonic difference to the DAC. The conclusion therefore is that JA's measurements do not adequately reflect the reality for whatever reason - maybe because static test signals are being used for the measurements & we need dynamic music-like signals to reveal what the ear is picking up?

 

Whatever is the case a balanced view needs to be taken & this is what is missing from Amir's review.

 

BTW, one thing that always strikes me is that none of these people who are married to measurements hear anything that they can't justify by measurements. Why is this? Surely there must be a situation where someone says "OK, I can't measure it but I can hear the difference"? I suspect that one of two possibilities exist - the most obvious one is that they are so bought-in to measurements that it biases them (fear of admitting to hearing something that they can't explain by measurements & being the butt of snide comments & jokes that they so often levy at others who hear what they can't measure). This shows one aspect of the fallibility of listening - when the internal psychological pressures are beyond a certain point, it overrides the true listening experience in favor of a safer opinion which isn't a target for ridicule among peers

[firedog]

I

 

BTW, one thing that always strikes me is that none of these people who are married to measurements hear anything that they can't justify by measurements. Why is this? Surely there must be a situation where someone says "OK, I can't measure it but I can hear the difference"? I suspect that one of two possibilities exist - the most obvious one is that they are so bought-in to measurements that it biases them (fear of admitting to hearing something that they can't explain by measurements & being the butt of snide comments & jokes that they so often levy at others who hear what they can't measure). This shows one aspect of the fallibility of listening - when the internal psychological pressures are beyond a certain point, it overrides the true listening experience in favor of a safer opinion which isn't a target for ridicule among peers

 

I think when they hear something they can't explain/measure, they simply assume it is some placebo/expectations bias effect.

[mmerrill99]

I think when they hear something they can't explain/measure, they simply assume it is some placebo/expectations bias effect.

I believe negative biasing is stronger than this in that you actually won't perceive what "you believe" is not there (if your "belief" is strong enough). Now the reason you believe it's not there is because your measurements tell you that is so & your perceptions are confirmed - it's a strong circle of logic (what appears to be logic but actually is a logical trap).

 

The opposite is of course also true & is seen in the fan-boy attitude who "believe" that they perceive something because they are strongly motivated to hearing this in the device

[kennyb123]

I think when they hear something they can't explain/measure, they simply assume it is some placebo/expectations bias effect.

 

I imagine some of the guys who put themselves out there as objectivists probably feel a tremendous pressure to stick with the party line for fear of losing the credibility they've worked relentlessly to establish with other objectivists. How could they admit to hearing things they can't explain/measure or even acknowledge such things to themselves? Doing so would make them just as bad as the audiophiles they ridicule every chance they get. I think it's more important to some of them that they are viewed as objectivists than to actually have a system that blows their minds constantly.

[kennyb123]

I believe negative biasing is stronger than this in that you actually won't perceive what "you believe" is not there (if your "belief" is strong enough). Now the reason you believe it's not there is because your measurements tell you that is so & your perceptions are confirmed - it's a strong circle of logic (what appears to be logic but actually is a logical trap).

 

Exactly

 

The opposite is of course also true & is seen in the fan-boy attitude who "believe" that they perceive something because they are strongly motivated to hearing this in the device

 

Well simply believing is one thing, but actually doing something about that belief is another - particularly when doing something comes at a cost.

[sbank]

Sure, there are two obvious approaches to his thread

- ignore it as of little consequence (probably the best option)

- query/question the measurement technique, results & conclusions to try to get to some semblance of a balanced view

A third consideration needs to be mentioned:

- consider the source of the measurements, their history and motivations and then "query/question..."

 

In this case the source is the former site administrator/co-founder of What's Best Forum who has been involved in a long war with the other primary administrator/co-founder on that site that can be partially boiled down to "objectivists vs. subjectivists". In the last month it appears as if he has taken his voice to a different forum where he isn't challenged and/or partially moderated as he was on WBF. IMHO he is more interested in getting in the last word and proving measurement-based debate points than he in listening to music. His lack of tolerance for any opinions that differ from his is well documented. I find it hard to give him the benefit of any doubt, while I lean in that direction with most everyone.

[mmerrill99]

I imagine some of the guys who put themselves out there as objectivists probably feel a tremendous pressure to stick with the party line for fear of losing the credibility they've worked relentlessly to establish with other objectivists. How could they admit to hearing things they can't explain/measure or even acknowledge such things to themselves? Doing so would make them just as bad as the audiophiles they ridicule every chance they get. I think it's more important to some of them that they are viewed as objectivists than to actually have a system that blows their minds constantly.

Yes, that's the other strong psychological factor at work in the negative bias - fear of ridicule.

It's a great study in psychology & negative biasing.

I wonder the outcome if they were presented with a "real" blind test - one where they didn't know what category of device they were about to evaluate, speakers, amps, cables, DACs.

 

When pre-knowledge about the blind test is given a negative bias decision can subconsciously be made "I'm not going to hear any difference between DACs, cables, etc." but when this pre-knowledge is blocked it would be interesting to see where they stand. I suspect they will always hear no difference as the much greater psychological pressure is the fear of ridicule from "their camp" & hearing no difference with "measureably" different devices is less embarrassing & easier to explain away.

[Superdad]

I imagine some of the guys who put themselves out there as objectivists probably feel a tremendous pressure to stick with the party line for fear of losing the credibility they've worked relentlessly to establish with other objectivists. How could they admit to hearing things they can't explain/measure or even acknowledge such things to themselves? Doing so would make them just as bad as the audiophiles they ridicule every chance they get. I think it's more important to some of them that they are viewed as objectivists than to actually have a system that blows their minds constantly.

 

I agree. It would be like the NRA admitting that selling assault weapons--to any jerk that wants one--is a bad idea.

(Sorry, I know politics is off limits here. Feel free to delete this post.)

 

The real issue--which has been debated at length here at CA--is that the measurements being taken are not ones that tell anything about the dynamic performance of the devices being tested. Inaudible residual noise plots? Who cares?! There are literally hundreds of variables that go into fine tuning an audio product for top musical performance which any designer--even with $500K of test gear--would be hard-pressed to find the correct measurements to correlate to. This is really old news. Ask ANY of the engineers at the top digital firms--in pro-sound or home audio--and they will tell you that as many decisions of parts, topology, adjustments, etc. are made in the listening room as on the bench. It is far more efficient.

 

Atkinson has been consistently measuring gear for decades, and with the exception of speaker measurements and the odd piece of electronics that performs really poorly, he would be among the first to admit that what he measures does not nearly begin to characterize the differences heard between the portrayal of music yielded by similar components.

 

This is not to say that measurements are not useful. But the suite of tests results that can be spit out by an Audio Precision box will not break new ground to tell us what sounds good or bad.

 

And I will make no comment about Amir, his sycophants, or the clear agenda at his forum. The posts and in absentia lynchings they perform speak for themselves.

[mmerrill99]

A third consideration needs to be mentioned:

- consider the source of the measurements, their history and motivations and then "query/question..."

 

In this case the source is the former site administrator/co-founder of What's Best Forum who has been involved in a long war with the other primary administrator/co-founder on that site that can be partially boiled down to "objectivists vs. subjectivists". In the last month it appears as if he has taken his voice to a different forum where he isn't challenged and/or partially moderated as he was on WBF. IMHO he is more interested in getting in the last word and proving measurement-based debate points than he in listening to music. His lack of tolerance for any opinions that differ from his is well documented. I find it hard to give him the benefit of any doubt, while I lean in that direction with most everyone.

Indeed! I've watched his progress on WBF & it was his continual interjection of measurements inappropriately into threads was where the WBF membership started to react riot. Now, to my mind the membership of WBF are somewhat overly sensitive & lean a bit too far towards the other side - "no measurements here". It's also interesting that he stopped posting on WBF after he embarrassed himself with a display of technical stupidity &a arrogance about how asynchronous USB worked by retransmitting USB packets when needed & saying that this was one of the working principles of the Regen which JohnS told him. What a blunder - firstly to not know enough about asynch USB to know that packet re-transmissions are not part of the protocol but more seriously to then try to state that it was what John Swenson told him.

 

At that point, his technical credibility & inability to admit he made a mistake (nothing wrong with that - we all learn new things all the time) was evident for all to see - I'm not surprised he stopped posting.

[firedog]

I believe negative biasing is stronger than this in that you actually won't perceive what "you believe" is not there (if your "belief" is strong enough). Now the reason you believe it's not there is because your measurements tell you that is so & your perceptions are confirmed - it's a strong circle of logic (what appears to be logic but actually is a logical trap).

 

The opposite is of course also true & is seen in the fan-boy attitude who "believe" that they perceive something because they are strongly motivated to hearing this in the device

 

I think you are correct in the narrow sense. I'm not sure our brains actually work in such a simple linear way. I think part of the problem with expectation bias as a phenomenon is that the bias(es) our brain may be working into our perception are not necessarily the ones we are conscious of or the ones we think we know that we have. And several different biases can be going on at once.

[BobSherman]

A third consideration needs to be mentioned:

- consider the source of the measurements, their history and motivations and then "query/question..."

 

In this case the source is the former site administrator/co-founder of What's Best Forum who has been involved in a long war with the other primary administrator/co-founder on that site that can be partially boiled down to "objectivists vs. subjectivists". In the last month it appears as if he has taken his voice to a different forum where he isn't challenged and/or partially moderated as he was on WBF. IMHO he is more interested in getting in the last word and proving measurement-based debate points than he in listening to music. His lack of tolerance for any opinions that differ from his is well documented. I find it hard to give him the benefit of any doubt, while I lean in that direction with most everyone.

+100

[BobSherman]

Indeed! I've watched his progress on WBF & it was his continual interjection of measurements inappropriately into threads was where the WBF membership started to react riot. Now, to my mind the membership of WBF are somewhat overly sensitive & lean a bit too far towards the other side - "no measurements here". It's also interesting that he stopped posting on WBF after he embarrassed himself with a display of technical stupidity &a arrogance about how asynchronous USB worked by retransmitting USB packets when needed & saying that this was one of the working principles of the Regen which JohnS told him. What a blunder - firstly to not know enough about asynch USB to know that packet re-transmissions are not part of the protocol but more seriously to then try to state that it was what John Swenson told him.

 

At that point, his technical credibility & inability to admit he made a mistake (nothing wrong with that - we all learn new things all the time) was evident for all to see - I'm not surprised he stopped posting.

He can spew his venom uncontested on Audio SxxT Review now and if he does get questioned, he blocks the person. JK was blocked from posting in the MR thread.

[mmerrill99]

I think you are correct in the narrow sense. I'm not sure our brains actually work in such a simple linear way. I think part of the problem with expectation bias as a phenomenon is that the bias(es) our brain may be working into our perception are not necessarily the ones we are conscious of or the ones we think we know that we have. And several different biases can be going on at once.

Agreed & I didn't mean it in so linear a way but in my experience the greater the "belief" or "conviction" the greater the effect on what's heard. I do believe that we hear subconsciously first & then certain elements make it into the consciousness - elements that we now recognise as the characteristics of the sound. Much like we subconsciously make a decision about something & then consciously justify the decision which makes it appear as if we are using logic to arrive at the decision.

 

So, yes, the subconscious plays the biggest part in all of this

[Geardaddy]

He has this planned next: FYI, the next part of this review will be a hardware tear down/internals pictures. So for those anxious for that, it is coming.

[Krutsch]

wow.

[Distinctive]

He has this planned next: FYI, the next part of this review will be a hardware tear down/internals pictures. So for those anxious for that, it is coming.

As this has played out it will not be an impartial review but rather a convulsively attempt to find some flaws with the uRendu.

[Dev]

And I will make no comment about Amir, his sycophants, or the clear agenda at his forum. The posts and in absentia lynchings they perform speak for themselves.

 

So what's the agenda ? Don't forget, there is someone who tried to measure the uRendu right over here at CA long before.

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f22-networking-networked-audio-and-streaming/microrendu-and-hqplayer-28720/

[esimms86]

I've had the microRendu running for 24 hours now and it sounds fantastic. It took another leap forward today when I went from a 9v iFi power supply to the Uptone Audio JS-2 set at 7v.

 

In Chris' review(part 2) he talks about the Sonore Signature PS developed by Barrows Worm and Adrian Lebena. The Sonore website talks about the SSPS as being tuned specially for the microRendu. Further, Sonore sells the SSPS with an additional Synergistic Research fuse upgrade option which adds an additional 190 USD to the base price of 1399 USD. I have no plans to outlay any money on a new power supply but I wonder what kind of sound difference would be expected in going from the JS-2 to the SSPS with or without the SR fuse upgrade. At this point the JS-2 is looking more and more like a bargain, particularly given its extra inputs.

 

I mean no disrespect to Barrows or Adrian and what I'm certain is an outstanding product; I just wonder what delta in performance is received for a not insignificant delta in price.

 

Esau

[joelha]

As this has played out it will not be an impartial review but rather a convulsively attempt to find some flaws with the uRendu.

 

And you know this exactly how?

 

Joel

[Distinctive]

And you know this exactly how?

 

Joel

By reading the sentences in his blog and in-between the sentences in his blog (and with my own perception thrown in).

I can't help thinking there might be some personal agendas here as well.

[joelha]

Distinctive,

 

I can't prove Chris' intentions, but I know him personally and have spent a lot of time talking to him. He is, to this audiophile, a very honest guy who cares deeply about his integrity and goes to great lengths to do the right thing. I'd be very surprised if his agenda was anything but to deliver the most honest accounting of the mR that he can.

 

Joel