Auralic Aries Mini vs. Sonore microRendu vs. SOtM SMS-200 Listening Impressions

[Johnseye]

1. I really like the ability to tweak tag options, with the indexTag, tagOptions, tagFormat, etc flags
   
2. I like the on-the-fly transcode options with stream.transcode. I use it to convert FLAC to WAV, DSF and DFF to DoP WAV.
   

However, as I've mentioned, I did open a Pandora's box when I compared running MinimServer on my Synology DS916+ with MinimServer on my W10 machine - in both cases with the music files on the Synology. The W10 hosted Minim sounds better.

Honestly, I wish it weren't so, because I really do like the aesthetic and electrical simplicity of the NAS + renderer approach, without a bad, noisy computer in the mix.

 

But such is life. And I will admit, with a W10 machine hosting the MinimServer, I got further improvements from two things:

1. Using a bridged connection. I was unable to get bridging to work on my NAS, despite the fact it has 2 Ethernet NICs
   
2. Running Audiophile Optimizer (AO), which is not an option on the NAS.
   

I use JRiver for tagging efforts. Similar to Minim it is infinitely simpler and faster as I can sort and make mass changes to file metadata.

 

You did make an interesting discovery with the NAS processing the audio vs W10. I could only guess why. The DS916+ processor is a Braswell Intel Pentium N3710 which isn't that old. I think it would be tough to identify the reason and it might just be a case of going with which sounds best without knowing why.

 

I got the sMS-200 in the mail yesterday. It's too early to form an opinion. There's definitely a difference between it and the mR. What I did last night was play some tracks with a single source of sound, so a vocalist with dead air behind her and a trumpeter with nothing but some mild delay behind him. Listening closely to not the music, but the silence behind the music, there's a difference in the pitch of the noise. The sMS-200's background noise sounds higher or whiter. This could be phase noise that I'm hearing and related to jitter. I'm just not sure yet. Just guessing. The mR has a lower or darker background noise. I'll be posting more as I continue this comparison in a thread I started, which began as a discovery of the mR as I knew nothing about it at the time.

[austinpop]

I use JRiver for tagging efforts. Similar to Minim it is infinitely simpler and faster as I can sort and make mass changes to file metadata.

 

You did make an interesting discovery with the NAS processing the audio vs W10. I could only guess why. The DS916+ processor is a Braswell Intel Pentium N3710 which isn't that old. I think it would be tough to identify the reason and it might just be a case of going with which sounds best without knowing why.

Yeah, neither CPU even breaks a sweat, so it's not that. To me, the sound improvement is consistent with lower jitter. Better timbre, and instruments are more 3-dimensional, and easier to distinguish. But I cannot explain it scientifically.

 

I tend to think @romaz is onto something with his end-to-end clock improvements approach. See this post, for example: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f10-music-servers/novel-way-massively-improve-sq-sms-200-and-microrendu-31110/index36.html#post641520

 

I got the sMS-200 in the mail yesterday. It's too early to form an opinion. There's definitely a difference between it and the mR. What I did last night was play some tracks with a single source of sound, so a vocalist with dead air behind her and a trumpeter with nothing but some mild delay behind him. Listening closely to not the music, but the silence behind the music, there's a difference in the pitch of the noise. The sMS-200's background noise sounds higher or whiter. This could be phase noise that I'm hearing and related to jitter. I'm just not sure yet. Just guessing. The mR has a lower or darker background noise. I'll be posting more as I continue this comparison in a thread I started, which began as a discovery of the mR as I knew nothing about it at the time.

 

It will be interesting to hear about your comparisons. Give it a couple of days to burn in and settle in to your system first. You can also read romaz's impressions of the two (mR and sMS-200) in the thread referenced above.

[hicr49]

I think I will invest in a good lps from uptone or Sotm to power my sms200. The teradak is quite mediocre I believe.

I don't have experience with Sotm yet but have had great experience with uptone's lps-1 on microuRendu. It made quite a great improvement for me.

[Lebouwsky]

That will take you a long way, I agree. There's always more tweaking, of course! [emoji5]

 

For the past few weeks I'm thinking about this w10 machine and the sms200 in bridged connection....

 

If Roon, hqplayer, minimserver and even local storage on the w10 machine is not necesarry to gain sound improvement, what remains as a job for the w10 machine is almost nothing, accept for bridging the ethernet.

 

I am no ICT specialist, but it looks like some sort of ethernet regenerator, that benefits by an OS with small footprint. Even a rpi could do that..... right?

[artur9]

I am no ICT specialist, but it looks like some sort of ethernet regenerator, that benefits by an OS with small footprint. Even a rpi could do that..... right?

 

That's what an Ethernet switch is, in contrast to an Ethernet hub.

[Lebouwsky]

Not sure if there will be an improvement in soundquality with a switch. Maybe I'm lost here.

[austinpop]

For the past few weeks I'm thinking about this w10 machine and the sms200 in bridged connection....

 

If Roon, hqplayer, minimserver and even local storage on the w10 machine is not necesarry to gain sound improvement, what remains as a job for the w10 machine is almost nothing, accept for bridging the ethernet.

 

Not quite. As I reported, I did find at least 3 improvements from the W10 machine:

• Bridging for direct connection with endpoint
  
• SQ improvement from running MinimServer on the W10 machine vs. directly on the NAS
  
• SQ improvements due to Audiophile Optimizer (AO).
  
• 
  

I am no ICT specialist, but it looks like some sort of ethernet regenerator, that benefits by an OS with small footprint. Even a rpi could do that..... right?

 

While I, and many others, have clearly heard the SQ improvement of the direct connection, there is no ready explanation. Try this thread: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f10-music-servers/sms-200-and-microrendu-direct-connection-why-does-improve-sound-quality-31476/

 

This does trouble me intellectually, as a scientist and an engineer, but when it comes to audio you have a choice. You can either chase after scientific proofs of every phenomenon, or you can just enjoy what you hear without necessarily having it proven to you. I choose the latter. I get to science the shit out of stuff in my day job, so maybe that's why I can be so sanguine!

[austinpop]

I got the sMS-200 in the mail yesterday. It's too early to form an opinion. There's definitely a difference between it and the mR. What I did last night was play some tracks with a single source of sound, so a vocalist with dead air behind her and a trumpeter with nothing but some mild delay behind him. Listening closely to not the music, but the silence behind the music, there's a difference in the pitch of the noise. The sMS-200's background noise sounds higher or whiter. This could be phase noise that I'm hearing and related to jitter. I'm just not sure yet. Just guessing. The mR has a lower or darker background noise. I'll be posting more as I continue this comparison in a thread I started, which began as a discovery of the mR as I knew nothing about it at the time.

 

It will be interesting to hear about your comparisons. Give it a couple of days to burn in and settle in to your system first. You can also read romaz's impressions of the two (mR and sMS-200) in the thread referenced above.

 

I actually received my own sMS-200 same time as you did. Right out of the box, the sMS-200 (powered by existing LPS-1) seemed a bit harsh. I've now put about 80 hours of my "burn-in" input on it - an ocean waves track on repeat.

 

The SQ is now transformed, and sounds like what I remember with my loaner unit.

 

Bottom line - like analog components, the sMS-200 too benefits from burn-in. Give it time to settle before evaluating. Why? I've stopped even asking - every component (analog or digital) I've bought has benefitted from a period of burn-in, so I just do it.

[Lebouwsky]

I actually received my own sMS-200 same time as you did. Right out of the box, the sMS-200 (powered by existing LPS-1) seemed a bit harsh. I've now put about 80 hours of my "burn-in" input on it - an ocean waves track on repeat.

 

The SQ is now transformed, and sounds like what I remember with my loaner unit.

 

Bottom line - like analog components, the sMS-200 too benefits from burn-in. Give it time to settle before evaluating. Why? I've stopped even asking - every component (analog or digital) I've bought has benefitted from a period of burn-in, so I just do it.

 

My experience is exact the same. When I first listened to it, the sound was a bit better the my previous hummingboard/ volumio renderer. But the sound changed over time from good to really good. I would discribe the change from dry to organic (not that it ever sounded dry)

 

The sps500 has got my attention now.

[lousyreeds1]

Has anyone gotten wifi to work using a dongle on the sMS-200?  I attached a dongle with the required RTL8812AU chipset, and while it says I'm connected and shows an IP address, there's no sign that the sMS-200 is actually connected to the network (no access to Eunhasu control page, Roon won't see it).  Eager to compare sound wired vs. wifi.  Thanks!

[austinpop]

10 hours ago, lousyreeds1 said:

Has anyone gotten wifi to work using a dongle on the sMS-200?  I attached a dongle with the required RTL8812AU chipset, and while it says I'm connected and shows an IP address, there's no sign that the sMS-200 is actually connected to the network (no access to Eunhasu control page, Roon won't see it).  Eager to compare sound wired vs. wifi.  Thanks!

 

Sorry, I have no experience with wifi on sMS-200.

[Zeplin000]

On 27/04/2017 at 8:50 PM, lousyreeds1 said:

Has anyone gotten wifi to work using a dongle on the sMS-200?  I attached a dongle with the required RTL8812AU chipset, and while it says I'm connected and shows an IP address, there's no sign that the sMS-200 is actually connected to the network (no access to Eunhasu control page, Roon won't see it).  Eager to compare sound wired vs. wifi.  Thanks!

Yes I had the same issue. I typed the IP address that is assigned to the wifi connection into my browser, which brings up the usual config page. I then activated my player, Roon, again. I then disconnected the Ethernet cable and rebooted the unit at the wall. This worked for me and I can now use the sms 200 over wifi. 

[AmusedToD]

On 8.5.2017. at 6:34 PM, Zeplin000 said:

Yes I had the same issue. I typed the IP address that is assigned to the wifi connection into my browser, which brings up the usual config page. I then activated my player, Roon, again. I then disconnected the Ethernet cable and rebooted the unit at the wall. This worked for me and I can now use the sms 200 over wifi. 

I just ordered a RTL8812AU chip USB WIFI dongle to use with my sms200. Is the sound quality definitely better than via Ethernet? I did manage to establish a bridged connection between my PC and sms200, and it really is much better SQ wise then running an Ethernet cable from the sms200 to my router of switch, but I wish to keep things tidy so went for the wifi dongle.

 

I am even thinking of placing an Ifi iSilncer3.0 between the sms200 and the USB wifi dongle. The iSilencer3.0 should be be-directional right? Did anyone try this?

 

[Dzezik]

 

On 15.02.2017 at 7:15 AM, Cornan said:

 

I started out using BubbleDS Next with Jplaystreamer. BubbleUPnP is really the holy grail of control points. It is extremely versitail and can control just about anything. Video or music. Sounds great too. BubbleDS Next is not at all as versitail. It is concentrated to music only, works seemless with OpenHome & Tidal, a little bit quicker respons time and I would say it sounds slightly better than BubbleUPnP too. Not intirely sure everyone would hear the difference between the two though, since the differences in SQ are very small. BubbleUPnP is a one stop solution, BubbleDS Next is more of a specialized solution.

 

I am an audiphile for over 20 years. I can hear the difference if I replace signal cable, speaker cable, I can even try to listen for power conditioneer. but I never tried to compare different remote controllers. this is even more than creazy voodoo gadgetets. The Remote control cant have any influence in the sound because it only makes the playlist. The data is sent directly from source to Your renderer and You can just turn Your Bubble off and it works. It is OpenHome.  But at least I know streaming works with Auralic and BubbleDS. Because on oficial site they claims You can only listen to DLNA/uPnP andd raddio, streamin, songcast airplay cant be accessed. You beter focus on the Music not on the Remote You keep in hand when listening. Regards

[Cornan]

3 minutes ago, Dzezik said:

 

 

I am an audiphile for over 20 years. I can hear the difference if I replace signal cable, speaker cable, I can even try to listen for power conditioneer. but I never tried to compare different remote controllers. this is even more than creazy voodoo gadgetets. The Remote control cant have any influence in the sound because it only makes the playlist. The data is sent directly from source to Your renderer and You can just turn Your Bubble off and it works. It is OpenHome.  But at least I know streaming works with Auralic and BubbleDS. Because on oficial site they claims You can only listen to DLNA/uPnP andd raddio, streamin, songcast airplay cant be accessed. You beter focus on the Music not on the Remote You keep in hand when listening. Regards

 

I have been an audiophile much longer than so! ? You choose what to beleive in. No one is forcing you to beleive in anything. But, if you suddenly feel curious I can recommend that you have a listen to BubbleDS Next and compare it with your ears instead of with figuring it out with common sense! ?