Sonore ultraRendu v1.3

[barrows]

Yes, indeed.  There are significant differences between the SPS and the power supply design in the Signature Rendu SE.  BTW, the transformer used in the Rendu SE costs us 9x that of the transformer used in the SPS, we went all out here to get maximum performance.

[barrows]

8 minutes ago, flummoxe said:

So is it just differences in the PSU combined with the ultraRendu or is the ultraRendue different as well? 

I do not understand the question, could you please re state it?

[barrows]

No apology needed, I just was not clear on the question.

 

Here are the technical advantages of the Signature Rendu SE over the ultraRendu + SPS

 

1. Single box design allows close coupling of the power supply and active circuitry.  This significantly reduces the impedance of the power supply.  

2. High quality, thick gauge aluminum and steel chassis (unit weighs over ten pounds) provides a sturdy, vibration free, environment which allows the circuitry to perform better, especially the clock, as clock phase noise is degraded by vibration.

3. 50% more power supply capacitance than in the SPS, reducing power supply noise and impedance even further.

4. Custom wound Mercury Magnetics EI transfomer designed specifically for this product which more effectively blocks AC line noise.

5. A couple of other small refinements which will remain proprietary.

 

Sonore makes 3 levels of Rendu products, good, better, and best.  The microRendu offers fantastic performance and was a revelation on its introduction.  The ultraRendu ups the performance of the micro, and for those who want the very best possible performance we make the Signature Rendu SE, which is currently the state of the art of what we can do in a USB source.

 

The digital circuitry of the Signature Rendu SE and the ultraRendu are identical, but the performance is quite different due to the  technical differences mentioned.

[barrows]

2 minutes ago, roboss38 said:

I have been using the ultraRendu and CI Audio power supply with great success for the last couple weeks.

Awesome, glad you like it!

[barrows]

22 hours ago, HookEm said:

Hi Barrows,

Are there measured specs on this new-improved LPS?... For example, this white-paper talks about:
- Temperature Stability

- Load and Line Regulation

- Ripple and Noise specs
https://www.tek.com/document/application-note/understanding-linear-power-supply-specifications

 

It would be interesting to see how the specs of the older LPS compare to this newer one, especially regarding ripple & noise.
Thanks.

Why would we do this?  Have you ever seen any manufacturer publish internal power supply measurements?  Seems an odd request to me.  I have provided all the significant technical details of the differences between these products, excepting a few little things which will remain proprietary.  Beyond this it is up to the audiophile to decide if they want: good, better, or best, simple as that.  As most who have used it know, even the microRendu with a really good power supply provides excellent performance, the ultra with the same supply is better, and the Signature is the best.

[barrows]

17 minutes ago, HookEm said:

Wow... easy does it (LOL).
I'm not demanding anything... Was simply curious about the comparison between the old & new LPS's.

And you're right of course, published specs on "Audiophile" gear are rare (although I'd like to think that 'measured' specs would be helpful to consumers... but that's a "whole nother" topic).

Anyway, thanks for sharing what you did share.

No worries, did not mean to be aggro!  Manufacturers provide specifications on the output of their products, but not on measurements of internal parts of the circuit.  I am not sure on what kind of measurement we could provide on the USB output of the SRse...

I can offer one measurement of one difference between the Signature Power Supply and the power supply in the SRse:  The AC ripple before the regulator of the SPS is about 44 mV, and the SRse ripple under the same load conditions is about 28 mV.  In addition, the power supply rejection ratio of the regulator is the same in both units.  Before people get all crazy, please remember this is not the ripple/noise of the power supply which the circuitry sees, as the regulator's power supply rejection reduces this level to the tens of micro volts (not milli volts).  Additionally, remember that this the pre-regulated supply, which then goes to the main board where it is filtered and regulated again by the local (ultra low noise, linear) regulators for each stage of the circuit.

So there you have one measured difference between SPS and the power supply internal to the SRse.

[barrows]

6 minutes ago, left channel said:

@Em2016 glad to help once again. The Pro-Ject only supports DoP; I don't know if that will be an issue for you. I've never ventured into the stratosphere for those numbers.

If it is DoP only then the max rate will be DSD256.  As 705.6 PCM is required for DSD256 via DoP, and 1411.2 PCM would be required for DSD512 via DoP... Unless it can actually handle 1411.2 PCM!

[barrows]

8 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

 

For added confusion (as if I needed more ) check out the last page of the manual here and the mentioned of DSD1024

 

http://www.box-designs.com/inhalt/en/manual/manual_preboxs2digital.pdf

 

 

Yep, I am confused!  It does not say anything about requiring DoP either...

[barrows]

1 hour ago, rlow said:

So perhaps this is something that was in the recordings all along, only now brought more to light by the ultraRendu, but I do find it a bit fatiguing.

Bingo!  When you increase true resolution in a system by upgrading one component, this type of outcome is always possible as you may end up revealing another problem somewhere else in the system via the increased resolution.  Make sure everything is well burned in, and then start considering where that increased sibilance might be coming from, and never forget that it is possible the sibilance is on the recording and is just now being resolved at this level.  The way to rule out if it is on the recording is to see if it just shows up on some recordings and not others of a similar nature.

[barrows]

1 hour ago, aggielaw said:

May I ask a stupid question?  I just received my Ultrarendu today.  I have three copies of all my music: one external USB hard drive, one hard drive attached to my router as NAS; and one hard drive in my primary desktop computer.

 

My router can function as a DLNA server.

 

I would like to use my tablet to control playback.  I'd like the ability to upsample to DSD as well.  How do I do these two things?

 

Thanks!

HC 

In order to oversample to DSD you need two things: 1.  A computer with enough processing power and memory to handle the work (oversampling to DSD is not easy and requires quite a lot more processing power than just PCM oversampling), and 2. A software capable of the DSD oversampling.

I would recommend an I7 processor and 16 Gb of memory to be safe.

Configuration example:

 

I7 computer running ROON or Audirvana Plus-Ethernet cable-Router-Ethernet cable-ultraRendu-USB cable-DAC, then your tablet would control playback via the ROON remote app or Audirvana Plus remote app.

 

I hope that helps!

 

[barrows]

12 hours ago, jcn3 said:

Roon core is the player and does all the processing. The endpoint does basically nothing except pass the file on to the dac.

This point of view is entirely in error.  ROON plays the file, and passes the file to the endpoint.  The the endpoint converts from a file type (.wav, .dsf, etc) to a digital audio stream (in this case USB) which can be accepted by a DAC.  That conversion process matters to sound quality, as does the level of noise produced by the endpoint, and transmitted over USB to the DAC.  This is why purpose built for audio devices such as the ultraRendu can achieve such an improvement in sound quality over something built as a commercial grade computer component, with all the compromises inherent in the design of commercial grade computer products: built to the lowest possible price point, standard $.50 cent clock(s) vs expensive low phase noise clock(s), noisy switching regulators vs. expensive ultra low noise linear regulators, and tons of other details which make real differences in sound quality.

[barrows]

I have not tried the USBPC, but it is curious to me.  Typically, a PCB construction has more parasitics than an appropriately engineered wire, as the mass of the substrate material in close proximity to the trace is much higher.  AFAIK the USBPC is also made of ordinary FR4, right?  It might be a bit better if it was FEP/Teflon substrate.

I am not certain of these thoughts, perhaps a good high speed PCB designer like @marce, could comment.

[barrows]

12 minutes ago, marce said:

The best control of a signal is no connectors, no wire, a nice controlled path from transmitter to receiver. From measurements I have seen the USPCB does seam to have the best controlled impedance path...

That said the only caveat I have is stress on the connectors, that could cause long term problems unless all forces are removed from the connectors. I prefer flexi-rigid designs, all the high vibration, critical stuff uses it... Again the single (or almost) box construction with isolation, LVDS digital signalling across the flexis, no GND connection, all signals through a common mode choke. You controll everything apart from input and output devices...

Thanks!  Are you talking FFC style for internal connections?

[barrows]

8 hours ago, marce said:

The double sided ones with the controlled impedance connectors are OK, but for the best a proper flexi-rigid PCB, no connectors flexible arms connecting rigid PCB sections, just finished a 14 layers one, expensive, because its large, 1 per manufacturers std 18x24 panel. But done smaller cheaper ones, did a set for racing steering wheels, basic SBC in the middle with display, then flexi limbs for the switched etc. No connectors, vibration proof and total control of he signals.

Thanks for sharing your experience.  I have never liked it when I looked in some very high end DACs and saw I2S/clock signals being carried on ordinary pin headers and ribbon cables, it seemed to me at least that FFC would be better.  I have seen some 5 figure DACs using up to 5"-6" ribbon cables carrying I2S between boards-it always made me wonder...

[barrows]

For an affordable LPS the Booster is fairly good.

[barrows]

@soares, With Chord DACs (except for DAVE) I would recommend feeding them PCM rather than DSD.  If you want to oversample in software, then go ahead and oversample to the highest PCM sample rate the Chord DAC accepts.  Chord DACs (again excepting DAVE) convert incoming DSD to PCM anyway.  I can confirm that with Mojo and any of the Rendu's I can oversample to PCM 705.6/768 (via Audirvana Plus in my case) and it works perfectly, and sounds better than converting to DSD as well.

Jussi (HQP developer) also recommends oversampling to highest PCM rate with HQP for Chord DACs.

 

DAVE is different, as it has a dedicated DSD conversion algorithm, but the rest of the Chord DACs convert to PCM internally.

[barrows]

It is well understood that Chord DACs (with the possible exception of DAVE and its separate DSD mode) do not do the best job with DSD playback.  See the post below from Jussi (HQP developer), and it is also well known that Rob Watts does not believe in DSD being a good format and prefers PCM.  I love the Chord DACs, but as my interest is in DSD playback and conversion of PCM to DSD, I choose DACs which perform really well with DSD.  My experience with MOJO suggests that Chord's USB interface has some problems with high rate DSD, even though it should be capable of DSD 256 via DoP, there always seem to be dropouts.  Whereas the interface works flawlessly with PCM up to 768.

 

 

 

[barrows]

7 hours ago, pl_svn said:

Qutest here and, honestly, DSDs sound good (better than PCM, to me)

no hiccups whatsoever up to 256 (max my Mac Mini can do)

What playback software is working for Qutest and DSD 256 (DoP) on OSX?

[barrows]

11 minutes ago, pl_svn said:

Roon is what I use these days

not tried (yet) Audirvana + that I also own

Thanks, just wondering because I use my Mojo for mobile use with JRiver, and it has issues on OSX with higher rates of DSD (PCM is up to 768).  I should probably add A+ or ROON to my laptop, as it does work very well for me in my home set up.

[barrows]

The ultraRendu can indeed power a DragonFly (as long as the ultraRendu has adequate ventilation), but whether it can work with the DragonFly USB input is a question which @vortecjr would have to answer.

[barrows]

@savingslowly.  I think you may need to consult @Superdad on this one.  This indeed sounds like there is just not enough current to allow the ultraRendu to fully boot.  Although my understanding is that this combo usually works.

 

[barrows]

3 hours ago, savingslowly said:

Ok more info... When I i got home today I power cycled the ultracap and I was able to get both the rendu and the iso to boot but I was again unable to get the rendu to see the dac with the iso inline. I tried shutting it down and connecting the iso first then booting the rendu (which worked before) but no luck... I've been trying for about an hour.... now Ive just started having the same Problem as before where the power cuts from the 1.2 and the red light starts flashing... Maybe it's because it's too warm? It is fairly hot.. Please help it shouldn't be this hard to get this kit working... It's starting to do my head in!! 

ultraRendu direct to DAC works without the isoRegen in place?  If yes, then you need to consult with @Superdad about the issue.

Do you have another power supply available for testing?

 

On your Ethernet cable question, the Sonore recommendation for Ethernet cables is to use Blue Jeans Cable CAT 6A which uses a floating shield.  If one uses Ethernet cables with metal connectors on both ends and grounded shielding (connected to the metal connectors) this defeats the isolation inherent in Ethernet and COULD be a source of ground current noise.

 

Additionally: please note that by powering the ultraRendu and the isoRegen from the same power supply, you end up defeating the isolation of the isoRegen.  For best performance of these two products together, they need to have separate, isolated, power supplies.

[barrows]

5 minutes ago, rickca said:

Does anyone know whether Supra Cat8 ethernet cables have this issue?

Typically, the CAT7 and CAT8 cables I have seen include metal shell plugs with the shield connected to the shell.  It is easy enough to test (if one has a DMM) for continuity between the two ends of the cable, just see if there is continuity between the shell at each end, if there is, the possibility of creating a ground loop exists.  I am not suggesting that this ground continuity IS definitely a problem, but it certainly is a potential problem, depending on the system context.

Ethernet copper wiring is isolated by transformer at each end, but a ground connection between components via the cable shield defeats the isolation.

[barrows]

If the shield on your Ethernet cable is not connected to the plugs (with metal jacket plugs), then you have no problem.

[barrows]

@jaaptina, That ACA amp is really good with the right speakers, I just built one for Sonore President Jesus and was kind of sorry to ship it off to him!  I am considering building another and making it into a headphone amp (but for those who might want tp do this, remember the two Red speaker terminals are common!).

I know it is OT, but I am interested to know what speakers you are driving with the ACA's 8 watts per channel (pure class A)?