ultraRendu or sMS-200Ultra?

[Lassej]

9 hours ago, ismewor said:

No worries, I’m not concern who. I just want to say that sms-200ultra will not skip on dsd64

 

10 hours ago, thyname said:

 

I cannot in good faith disclose names for stuff emailed me privately. Sorry

 

It's ok if you can't name him but such a test when we don't know anything how the test is done, what psu are used,  etc, says nothing to me. I would like to see a real, with open facts, test done by, for example CA, 6 Moons or Hans etc, of these two units but it looks like that we have to wait for that. 

 

BTW, About skipping with DSD64 , I have an 200 Ultra with a sPS-500 and I have no issues with DSD at all but my DAC is a Bryston BDA-3. Running Roon on a Mac mini. And, it sounds fantastic. Before the Ultra I used a Bryston BDP-2 as an endpoint. The Ultra sounds better. Moore open sound stage, moore details, tighter bass and at the same time a little more analouge like sound that I really like. 

[tea_hous]

21 hours ago, ismewor said:

I own chord dave and sms-200ultra and I have no issue with DSD64. And remain nameless part make me concerned with that interns purpose . 

 

11 hours ago, Lassej said:

About skipping with DSD64 , I have an 200 Ultra with a sPS-500 and I have no issues with DSD at all but my DAC is a Bryston BDA-3.

 

Good to hear, thanks for that... I guess we can quickly put the skipping thing to bed as a myth, before false rumors spread like wildfire.

 

11 hours ago, Lassej said:

I would like to see a real, with open facts, test done by, for example CA, 6 Moons or Hans etc, of these two units but it looks like that we have to wait for that. 

...

Before the Ultra I used a Bryston BDP-2 as an endpoint. The Ultra sounds better. Moore open sound stage, moore details, tighter bass and at the same time a little more analouge like sound that I really like. 

 

Likewise, a review from any of the sources mentioned would be great... And thanks for the mini review of the 200U... I just purchased the same setup, so it's good to hear.

 

The uR and sMS-200Ultra are of the same class and the two standout choices for their specific purpose right now... The SrSE being another superb choice in the renderer category, but its price separates it from these two.  Still, it would be great if the SrSE was thrown into said fantasy review for good measure :).

 

I'm guessing we who are using specialized renderer solutions are very much in the minority of the audiophile world still, so there just isn't enough interest or demand for a major reviewer to put the time and resources into it.  A large portion of the community are still thinking "digital is just 1s and 0s, how could there be a difference?". Then another portion of the community are set up with computer server solutions with JPlay, AO, and Fidelizer, like we all were before network streaming reached audiophile stardom.  Then of course yet another portion of the community are strictly analogue guys... Etc., etc.

[mfin]

I'm interested in the comparison of these two as well. Any more experiences since this thread went quiet?

 

I note that the SOTM sMs-200ultra can have a external clock capability for future "upgrading and potential", but also that even without this and in its basic form it costs quite a bit more than the UltraRendu.

 

I assume the SOTM is much nicer aesthetically but does it outperform the UltraRendu or should they pretty much be considered as equals?

[firedog]

On 10/21/2017 at 7:21 PM, davide256 said:

The recommended supply for the ultraRendu is the Uptone audio LPS1, a fast capacitor based battery supply., definitely not an LPS. You can buy both for  $75 more than the SMS200 ultra with its supplied wallwart. I know which way I'm leaning...

Uptone site page for LPS-!

 

Quote

  The world's first bank-switching, microprocessor-controller, ultracapacitor-based, ultra-low-noise external linear power supply has arrived!

 

[d_elm]

3 hours ago, mfin said:

I'm interested in the comparison of these two as well. Any more experiences since this thread went quiet?

 

I note that the SOTM sMs-200ultra can have a external clock capability for future "upgrading and potential", but also that even without this and in its basic form it costs quite a bit more than the UltraRendu.

 

I assume the SOTM is much nicer aesthetically but does it outperform the UltraRendu or should they pretty much be considered as equals?

The consensus is the two units sound about the same and vary depending on the music genre.  For more money the sMS-200ultra has potential for a better digital source if clocks are exported to an upstream switch, suggest Netgear FS105 or GS105, and possibly a downstream USB regenerator eg tx-USBhubEX.  And as you mentioned a better external clock for the sMS-200ultra is also significant for SQ and your wallet.

[mfin]

1 hour ago, d_elm said:

The consensus is the two units sound about the same and vary depending on the music genre.  For more money the sMS-200ultra has potential for a better digital source if clocks are exported to an upstream switch, suggest Netgear FS105 or GS105, and possibly a downstream USB regenerator eg tx-USBhubEX.  And as you mentioned a better external clock for the sMS-200ultra is also significant for SQ and your wallet.

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

Can I ask what you mean by "For more money the sMS-200ultra has potential for a better digital source if clocks are exported to an upstream switch, suggest Netgear FS105..." ?

 

It seems in that bit you are not describing anything to do with the external clock option or using it with one there. I'm a bit confused.

[limniscate]

The sMS-200 Ultra, tX-USB Ultra, and dX-USB Ultra each have a clock board with 4 taps.  Not all of the taps are used in each of the components, so you can ask SOtM to use an extra tap for a switch.  You will need a SMB or BNC cable to connect the switch to whichever SOtM device you have them run the tap from.  This is separate from an external master reference clock.

[mfin]

Still confused

 

So... are we talking about a BNC connection between sMS-200 Ultra and a Netgear Switch? If so, how? I've not seen a Netgear Switch with one, or do people modify these switches?

[catastrofe]

I'm a long time customer of Sonore.  Their solutions sound fantastic, and you can talk directly to the owner.  With SOtM, you're dealing with a larger, non-US based company.  That is important to some.

 

 

[limniscate]

30 minutes ago, mfin said:

Still confused

 

So... are we talking about a BNC connection between sMS-200 Ultra and a Netgear Switch? If so, how? I've not seen a Netgear Switch with one, or do people modify these switches?

SOtM will add the connector to the switch.

 

I’ve never had any communication issues with SOtM, and it's astounding that they modify other products, including (in the past) competitors' products.

[d_elm]

13 minutes ago, catastrofe said:

I'm a long time customer of Sonore.  Their solutions sound fantastic, and you can talk directly to the owner.  With SOtM, you're dealing with a larger, non-US based company.  That is important to some.

 

 

I understand SOtM is five people, not exactly large.  May responds to e-mail within a day unless she is away or on holiday.  Just my experience and I do not have any SOtM gear right now.

[kopelli]

I own an SMS 200 Ultra, my interactions with SoTM have always been productive and May has always responded within a day.

[tims]

4 minutes ago, kopelli said:

I own an SMS 200 Ultra, my interactions with SoTM have always been productive and May has always responded within a day.

Yes;  I requested some information from May a few weeks ago and hadn't had a reply back after a few days.  I contacted her again and she promply replied, apologizing that she was still on holiday but still gave me a response to my query.

Can't get better customer service than that!

[mikicasellas]

8 hours ago, d_elm said:

The consensus is the two units sound about the same and vary depending on the music genre.  For more money the sMS-200ultra has potential for a better digital source if clocks are exported to an upstream switch, suggest Netgear FS105 or GS105, and possibly a downstream USB regenerator eg tx-USBhubEX.  And as you mentioned a better external clock for the sMS-200ultra is also significant for SQ and your wallet.

 

 

"The consensus is the two units sound about the same and vary depending on the music genre"

 

This one is very important, i wonder what genre is best for each device?

 

I listen mostly to Rock and Pop music, although i hear all kind of music those two are the most important for me to extract the best possible SQ.

 

in the other hand: If a UltraRendu + LPS-1 is joined after for a Mutec M3+usb would that combo compete with the SOtM sMS-200ultra + sPS500 + tx-USBhubEX for example?

 

Cheers!!

 

 

[limniscate]

Audiostream.com seems to like the SOtM better.

[d_elm]

1 hour ago, mikicasellas said:

 

 

"The consensus is the two units sound about the same and vary depending on the music genre"

 

This one is very important, i wonder what genre is best for each device?

 

I listen mostly to Rock and Pop music, although i hear all kind of music those two are the most important for me to extract the best possible SQ.

 

in the other hand: If a UltraRendu + LPS-1 is joined after for a Mutec M3+usb would that combo compete with the SOtM sMS-200ultra + sPS500 + tx-USBhubEX for example?

 

Cheers!!

 

 

It is going to be tough to know which setup is best for your music and ears but USB cables also affect the sound, unfortunately. Uptone USPCB is likely the most neutral if you can use it.  Phasure Lush cable is also popular into the DAC.

[mfin]

Some comments lifted from https://audiobacon.net/2017/11/18/sotm-sms-200ultra-network-audio-player-sps-500-power-supply-review/ about the sMs-200ultra vs the UltraRendu:

 

• This comparison is of particular interest to many. In short, they’re two completely different sounding network audio players, each with their own tradeoffs.
• The ultraRendu is a very transparent, highly resolving, and a super clean sounding device. It is unequivocally more detailed and quieter than any of the SOtM streamers. I also feel the ultraRendu has a more refined stage focus. The sMS-200ultra, on the other hand, has a slightly looser image with a much more full-bodied and richer tone accompanied by proper vocal and instrumental timbre.
• This seems to only affect the Chord DAVE owners but I can’t play DSD64 or DSD128 files without skips on the sMS-200 and sMS-200ultra. Two minutes into a DSD64 song and it’ll skip. It’s even worse with the DSD128 files. This may be non-negotiable for those with a large DSD collection. If you’re not running into this issue on your DAVE, please let us know in the comments. This is supposedly due to incompatible Linux drivers. The uR has no problems playing both DSD64 and DSD128.
• Macro-dynamics are more pronounced on the sMS-200ultra while the uR does a great job articulating the micro-dynamics.
• The bass region is tighter and cleaner on the uR while it’s deeper and punchier on the sMS-200ultra.
• For finer details, such as individual string plucks, the uR does a better job in delineation while the sMS-200ultra has more of a sultry and organic blend.
• The sMS-200ultra has much better layering and contouring of players on the sound field. The uR plays closer to the same musical plane with less depth.
• Some may prefer the cleaner, higher-resolution, and more insightful sound of the uR while others would prefer the euphoric, holographic, and humanistic sound of the sMS-200ultra.

[mikicasellas]

12 minutes ago, mfin said:

Some comments lifted from https://audiobacon.net/2017/11/18/sotm-sms-200ultra-network-audio-player-sps-500-power-supply-review/ about the sMs-200ultra vs the UltraRendu:

 

• This comparison is of particular interest to many. In short, they’re two completely different sounding network audio players, each with their own tradeoffs.
• The ultraRendu is a very transparent, highly resolving, and a super clean sounding device. It is unequivocally more detailed and quieter than any of the SOtM streamers. I also feel the ultraRendu has a more refined stage focus. The sMS-200ultra, on the other hand, has a slightly looser image with a much more full-bodied and richer tone accompanied by proper vocal and instrumental timbre.
• This seems to only affect the Chord DAVE owners but I can’t play DSD64 or DSD128 files without skips on the sMS-200 and sMS-200ultra. Two minutes into a DSD64 song and it’ll skip. It’s even worse with the DSD128 files. This may be non-negotiable for those with a large DSD collection. If you’re not running into this issue on your DAVE, please let us know in the comments. This is supposedly due to incompatible Linux drivers. The uR has no problems playing both DSD64 and DSD128.
• Macro-dynamics are more pronounced on the sMS-200ultra while the uR does a great job articulating the micro-dynamics.
• The bass region is tighter and cleaner on the uR while it’s deeper and punchier on the sMS-200ultra.
• For finer details, such as individual string plucks, the uR does a better job in delineation while the sMS-200ultra has more of a sultry and organic blend.
• The sMS-200ultra has much better layering and contouring of players on the sound field. The uR plays closer to the same musical plane with less depth.
• Some may prefer the cleaner, higher-resolution, and more insightful sound of the uR while others would prefer the euphoric, holographic, and humanistic sound of the sMS-200ultra.

Interesting,

 

In this review is said other wise:

 

"I first listened to the IR with both the SOtM sMS-200ultra and the Sonore ultraRendu, both configured as Roon endpoints, and my Holo Spring Level 2 DAC. After weeks of listening, I'd say that the latest SOtM components excel at detail retrieval and silent backgrounds, whereas the Sonore streamers focus on making music preen and strut. Though both sound excellent, I tend to prefer musical thrills to sonic ones, and for pleasure I listened more often to the ultraRendu."

Read more at https://www.audiostream.com/content/iso-regen#i5Q8r3hiikmPt9fG.99

[sgr]

I have not heard any SOtM products at all.
But I’ve combined the UltraRendu, IsoRegen, two LPS1s, two USBPCs (one after the UltraRendu and one USBPC before the ISO Regen which is connected to my Lampizator Pacific. This combo brings more meat to the table than just the Iso Regen and LPS1, UltraRendu and LPS1, and combinations with the USBPC devices. I also use the LPS1 with FMC closest to the DAC and a battery to power the first FMC. Really amazing results. Apparently SOtM was caught trying to influence the Computer Audiophile awards so to me that’s a good reason to stay away. Andrew at Small Green Computer, Jesus at Sonore, and the guys at Uptone Audio are great at supporting their products and they sound astoundingly good as well.

[zerung]

15 hours ago, sgr said:

I have not heard any SOtM products at all.
But I’ve combined the UltraRendu, IsoRegen, two LPS1s, two USBPCs (one after the UltraRendu and one USBPC before the ISO Regen which is connected to my Lampizator Pacific. This combo brings more meat to the table than just the Iso Regen and LPS1, UltraRendu and LPS1, and combinations with the USBPC devices. I also use the LPS1 with FMC closest to the DAC and a battery to power the first FMC. Really amazing results. Apparently SOtM was caught trying to influence the Computer Audiophile awards so to me that’s a good reason to stay away. Andrew at Small Green Computer, Jesus at Sonore, and the guys at Uptone Audio are great at supporting their products and they sound astoundingly good as well.

That is not fair... Every one is trying to influence this; Not only SoTM. I voted for the US company who requested my vote and I did - I prefer their product and felt suitably impressed to vote for them.

[beerandmusic]

Here is a good comparison...

 

https://www.audiostream.com/writer/32421

[hurka]

10 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

Here is a good comparison...

 

https://www.audiostream.com/writer/32421

poor sonore fans

[bit01]

Component interaction in different setups and different listener sensibilities come into play. In the end one has to listen with their own ears and using their own audio system. If you cannot do this, with this level of performance, toss a coin and hope for the best.

[matthias]

On 30.12.2017 at 9:21 PM, beerandmusic said:

Here is a good comparison...

 

How do you know?

 

Matt

[beerandmusic]

1 hour ago, matthias said:

 

How do you know?

 

Matt

 

I am not suggesting it is good as in accurate....

Good as in comparison to any other reviews out there....show me a better review with more detail and information  by a professional reviewer, even with a different view?

https://www.audiostream.com/writer/32421

 

To be honest, i trust what the people in the SOTM threads on this site say more....