Innuos Zenith Mk3 or OpticalRendu + separate server?

[BigAlMc]

Hi @McNulty,

 

Welcome. And loved your work in The Wire 😁

 

I can't answer your question as no one knows how the optical rendu will perform.

 

I can offer two small items of advice.

 

Firstly, I owned the Zenith MKII and still own the Zenith SE and both are superb. I'd heartily recommend Innuos.

 

Secondly if you're considering the SonicTransporter then take a look at the Audiostore Prestige from Vortexbox. 

 

https://www.vortexbox.co.uk

 

Martin Smith does great turnkey servers, offers superb service and is based in the UK. Nothing against Andrew Gillis that does the Sonictransporter who is similarly superb. But given you mention importing to Europe then Martin is based in the UK, offers essentially the same products and you'd avoid the hassle of customs charges etc from US to Europe. 

 

Martin also stocks Uptone Audio and Sonore.

 

Hope this helps a bit.

 

Cheers,

Alan

 

[BigAlMc]

4 hours ago, barrows said:

Consider, if you use an optical Network connection to a Renderer (or DAC with an optical input), there really is no reason to purchase an expensive "audiophile" server, as the optical connection isolates the Renderer from noise.  Just make sure you place the server (or NAS, whatever) away for the audio system and plugged into a different AC line form the audio system.

 

@barrows you should state your affiliation here because given you work for Sonore your advice isn't exactly impartial.

 

@McNulty,

 

What do you currently use as a server? And what inputs does your DAC accept and does it prefer any particular input?

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

9 minutes ago, barrows said:

It is clearly stated in my Signature.  

 

My advice here was general, and completely unrelated to Sonore.  Also the original topic does refer to, and ask about, Sonore product.

 

Fair enough. I read and responded to your response on my phone and it's not obvious there as signatures are not shown.

 

I stand by my impartiality comment though. My experience is that everything matters. So whilst I hope the Optical Rendu is a great product and am a fan of Sonore, I'm not convinced that you can state with any certainty that it renders (pardon the pun) the server as irrelevant.

 

I think the Op would be pleased with the Innuos and it meets his needs. But whether the Optical Rendu would outperform it is impossible to say at this stage.

 

Apologies if my original comment was too harsh.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

36 minutes ago, barrows said:

Even though the OP mentioned Sonore product specifically, I tried to keep my comments general RE optical connections, as there are other optical solutions available (like the Lumin's X-1, for example).

The fact is that optical isolation is absolute, there is no middle ground here, as long as the upstream gear is far away enough to not interfere with the audio system from airborne RFI, you will have no issues, no interference will come over the optical cable, it just cannot.

Anyone can test this with a couple of FMCs and a single optical cable.  Try any audiophile server on the other end, and then try a basic laptop.  See if you hear a difference...

 

While opinions are nice, there are some actual facts here-optical connections work so well because they are not subject to electrical interference the way electrical wiring is, this just a fact.  It is why optical is the choice for long distance, high rate data transmission.

 

I do not stream from Internet based music sources (Tidal, Qobuz, etc), but for those who do: do you suspect the server(s) these companies are using is an audiophile approved one?  Would Tidal sound better is their server(s) were Innuous?  This is, perhaps, a topic for another thread, but I am just offering it up as food for thought.

 

I tried a pair of FMCs and whilst they made a difference they were never perfect because the FMC closest to the DAC introduces almost as many problems as the optical run solves.

 

I tried this with your MicroRendu and without.

 

The Innuos MKII directly to my Directstream DAC was better on both Ethernet or USB than the MicroRendu was. Fact.

 

The Zenith SE better still. Fact.

 

The Op wants to know whether to buy a MK3, one box solution that meets all his needs, or a server & optical rendu. I'd buy the Innuos in his shoes. But I admit its possible, if unproven so far, that your optical rendu outperforms it.

 

Don't get me wrong, I hope for the sake of the market that the Optical Rendu does perform wonders. That would be a truly great thing.But I'm also aware that you spent ages advocating that servers didn't matter because of the Ethernet isolation into the Microrendu. My own experience begs to differ.

 

It's also kinda disingenuous to suggest you were opining on optical in general when the Op is choosing between your optical product and a specific alternative.

 

Beyond that a topic for a different thread as you say.

 

Cheers,

Alan

 

[BigAlMc]

6 minutes ago, barrows said:

 

A pair of FMCs and optical cable, then trade back and forth the server for an Innuous to an ordinary laptop.  this test would still show that optical isolation renders the "server" a non issue.

 

No. This is where we fundamentally disagree. The server matters and all this 'perfect isolation' malarkey is, at best, hyperbolae.

 

If isolation, be it optical, Ethernet or captain kirks transponder solved everything then why would you have so many experienced audiophiles spending so much time, money and energy on the Zeniths, audiolinux NUCs and suchlike.

 

Everything matters.

 

Period.

 

And the Optical Rendu might solve say 70 to 90% of it. But it will NOT solve it all.

 

Happy to be proven wrong. But I don't see a queue of Zenith owners lining up to trade their Zeniths in for an Optical Rendu. I do however see a lot of Microrendu owners doing do.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

33 minutes ago, barrows said:

I challenge you to propose a  technical theory by which an upstream device will matter in an optical Ethernet based set up.  

 

You're embarrassing yourself now.

 

You've preached the theoretical benefits of the MicroRendu for two years now but many peoples EXPERIENCE has led them to move onto better solutions.

 

I don't need to explain or propose the scientific theory. I'm telling you that my Innuos MKII sounded noticeably better than my MicroRendo.

 

This optical is the holy grail argument is frankly beneath you. It might well be a great advance. I truly hope it is. Sincerely. But I just can't see it being the endgame you're purporting.

 

Cheers,

Alan

 

 

[BigAlMc]

@barrows,

 

Upon reflection I apologise for that previous post. I was annoyed at your argument but I was overly personal. My bad.

 

I know your work and generally respect you. But guess we need to agree to disagree here.

 

My apologies for the embarrassing yourself comment.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

20 minutes ago, barrows said:

I am referring to electrical noise, not esoteric phase noise from the upstream clock(s).

 

At this point I would like to note we are getting into a very esoteric area.  There is presently no accepted science which explains if, and how, the phase noise of an upstream clock can affect the performance of a downstream Renderer.  First consider that the Renderer operates asynchronously, that is it ignores the upstream clock, and re-clocks all data to its own internal clock.  So the performance of the internal clock in the Renderer is paramount.  Once we accept this fact, we must first make sure our choice in renderers use a good internal clock(s).

OK, to discuss upstream clock phase noise, again, there is no accepted science of if/how upstream phase noise might effect the performance of a downstream Renderer...  Let that sink in before you go on believing this is a real problem.  After that has sunk in, let's consider: there is some anecdotal evidence to suggest the somehow upstream clocks are effecting downstream, even asynchronous, Renderers.  I believe there is enough anecdotal evidence to suggest further investigation into this.  John is currently making those investigations, and he is hoping to be able to measure these effects (if there are any).  I look forward to seeing what results he comes up with.  Let us also note that there are some really sketchily "engineered" products out there (like modified switches) that claim to reduce clock phase noise on Ethernet connections, and that some of the anecdotal evidence reported is based on these devices.

In the mean time I do look forward to testing for myself if a better upstream clock makes any audible difference (via an audiophile FMC with good engineering), and I will do that as soon as possible.  If it does, it is an easy "problem" to address, and does not change the fact that no electrical noise is carried on optical Ethernet connections. 

 

Dude you are digging a hole for yourself.

 

You want to lecture science over our experience but then state things like:

 

22 minutes ago, barrows said:

There is presently no accepted science which explains if, and how, the phase noise of an upstream clock can affect the performance of a downstream Renderer. 

 

 

Let's just accept there are differing views here.

 

Beyond that if you want to maintain this "our isolation makes the server irrelevant" argument its gonna be put up or shut up time.

 

I have a Zenith SE as well as an Audiolinux NUC server on hand and am happy to host a few CA/AS people for a bakeoff  if you want to send a Optical Rendu prototype or whatever here. Likewise I'm sure there will be US based members willing to do the same.

 

But this stance that your science trumps everyone else's experience and that experience is "anecdotal" isn't winning this argument for you. Its also pissing people off to be blunt. So either accept there are many unknowns here or prove your claims.

 

Cheers,

Alan

 

[BigAlMc]

7 minutes ago, barrows said:

But by no means do I expect audiophiles to just blindly believe what I say, go ahead and test for yourself, like I suggested, just do not blindly follow some Internet hobbiest based on their experiences, test for yourself, in your own system.

 

I'm at a loss for words in general but to be clear my own journey included:

 

ÑAS

MicroRendu

FMC

Singxer SU-1

Zenith MKII

Zenith SE

NUC Audiolinux

 

So I would argue with strong conviction that I have tested.

 

Regardless, bring it on. Send me an Optical Rendu and I'm happy to test and invite a few others to observe whether it renders the SE, NUC and my Lenovo laptop equal as you claim.

 

I'll pay full price as a holding deposit and keep it if it wins the bakeoff. But I'd expect to return it at no cost to myself if it doesn't live up to expectations.

 

Put up or shut up my friend, because beyond that this is getting tired and we're doing the Op a disservice.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

13 hours ago, barrows said:

I find your attitude distasteful, and am unsure as to why I would be obligated to prove anything to you?

 

Right back atcha. I find your attitude distasteful as your insinuating that I'm foolish for spending money on a good server because all I needed was to wait for Sonores completely unproven optical decrapifier. But in fairness to the Op I guess we park it there and agree to disagree.

[BigAlMc]

1 minute ago, vortecjr said:

. To me they are no different than the line products from Small Green Computer which offer the same functionality at a much lower price point.

 

Sorry Jesus but this is either a naive comment or an uninformed one.

 

I went from the Audiostore Prestige 2 (Martin Smiths version of Andrew Gillis  Small Green Computers server) to an Innuos Zenith MKII and the difference was night and day. The Zenith is far superior. The Zenith SE is even better still.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

2 minutes ago, vortecjr said:

. I also don't see the Rendu series as "decrapifiers". They are just purpose built endpoints or renderers 

 

I had the MicroRendu and later upgraded it to the 1.4 board - both courtesy of Martin Smith as I'm in the UK.

 

I liked both and admire your products.

 

I used the phrase decrapifier in response to Barrows continual argument that what's upstream of the Optical Rendu doesn't matter at all. So it's a decrapifier in terms of Barrows argument that it doesn't matter if you use a crap server because total isolation will save the day.

 

This is not my experience and I'm firmly in the 'everything matters' camp. If you don't introduce the crap you don't need to remove it.

 

I got a little strident with Barrows as his one sided argument was getting on my nerves. But I probably overreacted. My bad!

 

Look at my first post on this thread. I was very balanced despite currently owning an Innuos.

 

I hope the Optical Rendu does very well and I have no doubt it'll be a great product and great value. I just take issue with this 'your server doesn't matter because my science says so', mantra.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

2 minutes ago, vortecjr said:

However, I don't think they matter as used with our Rendu series

 

Sorry dude but need to disagree. The Zenith has USB out and a second LAN port for Ethernet out. My Directstream DAC supports both USB and Ethernet inputs.

 

Amongst other things I compared:

 

Server to MicroRendu to DAC

 

vs

 

Zenith via Ethernet output to DAC

 

The Zenith Ethernet sounded better. Others have reported similarly.

 

Ethernet might offer inbuilt isolation but its not the whole story. What you input into that Ethernet cable matters too. 

 

We can agree to disagree if you want.

 

9 minutes ago, vortecjr said:

Martin who is a great industry member and a top Sonore dealer and support center.  

 

Agreed. Great bloke and very helpful.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

1 hour ago, vortecjr said:

In one of posts above you said this referring to Barrows, "You've preached the theoretical benefits of the microRendu for two years now but many peoples EXPERIENCE has led them to move onto better solutions." This is an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information. I'm sure some have and you may have. However, I have access to the back end data from the usage of www.sonicorbiter.com and the data suggests otherwise. If I just take a multi day snap shot of the units online for the microRendu product its usage is actually quite high. Another indicator is the number of people who have updated their units to the most current version of SonicOrbiter. These indicators and more suggest that the microRendu is still being enjoyed by many no matter what some vocal few suggest.   

 

People sell the MicroRendu when they move on. I did

The second hand demand is pretty strong which is a complimentary reflection on your product.

 

But the number of MicroRendus still in use doesn't rule out that many people moved onwards to something else in search of higher SQ or some other functionality.

[BigAlMc]

Hi @McNulty,

 

No, the argument I was making was that the 'clean' Ethernet output from the Zenith was superior to the output from the MicroRendu (in my experience at least)

 

The Ethernet and USB outputs from the Zenith are pretty well matched.

 

FWIW I ended up using USB output far more but that was due to other reasons such as the LMS player only using USB, and the contributions of other USB peripherals such as the Lush^2 cable and the TX-USBUltra.

 

My debate with the gents from Sonore  here is that they claim that the isolation offered by Ethernet and now Optical when coupled with their low noise, designed for audio, Rendu board means the server is irrelevant. I disagree because my experience is that its better to not introduce that noise in the first place, using a good server like the Zenith. Rather than to rely on removing it later.

 

I think you should go for the Zenith. But as per my original post I can't say for sure that the Optical Rendu wouldn't outperform it.

 

Also my apologies for hijacking your thread!

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

3 hours ago, barrows said:

I still have not received an answer to this inquiry from those who claim clock phase noise (upstream as it were) actually accumulates and degrades the audio performance, as you appear to claim much expertise in the matter, how is it that Tidal and Qobuz can deliver even decent sound quality, considering the hundreds of clock domains their signals travel through to on the way to ones home?

 

Barrows, Barrows, Barrows!

 

This give me some science to disprove mine is akin to 'bits are bits'. Should we all pack up any cables we own if we cannot write a two paragraph scientific explanation for why they make our systems sound better? Of course not, if they sound better they still in. Period.

 

4 hours ago, barrows said:

your "extensive experimentation" does not include the opticalRendu, mine does.  My reports here are accurate to my experience, when you have experience of the opticalRendu 

 

My problem here is that you've been trotting out this tired: servers don't matter because of the isolation in the sonore renderers for a few years now. The optical isolation allows you to bolster that claim. But MANY users have concluded otherwise.

 

We we find out when the Optical Rendu is released. Until then you'd get less flack if you parked this dismissive we know better approach.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

7 minutes ago, barrows said:

But it is OK for you to have a "we know better" approach?  I am just sharing my experience

 

A. Yes it is. Because I'm not trying to sell one of the two products in question.

 

B. I wasn't. I was offering my experience.

 

C. Look at my first post. I was careful to be very balanced to the Op.

[BigAlMc]

2 hours ago, barrows said:

I disagree entirely with this assertion.

 

Here is an (albeit extreme) example of why:  Let's say you have a compound fracture: who do you consult to deal with the problem, a car salesman who has a hobby of giving medical advice for free, or an orthopedic surgeon, a professional, who is actually trained in his field and who charges money for his services?

 

Just because the Internet allows for anyone to post their opinion on anything does not make anyone an "expert".

 

Jesus Barrows you're full of shit!

 

Apologies for the ungentlemanly language but I'll accept a censure from Chris.

 

Dude/Mate/my friend - I have no animosity to you and genuinely wish your products well. I loved my MicroRendu. 

 

But regardless of whether you are a commission based sales rep, consultant, or business owner of Sonore.

 

You need to understand that you represent Sonore. Not that there is anything wrong with representing Sonore. Just you need to be balanced. If you'd been balanced on this thread you would not be getting the same shit you invited. 

 

Dude - it might not feel like it. But I'm a fan. I like Sonore and what you do. Honest. Just cut out this 'we used to build servers until we learned better' bullshit.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

10 hours ago, barrows said:

That quote is nothing more than the truth, you can choose not to believe me, that is up to you.  But, I do not lie about this.  I am saddened that you appear to inhabit a world where you choose to see dishonesty and conspiracy around you, but I will not be drawn down into that world.

I will continue to take the high road and report my experiences truthfully and honestly.

 

It's nothing to do with my choosing to see conspiracy or dishonesty. You are peddling a line that at best is mistaken and at worst is biased.

 

No one out there is saying the microrendu, signature rendu or optical rendu is the best SQ they've ever heard.

 

Jason Kennedy, John Darko, Roy/Romaz and others all opined that the Zenith SE server knocked their proverbial socks off. Times have moved on but 15-18 months ago the SE was at the pinnacle of off the shelf SQ and it was a Server not an Endpoint.

 

Sonores decision to focus on Endpoints was a business decision, not a valediction of the scientific principle you are arguing (wrongly!) here.

 

Does hooking up a MicroRendu to an SE further improve the SQ. Nope! Because the SE produces a level of SQ the MicroRendu is incapable of. Nothing wrong with that given the SE costs around 9 times what the MR does. But the point is that the Ethernet isolation into the MR doesn't safeguard against noise from the SE because the SE produces less noise than the MR. And the SE is a server!

 

10 hours ago, barrows said:

as I know that commercial computers are hopelessly compromised in this role.

 

Wrong again. Many users including myself are getting terrific results with a simple Intel NUC running Audiolinux in RAM (loaded from a USB memory stick). 

 

Those (including myself) that are pursuing this to the extreme are finding that an AL NUC endpoint contributes the lions share (60 to 80%) of the SQ but an additional AL NUC server contributes another SQ bump (40 to 20%).

 

Why? Because my friend, everything matters.

 

How are these NUCs connected? Via Ethernet. So refuting the argument you've made numerous times on this forum about the inherent isolation Ethernet offers there is a noticeable SQ bump putting a better server on the other end of that Ethernet run.

 

As for whether Optical is a game changer here well that's all down to the two conversions to and from optical. If you want to claim that the Optical Rendu makes the Zenith, Zenith SE or AL NUC server irrelevant, well then you need to prove it. Not necessarily to me. But to the market in general when you release it. Until then you're making unsubstantiated theoretical claims.

 

Assuming we accept my premise that the SE or AL NUC produces a level of SQ the Rendus are incapable of. Then theoretically do you accept that an optical run into an Optical Rendu might provide total isolation from the server but not to the benefit of the SQ if that SQ was already better?

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

5 minutes ago, vortecjr said:

What did I do to deserve this? If you have a disagreement with Barrows PM him. 

 

Sorry, I didn't mean Jesus as in your name. Was using the swearword version of the lords name.

 

@barrows I apologise. I went too far. My argument stands but I apologise unreservedly for the full of shit comment. My bad.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

6 minutes ago, vortecjr said:

“Nothing” is to strong a word. It’s my opinion that the software can matter because some can resample and some have very good algorithms. On the other hand I have measured some of the proposed network tweaks and found nothing compelling about them and when I posted my findings you guys want nothing to do with it. My network is the least optimized here and my server is an unoptimsed Synology NAS with switching supply and 5 spinning drives. My apologies, but I personally don’t need an expensive server to get stunning results. 

 

What endpoint or renderer are you using currently?

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

2 minutes ago, vortecjr said:

I currently have two in my system.

1. microRendu with a Sonore toneDAC under test into my integrated AMP.

2. Signature Rendu SE with opticalRendu board with a custom built Buffalo SE DAC into my integrated AMP. This unit arrived this week and I have installed the 20’ fiber optic cable needed for the network. 

 

 

Thanks Jesus,

 

When you say Signature SE with OpticalRendu board is that the OpticalRendu but with the superior power supply of your SE range?

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

37 minutes ago, vortecjr said:

FYI #1 above is unbalanced out into my integrated AMP and #2 is balanced out into integrated AMP.

 

Not sure I follow the balanced/unbalanced comment but I found it interesting you use a MicroRendu instead of an UltraRendu.

 

What PS are you using here?

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

21 minutes ago, FredM said:

This topic is quite useless and runs in circles, as a suggestion:

- move the topic to the Sponsored section

- rename the title, ie ‘When using a OpticalRendu, does a quality server matter?’

- just wait till OpticalRendu’s are actual available, so a comparison can be made 👍

 

Oh the Op has long since given up on this thread and the argumentative types propelling it in circles 🙄

 

@McNulty Did you decide or would you care to share your latest thinking? We promise to be nice regardless.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[BigAlMc]

4 hours ago, Foggie said:

I have been of the mindset that keeping the server/heavy processing be kept in another room and sending the output (via fiber) to a streamer (which is what I use). 

 

It is interesting that many of the users, actually everyone of them (in the Innuos case) has reported better to significant improvement with server direct to DAC v.s. server + streamer + DAC config.  That just seems counter intuitive, but has peeked my interest nonetheless and obviously its all subjective + system dependent. 

 

One "knock" I have with the Innuos is that it has a lot of functions I don't need/want and thus are paying for. 

 

This sonictransporter which has embedd HQP and sonicorbiter OS sounds like a great alternative

 

Hi Foggie,

 

I went directly from an Audiostore Prestige 2 (UK version of SonicTransporter running same SonicOrbiter OS) to an Innuos Zenith mkII and the jump in SQ was well worth the price difference.

 

The SonicTransporter / Audiostore Prestige line are good value at that price point. The Zeniths are better. Simples.

 

Cheers,

Alan