Innuos Zenith Mk3 or OpticalRendu + separate server?

[barrows]

5 minutes ago, Superdad said:

The hypothesis applies to Ethernet as well.  You'll see that John indicates that.  And it is why we are going to the trouble and expense to use 600MHz active digital isolators, differential clocking, and 10GHz differential flip-flops--all in their own separate clock and power domain--in the EtherREGEN.

Good, I'll take a look.  Alex, do you have any thoughts on how the Internet can possibly work (or perhaps think Tidal/Qobuz) with all those clock's phase noise accumulating and creating problems?  I mean, how many clocks (relatively ordinary, ie not sub 90 Dbc/Hz phase noise at 10 Hz) do you think are involved in getting a Tidal stream to one's home, hundreds, right?  (I am no expert on the Internet!).

[barrows]

57 minutes ago, Superdad said:

The hypothesis applies to Ethernet as well.  You'll see that John indicates that.  And it is why we are going to the trouble and expense to use 600MHz active digital isolators, differential clocking, and 10GHz differential flip-flops--all in their own separate clock and power domain--in the EtherREGEN.

I read the description and have a number of issues with it.  Perhaps JS had to dumb it down too much for lay persons though... He describes (incoming) Phase Noise as if it is a separate thing from the clock fundamental frequency, which is not really an accurate way of looking at it.  Phase Noise is just the sum (or spectrum if one looks at that) of the parts left when one subtracts out the fundamental.  The way he describes the "Phase Noise" as affecting the ground plane, and hence, output of the FF would actually, equally (actually to a much greater degree as the fundamental is many times higher in level) apply to the clock fundamental frequency as well, given that the incoming clock is not synchronous with the out going clock.

 

Question: if the close in phase noise is The issue, then why would a 600 MHz isolator be a good feature?  If what one is concerned about is noise around 10 Hz?  This seems counterintuitive, no?

 

And, again, if accumulated clock phase noise in an asynchronous Ethernet environment, would one not have to draw the conclusion that streaming Tidal and Qobuz would be hopelessly compromised by the hundreds of switches these streams pass through?  I guess this would be a good reason for the etherRegen and its "clock blocking", no?  and anyone who does not have this feature in their system would get absolutely unlistenable sound form Tidal or Qobuz (I use neither so have no experience...)?  Could the Internet even work if such problems really exist?

[OldBigEars]

Surely the comparison between Sonore and Zenith should include more consideration for the power supply used in the rendu?  In my case, I use a CI Audio 7v PS with mR 1.4.  A relatively affordable PS, but it sounds great anyway.  I don't doubt my mR would sound even better if I spent some more dollars on something like a JS-2, which would make it pretty price-comparable with the Zen. 

 

Question for Barrows.....(mR 1.4 + JS-2)  vs OptiRendu with a relatively modest PS - in your view, which would be better?

[barrows]

24 minutes ago, OldBigEars said:

Question for Barrows.....(mR 1.4 + JS-2)  vs OptiRendu with a relatively modest PS - in your view, which would be better?

I have no experience with either of those power supplies so I cannot make any kind of relevant comment, really.

I would suggest the JS-2 has far more capability than that required by either the microRendu or the opticalRendu, considering the micro needs <1A of current and the optical needs about 1.3A of current.  So the cost comparison is not really fair in thta sense.  A much lower power (but still high quality) supply would make for a more fair cost comparison.

 

What I can say is that in my initial testing of the opticalRendu I used a supply of my own design I call the "Stealth Switcher".  This supply features a small LC input filter, followed by a very low noise/leakage current SMPS, followed by a RC filter, and then an ultra low noise/output impedance discrete regulator.  With this supply the opticalRendu was clearly better than any other USB source I have ever heard.

 

My recommendation for you is to go ahead with the opticalRendu, and power it with your CIA supply (as long as that supply can deliver 1.3A continuous at 7-8 VDC).  And then, later, perhaps, if you so desire, you can always go for a power supply upgrade of some sort.

[kennyb123]

1 hour ago, OldBigEars said:

Surely the comparison between Sonore and Zenith should include more consideration for the power supply used in the rendu?  In my case, I use a CI Audio 7v PS with mR 1.4.  A relatively affordable PS, but it sounds great anyway.  I don't doubt my mR would sound even better if I spent some more dollars on something like a JS-2, which would make it pretty price-comparable with the Zen. 

 

 

I had tried both a JS-2 and and LPS-1.2 on my mR 1.4.  I got a nice bump in sound quality with the LPS-1.2.  I think I might have also preferred the original LPS-1 on the mR as well. 

 

I'm now using a Zenith Std Mk2.  This offered a really nice bump in sound quality over the mR 1.4 plus LPS-1.2.

[OldBigEars]

53 minutes ago, kennyb123 said:

 

I had tried both a JS-2 and and LPS-1.2 on my mR 1.4.  I got a nice bump in sound quality with the LPS-1.2.  I think I might have also preferred the original LPS-1 on the mR as well. 

 

I'm now using a Zenith Std Mk2.  This offered a really nice bump in sound quality over the mR 1.4 plus LPS-1.2.

 

So how was the mR 1.4 with JS-2 compared to the LPS1.2?  And the Zenith was presumably better than that combination?

[OldBigEars]

1 hour ago, barrows said:

I have no experience with either of those power supplies so I cannot make any kind of relevant comment, really.

 

 You should have a chat with Adrian.  He was the one who recommended that I should get the CI Audio. 

[soares]

Just a quick question that probably does not make any sense.

Will there be any value added in using a Zenith MKII with a opticalrendu/ultrarendu before the DAC?

Thank you guys.   

[matthias]

49 minutes ago, soares said:

Just a quick question that probably does not make any sense.

Will there be any value added in using a Zenith MKII with a opticalrendu/ultrarendu before the DAC?

Thank you guys.   

 

 Jason Kennedy in his review of the Statement in The Ear.net reported that adding a streamer before the DAC is superior to a direct DAC connection to the Innuos.

 

Matt

[incus]

On 2/25/2019 at 8:51 AM, barrows said:

It is plausible, but unproven, that more error correction by the endpoint will generate more processor noise, and could result in a decrease in sound quality.  In any case, for that reason alone I advise folks to avoid WiFi for music distribution if possible.

 

 The other problem is the WiFi transceiver itself, this is by definition a source of noise

But you've just answered it!  What you say here applies perfectly to optical transmission as well! The more error correction the optical rendu will be forced to do, the worse it will sound. So, logically speaking, feeding it a better clocked signal will improve SQ. And the optical receiver in this case is by definition a source of noise too....

 

I realize these comments are a bit old now but as I read through this new thread, I cannot help but say that much of what you have said here is, to the letter, 100% false according to my extensive experimentation with streaming music in both my two-channel rig and my desk-top rig. I am, quite frankly, shocked to hear this coming from someone so deeply involved in manufacturing part of a cutting-edge digital streaming playback system. I certainly hope it's not because Sonore doesn't make servers (anymore) and has focused so much on the renderer. I'd be curious what your system is such that you don't hear difference between sources. There is a distinct, obvious and repeatable difference in sound and sound quality between my SGC i7 Roon server and my new SotM Roon server as fed through the exact same system. I have my understandings for why there is such a difference and J. Swenson and the folks at Uptone certainly have their understandings of why there is such a difference - so I could suggest you stop passing off subjective experiences/motivations as objective truth. Sonore wouldn't keep coming up with better and better products if the objective truth had already been discerned and implemented, right?

[incus]

On 2/25/2019 at 11:07 AM, barrows said:

And, again, if accumulated clock phase noise in an asynchronous Ethernet environment, would one not have to draw the conclusion that streaming Tidal and Qobuz would be hopelessly compromised by the hundreds of switches these streams pass through?  I guess this would be a good reason for the etherRegen and its "clock blocking", no?  and anyone who does not have this feature in their system would get absolutely unlistenable sound form Tidal or Qobuz (I use neither so have no experience...)?  Could the Internet even work if such problems really exist?

I think you are exaggerating the effects of phase noise to make a point here. But it's not that complicated. Tidal and Qobuz are clearly NOT good enough on their own or else no one would buy any of the products any of you sell! They would just stream into earpods directly from their iMac. Streaming services ARE good enough for that. Accumulated phase noise doesn't "ruin" the signal for that kind of playblack - which is probably the majority of consumers anyway. But it DOES degrade sound quality for those who have the systems, the money, the inclination, and the ears, to hear the difference. We are only ever talking about a tiny percent of music listeners. For us - I think I can say us - every little bit matters...

[barrows]

6 minutes ago, incus said:

But you've just answered it!  What you say here applies perfectly to optical transmission as well! The more error correction the optical rendu will be forced to do, the worse it will sound. So, logically speaking, feeding it a better clocked signal will improve SQ.

As mentioned, unproven.  But, to satisfy those who want a better clocked signal Sonore has solutions for that coming soon.  And I am looking forward to testing them, as I have also stated in this thread (perhaps you should read it all before becoming so critical).  I am skeptical as to whether this will really matter in a system with the opticalRendu, but I will test with an open mind.  And, if it does make an actual improvement, then great, even better sound!  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?

 

8 minutes ago, incus said:

I cannot help but say that much of what you have said here is, to the letter, 100% false according to my extensive experimentation with streaming music in both my two-channel rig and my desk-top rig

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 in this context then you will you will have an opinion of what is "right" and "wrong" (or at least a sound quality that you prefer over another).

 

17 minutes ago, incus said:

so I could suggest you stop passing off subjective experiences/motivations as objective truth

OK, either I misunderstand you or something is very wrong with the above statement?  Honestly, i am a bit confused here: All of your observations on sound quality of different set ups are based on measurements?  Or do you use "subjective" experiences to determine your "truths"?  For the record, i rely on both measurements, verifiable data, and subjective listening experiences in order to make informed decisions about how to improve system sound quality.

 

One more thing.  I accept that there is more than one way to skin a cat.  Multiple approaches to sound quality can lead to good performances and not everyone even agrees on what kind of sound quality is "best".  I have reported on my experiences, even if my experiences do not match yours, that does not make them "100% false".

[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

[incus]

4 hours ago, incus said:

 

 

4 hours ago, barrows said:

As mentioned, unproven.  But, to satisfy those who want a better clocked signal Sonore has solutions for that coming soon.  And I am looking forward to testing them, as I have also stated in this thread (perhaps you should read it all before becoming so critical).  I am skeptical as to whether this will really matter in a system with the opticalRendu, but I will test with an open mind.  And, if it does make an actual improvement, then great, even better sound!  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?

 

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 in this context then you will you will have an opinion of what is "right" and "wrong" (or at least a sound quality that you prefer over another).

 

OK, either I misunderstand you or something is very wrong with the above statement?  Honestly, i am a bit confused here: All of your observations on sound quality of different set ups are based on measurements?  Or do you use "subjective" experiences to determine your "truths"?  For the record, i rely on both measurements, verifiable data, and subjective listening experiences in order to make informed decisions about how to improve system sound quality.

 

One more thing.  I accept that there is more than one way to skin a cat.  Multiple approaches to sound quality can lead to good performances and not everyone even agrees on what kind of sound quality is "best".  I have reported on my experiences, even if my experiences do not match yours, that does not make them "100% false". 

I only say 100% false to counter your repeated claims that absolutely positively nothing zero zilch nada makes it through optical. That is just as subjective as anything anyone else is saying, as you have no measurements to prove that *nothing* makes it through (and you dismissed some very interesting discussions about just these types of measurements from the What's Best interchange that was linked to.) You have come out firing with some big guns on the subject so perhaps you shouldn't be surprised that you are getting some edgy responses. I am saying that your "100% sure" claim that nothing makes it through optical is 100% false in my experiences with my system, which includes optical. I have optical isolation between server and desktop endpoint and changing servers has required many hours of note-taking to get a handle on all the changes I am hearing. This are not small changes between servers. They are large. 

 

So for the OP who is looking to understand where he should put his money, I will add my voice to the side that says he should absolutely look into the various server options and price them out and test them if he can because they do make a deep and obvious difference to the sound of a streaming playback chain - and not simply wait for the Optical Rendu and grab any old NUC as a source.

 

(The irony here is that I am pre-ordering an optical Rendu! Not just to test but to use because I have loved Sonore's products in the past and it fits perfectly with a need I have in another part of the house... I trust it will be better than all Rendus before it - all of which, however, benefited from a better source, as has been pointed out...)

[incus]

4 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?

Reposting:

I think you are exaggerating the effects of phase noise to make a point here. But it's not that complicated. Tidal and Qobuz are clearly NOT good enough on their own or else no one would buy any of the products any of you sell! They would just stream into earpods directly from their iMac. Streaming services ARE good enough for that. Accumulated phase noise doesn't "ruin" the signal for that kind of playblack - which is probably the majority of consumers anyway. But it DOES degrade sound quality for those who have the systems, the money, the inclination, and the ears, to hear the difference. We are only ever talking about a tiny percent of music listeners. For us - I think I can say us - every little bit matters...

[barrows]

55 minutes ago, BigAlMc said:

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.

But it is OK for you to have a "we know better" approach?  I am just sharing my experience, as are you.  We should be able to disagree and have different experiences without there being any need to give any flak. 

 

As far as the clock question goes (separate from noise isolation) I remain skeptical, but open minded about it, as I have mentioned about 3 times in this thread.  Again, as mentioned, I will be testing better upstream clocks in my system in order to come to my own conclusions about it.  My Tidal and Qobuz remarks have been made in an effort to discuss what is/may be really going on with clocks. 

[barrows]

1 hour ago, incus said:

I think you are exaggerating the effects of phase noise to make a point here. But it's not that complicated. Tidal and Qobuz are clearly NOT good enough on their own or else no one would buy any of the products any of you sell! They would just stream into earpods directly from their iMac

While I play only locally stored files and have no experience of streaming music from the Internet, I have communicated with many audiophiles, indeed with very good systems, both on forums like these and at audio shows like RMAF, who do a large portion of their listening via streaming services.  Including the owner of this site we are communicating on right now.

I have also read with interest the reports of some of diminished sound quality from Tidal, and better sound quality from Qobuz, and some claiming there is not difference of streamed vs. stored files (of the same master).  So the anecdotal reports are all over the place.  The only thing that is clear to me is that there is no consensus on the sound quality of music files streamed from the Internet.  

[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.

[barrows]

7 minutes ago, BigAlMc said:

 

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.

I am not trying to sell anything.  I am a consultant to Sonore, and I make absolutely nothing from sales of the opticalRendu mentioned in this thread.  I also make absolutely nothing from sharing my experience here on this forum.  

[barrows]

1 hour ago, incus said:

I only say 100% false to counter your repeated claims that absolutely positively nothing zero zilch nada makes it through optical.

The statement is that no electrical noise is transmitted through optical Ethernet interfaces.  Again, from the very beginning of my involvement in this thread I have made the exception for clock quality, which is not an interference but is embedded in the data.

[k-man]

54 minutes ago, barrows said:

I am a consultant to Sonore, and I make absolutely nothing from sales of the opticalRendu mentioned in this thread. 

It’s a little confusing, but from what I have read in Sonore’s own thread, aren’t Sonore Signature Series Rendu users sending their units to you to upgrade to the optical element? I’m not trying to call you out, but there must be some vested interest (royalties or labour ) here which supports @BigAlMc previous post.

[soares]

15 hours ago, matthias said:

 

 Jason Kennedy in his review of the Statement in The Ear.net reported that adding a streamer before the DAC is superior to a direct DAC connection to the Innuos.

 

Matt

Thanks Matt. 

Let's see if someone will try the Zenith with a ultra or optical rendu.

Kind regards,

 

Jorge

[incus]

6 hours ago, barrows said:

While I play only locally stored files and have no experience of streaming music from the Internet

Enough said.

[incus]

6 hours ago, barrows said:

The statement is that no electrical noise is transmitted through optical Ethernet interfaces

Because it depends what you mean by "transmitted." If you mean passed on to the endpoint/DAC then this is false because of the optical receiver and its power supply.

 

 

[barrows]

7 hours ago, k-man said:

It’s a little confusing, but from what I have read in Sonore’s own thread, aren’t Sonore Signature Series Rendu users sending their units to you to upgrade to the optical element? I’m not trying to call you out, but there must be some vested interest (royalties or labour ) here which supports @BigAlMc previous post.

Sure, but this thread, and the question posted the OP is about the opticalRendu, not the Signature.