Article: Review | AURALiC ARIES G2.1

[The Computer Audiophile]

View full article

[PeterG]

Hi Chris,

 

Thanks for the great review.  I was expecting a $20K price tag at the end, but at "only" $5K this may be the solution I've been looking for to add streaming to my system.  I currently use a Naim Uniti Core for 100% of my listening--it is a purpose built CD ripper and server, local only.  I've tried streaming a couple of times, but on my primary system, Qobuz cannot match local files for the last little shimmer.  Did you compare Qobuz to local files on the Aurilic for sound quality?  Could you tell the difference?

[Rcanoe]

Very glowing review.   I just don't get the copper em shield and springs in the feet features.   To me that is a distraction.   

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 hours ago, PeterG said:

Hi Chris,

 

Thanks for the great review.  I was expecting a $20K price tag at the end, but at "only" $5K this may be the solution I've been looking for to add streaming to my system.  I currently use a Naim Uniti Core for 100% of my listening--it is a purpose built CD ripper and server, local only.  I've tried streaming a couple of times, but on my primary system, Qobuz cannot match local files for the last little shimmer.  Did you compare Qobuz to local files on the Aurilic for sound quality?  Could you tell the difference?

I didn't do a direct comparison of local versus streaming. That's kind of a crapshoot. I stored all my content not available for streaming locally and streamed the rest while using the ARIES. Overall it's a fantastic system. 

[bbosler]

I read the review, but to be honest, not being familiar at all with Aurilic, I was almost done before it started to become clear what  type of device I was reading about.  I saw it is a "streaming Transporter" on the front of it in the picture but that could mean different things, and googling the term it appears to be something that is used only by Aurilic because all the hits I got were for Aurilic.. .. It  was many paragraphs in before I ran across "Many DACs have somewhat similar capabilities" so I then knew it was a DAC, until I realized later on it is not a DAC after looking at the picture of the back panel.  Then you said it would make a great centerpiece for my system, but I still had no idea what it was. 

 

maybe I'm the only one, but for these types of devices I find it extremely helpful if there is a list of features, and early on in the review a statement about what it is/does. If I may be so bold as to offer a suggestion, not all of your readers are as consumed with this stuff as you are so maybe you could dumb it down a bit , or at least offer some idea of the function of the device in the introduction , for those of use who aren't so well informed.. or a sidebar with functions. 

 

thanks

 

[McNulty]

A review without sonic comparisons to functionally similar products is no review IMO. 

[firedog]

6 hours ago, McNulty said:

A review without sonic comparisons to functionally similar products is no review IMO. 

I also like comparisons, but it isn't Chris' style. There are reviewers who compare and others who don't. It's a philosophical difference in how to approach reviewing.  I don't think you'll find what you are looking for in Chris' reviews. 

[firedog]

7 hours ago, bbosler said:

I read the review, but to be honest, not being familiar at all with Aurilic, I was almost done before it started to become clear what  type of device I was reading about.  I saw it is a "streaming Transporter" on the front of it in the picture but that could mean different things, and googling the term it appears to be something that is used only by Aurilic because all the hits I got were for Aurilic.. .. It  was many paragraphs in before I ran across "Many DACs have somewhat similar capabilities" so I then knew it was a DAC, until I realized later on it is not a DAC after looking at the picture of the back panel.  Then you said it would make a great centerpiece for my system, but I still had no idea what it was. 

 

maybe I'm the only one, but for these types of devices I find it extremely helpful if there is a list of features, and early on in the review a statement about what it is/does. If I may be so bold as to offer a suggestion, not all of your readers are as consumed with this stuff as you are so maybe you could dumb it down a bit , or at least offer some idea of the function of the device in the introduction , for those of use who aren't so well informed.. or a sidebar with functions. 

 

thanks

 

 I'm familiar with the products, but I agree that if you weren't it wouldn't have been clear if the device is just a transport or also includes a DAC. 

[Danny Kaey]

Great stuff Chris! Love that everyone has their own style on how to review products... 💯💥

[kennyb123]

9 hours ago, firedog said:

I also like comparisons, but it isn't Chris' style. There are reviewers who compare and others who don't. It's a philosophical difference in how to approach reviewing.  I don't think you'll find what you are looking for in Chris' reviews. 

Well said.  I get more from reviews that contain comparisons but I still enjoy reading what Chris has to say.  This is a product that hadn’t been on my radar due to not having the best experience with the original Aries.  A few things Chris shared about the company and this product have put them back on my radar.  It was definitely worth my time to read this so thanks @The Computer Audiophile for posting it.

[57gold]

Am not the sharpest knife in the CA drawer, but not sure what this product does? What and why will it make music sound better?

[firedog]

3 hours ago, 57gold said:

Am not the sharpest knife in the CA drawer, but not sure what this product does? What and why will it make music sound better?

Essentially, it's a network bridge like the Sonore Rendu series or the dCS bridge. The difference is that it has a lot of added functionality: the Auralic Lightning DS UI, multiple inputs, DSP - upsampling, ability to add storage, and a screen. You could use one of these and not need a separate server or outside UI software.

[R1200CL]

I wonder if Auralic will, or see the need of, adding fiber interface in next version. Or if an optical module or the EtherRegen upfront will make any difference.

It would be interesting to know if an upgrade from an opticalRendu to Auralic, dCS, Aqua LinQ, and similar network transports will make a change.

I suppose this answer will depend on what DAC in use. 

 

 

[audiobomber]

I also like comparisons. What would be particularly interesting to me would be a reference streamer or CD Transport that tested streamers could be compared with, i.e. a constant benchmark. 

 

Vibration control is a very interesting feature and sadly neglected in many otherwise fine components. I am using a Cambridge Audio isolation platform and thin sorbothane discs under my exaSound DAC and streamer, a highly worthwhile solution. I just ordered an IsoAcoustics zaZen for the exaSound gear. The Cambridge will go back to isolating my CD transport, where it belongs.

[ted_b]

I'd love to know what Chris thinks of its upsampling compared to running upsampling via a heavyweight server and HQPlayer, something he's done also.

[PeterG]

On 12/4/2020 at 7:30 AM, firedog said:

I also like comparisons, but it isn't Chris' style. There are reviewers who compare and others who don't. It's a philosophical difference in how to approach reviewing.  I don't think you'll find what you are looking for in Chris' reviews. 

Chris's reviews are great--he's one of the best.  But they would be even better with more comparisons.  Also, many of his reviews do include comparisons--RAAL requisite, Klipsch Three, Schiit Yggdrasil come to mind quickly.

[R1200CL]

8 hours ago, audiobomber said:

reference streamer

I think you just got that in this review 😀

 

 

[audiobomber]

3 hours ago, R1200CL said:

I think you just got that in this review 😀

 

 

Sure, the G2.1 would work as a reference, i.e. something to compare others to. 

[Account Closed]

23 hours ago, 57gold said:

Am not the sharpest knife in the CA drawer, but not sure what this product does? What and why will it make music sound better?

It’s a $5,000 computer. :)

[bbosler]

On 12/5/2020 at 8:36 AM, audiobomber said:

also like comparisons. What would be particularly interesting to me would be a reference streamer or CD Transport that tested streamers could be compared with, i.e. a constant benchmark. 

 

well, you would think that since Chris also has a $20K + Aurender W20SE that does basically the same thing, we could get some kind of comparison along the lines of why someone would choose to spend $20K+ versus $5K for this box 

[OldBigEars]

On 12/4/2020 at 12:51 AM, McNulty said:

A review without sonic comparisons to functionally similar products is no review IMO. 

 

It's an awkward situation for publishers.  Comparative reviews always have losers....meaning unhappy sponsors and advertisers.  It's a commercial predicament all reviewers face - Chris is no different.  One common practice is that some reviewers compare products with outlier brands, often products that would not realistically be main competitor(s) for the tested product.  It's a facade, but it at least gives some kind of reference point. Another one is to basically rank all the products in more or less in the same order as their prices - we can call this the "everyone wins" review. 

 

Obviously anyone reading this review would dearly appreciate an honest and qualified assessment of how it compares with other favorites - such as the Innuous Mk3 Statement or Sonore Signature, to name but two. Sadly this remains an elephant in the room. My take-away is that we're meant to use some kind of triangulation process to discover how this product really ranks, compared with similarly targeted products.

[The Computer Audiophile]

There is no comparison that would satisfy the majority of people. All the products mentioned so far are different from the ARIES with respect to feature set. Thus, a comparison is quite strange. 
 

In addition, if this was consumer reports and we purchased all the products, we’d have all the freedoms we want. However, we request review samples. We don’t ask manufacturers to supply components for us to use indefinitely and compare to everything that comes in. Who wants their product to live at a writer’s house for purposes of comparison with unknown future products that may or may not be even similar products? No manufacturers that I know, even if the products are the best. 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

P.S. I compared the Auralic software platform to Bryston’s in this review, yet nobody was happy. 

[thotdoc]

On 12/5/2020 at 1:13 AM, firedog said:

Essentially, it's a network bridge like the Sonore Rendu series or the dCS bridge. The difference is that it has a lot of added functionality: the Auralic Lightning DS UI, multiple inputs, DSP - upsampling, ability to add storage, and a screen. You could use one of these and not need a separate server or outside UI software.

I thought and still think, perhaps incorrectly, that it's a transporter, more SCG's sonic transporter with ripper, not Sonore's Rendus. Chris, you have to appreciate that your readers have built fairly sophisticated digital systems and within the group different people think this product is different things. I think it's pretty funny.

[audiobomber]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

P.S. I compared the Auralic software platform to Bryston’s in this review, yet nobody was happy. 

But no mention of sound quality vs. the Bryston. I believe that is the objection. Slick operation is available at much lower price points.