Aurender integrated streamer/DACs

Update.  I auditioned a Weiss 502 for about a month.  Very fine piece of equipment that was quite frankly built better (not as flashy, but better connections and knob feel) than my McIntosh C2700 pre-amp.  I fully expected to find that the Weiss was audibly better than the C2700's DA2.  Using Roon, and setting up a zone with both the Weiss connected via ethernet and the DA2 to my PC via USB, I was able to easily accommodate A/B comparison, and then a double-blind test.  My son (who is a musician) and I both took the test and really could not tell the difference.  The rest of my system is an MC 462 and B&W 802 D4s, so you'd think it would be resolving enough to tell the tale.  The sound really is quite good, but now I am back to looking at the source because thinking about it some more, maybe that's my first constraint as my PC is in no way optimized for sound, though I do use an AQ Coffee USB cable.  So now I am back to N20 or N200 to be sure my source is as good as I can practically afford, and then try another DAC (based on another technology - maybe a PSAudio DSD MkII or the T+A DAC 200 or Holo May or second-hand dCS Bartok).  Thoughts?  Thanks All.  -Mark

@mhwilliford If you can afford an N20, go for it. The N200 is excellent, but the N20 is a level above and delivers with much more body and smoothness on top of the great clarity the N200 brings. The N20 is near endgame, and you have to listen critically to discern the differences with the doubly expensive N30SA, which is exceptional by bringing even more clarity and larger soundstage.

For the DAC, I have highly recommended T+A as I have in the past, but I am curious about the DSD MK II as I used to own the fully modded MK I. That said, the DAC 200 is leagues above the DSD MK I. I haven’t heard the DAC 200 and DSD MK II side by side.

I would forego the Bartok. I find it to be a bit closer to the analytical side, and you may be paying for features you will not use (built in streamer).

Take this with a grain of salt as I am an authorized dealer for Aurender and T+A, but I am an audiophile first and chose to carry these brands for a reason and owned equipment from them prior to becoming a dealer. 

I just bought Aurender A200 as an upgrade from BlueSound Node. My initial impression of Aurender that it sounds a bit more dull in comparison. It lacks the high end presence of BlueSound. 

The rest of the system is exactly the same for both sources: Luxman 507z and SonusFaber Olympica III. 

Is there something that I should tweak in Aurender or do you think I have been jaded by higher presence sound of BlueSound?

Thank you all!

@gsomin

First, is it new? Broken in? It will need at least a couple hundred hours on it before it will perform correctly… 300 or 400 is better.

Tell us more about the rest of your system. There is a place for photos and to ID your system. That would really help us. Click on the little triangle next to discussion Forum to virtual system.

Aurender streamers are world class… although their DACs are not known to be quite as leading edge. The A200 i should blow away the Blue Sound.

Is it possible you are taking treble and in your face presence for higher quality? Higher quality sound brings out the natural midrange and heft of voices and many instruments… it is more relaxed and musical. The presentation is deeper, soundstage wider. Just a thought.

Yes, it is brand spanking new A200. The rest of the system is Sonus Faber Olympica III speakers and Luxman 507z (will send a photo later). Note, that I did side-by-side with BlueSound on the same setup. 

Aurender does sound warmer with more bass, but cymbals and background piano is blended in, very understated. In contrast, I could hear all instruments on BlueSound. I do use a cheaper RCA cable for BlueSound (and LINN interconnects for the Aurender), so I can play with that, but I doubt it would have such a drastic difference.