Aurender

@vonhelmholtz Just seeing this thread now and weighing in.

First, sample rates higher than 176-192KHz are nowhere near as important as the quality of the clock and the protocol. With that said, I would take a digital source with a quality clock maxxed out at 192KHz using AES over 768KHz USB any day. I am in the camp that believes USB is noisy and fatiguing in comparison. One case I can make is using USB from my $24K Aurender N30SA into my $38.5K T+A SDV 3100 HV. Where USB will use the T+A’s reference clock, even with 768Khz, I still prefer AES and the Aurender’s clock with 192Khz sample rates. The quality of the clocks in Aurender’s higher end units is very admirable and the N30SA (and the T+A DAC) is one of the reasons I’m debating so hard on whether I should give up on vinyl completely (you and I have discussed this). Many other endgame DAC manufacturers also prioritize AES, such as Berkeley, and AES is a professional protocol used in the pro audio / recording / mastering / production works. It is NOT a legacy interface.

Audiotroy mentions that Aurender can’t run Roon because it’s processors aren’t strong/fast enough. This is by design. By utilizing a low processing power architecture, Aurender can achieve lower noise floor, better separation, and just more of everything. Conductor is a proprietary platform to work its best alongside this low processing power environment. On the contrast, there is much debate about the “sound of Roon”. There was a fairly lengthy thread on this where I also commented on the elements that make a quality server/streamer (a robust linear power supply, low power, low noise, isolation, and clocking).

Also, I’m not aware of Aurender having any issues with native DSD playback. The Conductor platform allows users to choose whether they want native playback, DSD over PCM (DoP), or conversion to PCM. In this case, it boils down to the DAC’s supported formats.

Agree with others on i2s. There’s been a lot of hype, but implementations vary.

Not limited to Aurender, a high quality clock is usually one using OCXO or Femto and “quality” is about accuracy of timing, just like a luxury watch that uses a mechanical design to keep time. The clock’s role is focused on the transmission of digital samples and how well it assembles those samples back together. I wrote in a different thread, but clock and digital playback accuracy can be compared to photography. Many cameras and lenses can take a photo, and many of them do it “well”. But some stand out because of the quality of the lens in reproducing exactly what is out there, and the image is crisper, more natural, and the colors do not bleed due to aberration. A great clock does the same and results in the most accurate timing of digital signals, which will result in clarity, separation, and coherence. A lesser clock can still reproduce well, but in comparison to a great clock, it’s as if the image just wasn’t properly focused ever so slightly, or a slightly inferior lens was used. Sometimes one cannot tell unless comparing the two photos side by side. 

Higher end Aurender’s do leverage better clocks, but they also leverage more robust power supplies, better isolation (both in circuit design and chassis), and other benefits. 

@baylinor Apologies, in most posts I do mention that I am an authorized Aurender dealer. I missed it this time. That said, I purchased my N30SA prior to becoming a dealer. Sometimes I prioritize being an audiophile first and was not intending to promote Aurender and try to make a sale. Vonhelmholtz and I have had many discussions personally, and I was simply responding to him directly. He knows I’m a dealer, as he has purchased from me in the past. 
 

@vonhelmholtz FWIW, yes the higher end Aurender’s have better clocks, but as @oddiofyl states, even with the N200 he prefers coax. I did not sell him that unit, but I did provide his coax cable.

Also, I meant to say +1 in support of a master clock. My T+A unit already has a masterclock built in, and does not accommodate any external clocks, otherwise I’d be looking at one myself!

@lalitk Unfortunately no, when I did compare it was in someone else’s system and Taiko was running Roon. At that point the units have the same level of body and natural delivery (which is significant compared to any other streamer / server I’ve ever heard), but the N30SA had better clarity and separation. Maybe XDMS puts the Taiko up a notch, but for a $10K difference, I’m wondering if the SQ improvement from the software alone would justify the price difference.

What I would also say is that while I do have the N30SA, it is hooked up to the T+A SDV 3100 HV Reference Streaming DAC Preamp. I’ve spent a lot of time comparing the two, and it is really close. The N30SA does still beat the SDV’s streamer just ever so slightly with body and detail, but I have to try really hard to tell the difference. I’d like to try hooking up a simple fanless NAS, thinking of getting a QNAP HS-264 to try, putting one of my SSDs and a linear power supply to connect via Ethernet into the SDV and compare it to the N30SA’s local library. If the SDV is close, that really makes it a killer unit as its preamp and DAC sections are also the best I’ve ever heard.

And again, in full transparency I am both an Aurender and T+A dealer, so feel free to take my comments with a grain of salt despite these being my honest convictions compared to all other gear I’ve heard. 

+1 @pokey77 on the Aurender N30SA over the Taiko. There are a few other threads on other forums that cover this. Not only does it sound better, the N30SA costs $10K less. 

@lalitk I would agree the UI for the native T+A streaming platform isn’t as mature as Roon or Conductor, but I would anticipate that knowing T+A hasn’t been a company completely dedicated to designing digital sources like others have. Of all the platforms out there, Roon is my favorite one to use, but in my experience it’s not always the best sounding. The Grimm MU1 and Taiko SGM are two that are truly exceptional with Roon. Pink Faun is up there as well. 

@lalitk Nice to know about Euphony Stylus on Pink Faun. I recall when Euphony first came out there was a lot of chatter about how it sounded better than Roon. I have one friend that still uses it, but I never personally owned a hardware solution that ran it. Thanks for sharing. 

@vonhelmholtz Yes, while the streaming processes and protocols may be the same, the quality of the power supply, clock l, and isolation in the design of the circuits and components (isolation overall by chassis, isolation inside across individual components, etc) are the main reasons why each unit sounds the same. 

@vonhelmholtz To respond your assumption, the answer is "typically yes, but not always".

As oddiofyl mentions, he still prefers the coax out from the Aurender to the USB. While the higher end Aurenders have even better clocks, the N200's coax may still be better than the USB interface to your Holo. You would have to experiment and decide.

Sometimes, but rarely, even with USB, some DACs can be set to prefer the internal clock of the source vs in the DAC. Very, very rare.

And in the case of T+A DACs, both the SDV 3100 HV and the DAC 200 both have some masterclock functionality built in, so it still optimizes the clocking coming in from the Aurender when using coax/AES.

And again, with the N200 vs the higher ends via USB, what you are still getting in the other units are a more robust power supply and better isolation that will give you additional tonal density and clarity. I would say something like the N20 would give you more body and meat on the bones in the same way your new phono stage does, where as the N200 will sound just a bit leaner/neutral. The N200 gets very close to the N20, but there is still an audible improvement in the N20 (say 20% better) but at double the price. The N20 is the sweet spot for near end game at its price point, but the N200 is probably Aurender's best unit for price/performance ratio.

@pokey77 Your stance is accurate. I wasn’t implying you yourself had heard the two and had a preference, but was just acknowledging the sentiment between the two. Both are exceptional and endgame. While I had a preference sonically for the N30SA, one’s system synergy might sway the decision. But I do also agree that Aurender is a simpler solution in terms of usability. Glad to hear of your affinity for T+A and as above acknowledge your sentiment on their software interface. I would say that despite any lack of maturity T+A has over a more mature platform, it is nice to adjust most settings like DAC filters, preamp source display names, etc for many of their units over their mobile app.