$1,400 seems like a lot of money. I am old-school DIN 45500 educated person with 50+ yrs of audio experience and I have a nice arsenal of inexpensive/expensive gear. Money should be spent on loudspeakers, turntables, DAC's. And NOT on cables, power outlet conditioners and all the other (often snakeoily) gadgets, that might make 0.1% sq improvement. How does one measure the sq improvement/expense ratio anyways?
If a $1,400 digital interface makes such a dramatic difference, then my first question would be, what else is wrong in this particular setup? "Wrong" might be too strong a word here, perhaps "mis-aligned" would be more polite.
Going back to the original post, my second question is: What problems are you trying to solve with this $1,400 expense?
Cheers and happy listening. |
At the risk being perceived at being rude again...electronic interference can only affect audio quality at the endpoint where Ethernet packets being converted (decoded) back to the original bit structure of where they entered the transport medium (encoded). Any electrical interference along the transport wires has be inaudible simply because Ethernet/optical packets cannot be listening to. At the interface level there complete galvanic isolation between Ethernet/optical and original bitstream. Jitter/EMI on Ethernet/optical wires is irrelevant and has 0% effect on sq.
Now, some manufactures designing "high-end" audio streamers for tons of $$$ really only have to worry about of interference from those interfaces, the converting technology, the size of packet buffers and clock signals. That’s what you pay for ($1,400) for Rendu devices.
The real question to me remains: What problems are we trying to solve? If you replace all Ethernet/optical wires from the system and replace them with wifi, that would be a worthwhile discussion. Please read the few available reviews (e.g. Auralic Aries G1), which offers both technologies and try to ascertain which medium has a bigger impact on sq. The result: zero audible difference.
As to main question, is $1,400 is lot of money to improve the sq of a system? I can only reply, my Allo Digione Signature/Raspberry cost about $300. This is a transport only, feeding an external DAC over SPDIF/coax. But it has complete galvanic isolation between the "noisy" wifi interface of the Berry and SPDIF transport, plus high-quality re-clocking of the bitstream before it enters into the SPDIF interface. Yes, there still is a small chance of the Wifi interface causing some residual EMI on the SPDIF circuitry. Is it measurable, will it make a difference? I don’t know.
Challenge for anyone out there to put a $300 network bridge to test against a mega$$$ network streamer/DAC/Rendu with mega$$$ cable and audiograde switches in-between.
I am a audiophile hobbyist just like most people here. All I am saying, please try and blend your listening experiences with the truth of technical explanations. Alternately, you are free to purchase things like the $10,000 Audioquest "directionally aligned" Ethernet cable and expect a "dramatic" improvement of the wired audio components. Snakeoil. |
It’s really hard to say "how much" of a difference something makes, because of subjective listening habits and inability to measure. I dare to state that the Allo DigiOne Signature is an incredible value for the money. It’s a touch better than the non-signature version which I had for the last 2 years. The reasons are mainly these: separate power feeds (clean), galvanic isolation (the previous had that too, but on the same board) and improved clocking.
Allo also makes a USB bridge that conceptually competes with the Rendu and similar products. I didn’t have the privilege to test this out (money is not an object, but time is....)
What do I with the Signature: I am running LMS/Squeezeplayer on it, without oversampling. Because I like to control to oversampling characteristics on the DAC itself, not in software. Although it is nice to have that software option (Foobar) for trial/error and to play around with it. I love the sound coming out the Signature. Someone should put that setup next to a BlueOS or Rendu device and compare, as unbiased as possible.
I am feeding a Burson Conductor 3R (2xESS9038q2m) a SMSL SU-9 (ESS9038pro) and sometimes a Chord Mojo for A/B testing. For the ESS, my personal preferred filter setting is MP/fast (minimal phase, less pre-ringing), which comes close the "Meridian" sound of MQA (don’t get me started....). Playing with OS filter settings and being able to measure the effect on your listening experience is something that takes a long time to develop. It’s fun, doesn’t cost anything more and makes the difference between feeling "fatigue" and "addiction". Again, personal opinion only here.
I use a combination of UniFi switch/cheap Ethernet cable for the Signature setup, and wifi on the other. I sometime switch. Honestly, to my ears, there is zero audible difference between Ethernet and wifi.
Look, I don’t want to put anyone down for feeding the hobby. Many decades I ago spent top $$ for 20bit Audio Alchemy HDHC DAC, which had an "ear-and-mind-opening" experience. Did I regret buying it? No. But I do know that technology get’s better and cheaper all the time. And I just want to make sure I understand the technical reasons before spending more $$$ on the latest gadget. I like to make educated decisions.
Happy listening. -frank |
In the age of disinformation, audio marketing has lead the way for many years. I believe in civility and rational discourse, throwing verbal molotov cocktails doesn’t solve anything.
Back to the topic and original question: is the amount of $1,400 spent on a well-designed product a good investment? How much "improvement" can be expected and how is it measured/justified? This can not be answered without additional context. Such as asking the question, "what is the problem that needs to be solved", which requires some technical understanding and basic scientific approach. No way around it.
Audio2design is correct in stating most arguments are based on anecdotal and here-say. Even well respected community members don’t aways get it right (saying this without arrogance). Re-reading the (very favorable) blog about the Sonore Rendu in Computer Audiophile made me realize that the problem is still NOT understood. That was in 2018. But we now we have a dozen of solutions to choose from, some rather expensive ones.
A 12 Meter "directional" AudioQuest Diamond Ethernet cable goes for $11,000 retail.
Not bashing here, just stating that I have no respect for companies like Meridian, Chord, AudioQuest, Sonore (the Marketing dept. mostly). Although I own a few of their lesser expensive products....and you can call me hypocritical? Yes, perhaps a little.
In the meantime I enjoy (subjectively) listening to my humble setup, carefully selected and budgeted. Addicted to good audio :-)
Cheers, -frank |
Have you tried HQPlayer? Good question. I have used HQplayer for a brief trial period. The UI is a bit primitive, but it provides a great learning opportunity to study the effects of filter design on sq. Essentially, one is able to simulate internal DAC operations. But you have to learn the theory first before making good selections for the various filters. A great resource and highly recommended for anyone interested in the topic. I see a lot of people struggle with it. In my case, I only applied my limited playtime with HQPlayer to a high-quality ESS9018 based DAC and found very few (subjective) differences between the various options. Not enough for me to put up with the poor UI and make it the primary player for everyday use. As an end-point to Roon perhaps it is better suited. I also think that if one has a high-quality d/s based DAC of recent design, the benefits of using HQPlayer is greatly diminished. Luisma31, thank you for your comments. |
I haven’t noticed any differences myself but others intriguely do, should I say they are delusional or should I give them some credit? I choose the latter, I don’t like to dismiss people experiences, unless at some point I realize they are truly delusional. I struggle with this as well, because I found myself in the exact same dilemma. First of, I am not an active blogger unlike others here. And one must avoid not to fall into the pit holes, e.g. endless arguments. The OT headline of this thread caught my attention. And without becoming too confrontational, I asked "What is the problem opticalRendu is trying to solve?" Why does this device makes such a "huge" difference in perceived improvement? The "improvement" needs to be put into a different perspective and somehow quantified. My approach now: I think the measurementalists are doing a great service to the community and I read, and listen to them. But by no means are they the only authoritative decision point. Nobody can ever be fully immune to the "aha - this sounds great" effect, because after all it is wonderful hobby (for most). And therefore nobody should be put down for being excited about the improvement of a certain product, unless it is, as you said, completely delusional. Opinion vary... |
Electrical interference or noise makes no changes to the data packets themselves. It could cause a packet not to be received, or fragmented.
Could you please re-write this in CAPS, so that everyone can read it :-) Some people believe that expensive shielding and "directional" data cables would somehow improve audio quality. But it's a futile effort to fight a enormous industry and their believers. Only a small amount of education would remedy this. Again, I am not saying that microRendu is a flawed product, but I am saying that the value is inflated by misleading marketing and phony claims. In extreme cases, some boutique hi-end audio manufacturers will sell you a $30,000 music streamer (network -> USB or SPDIF bridge, or DAC) and make you believe it's a worthy investment. Some people on this thread here can build a better performing streamer for $300 and with expectations of similar results. |
|
I don't disagree with that, but that's another blanket statement. There is no one else who does what he does: independent testing and objective conclusions (mixed with bias). I use the information for what it is, one of many criteria when selecting new gear. |
This isn’t the 70’s where all we look at it is a single frequency THD value. How true that is. I grew up with DIN 45500, the HiFi standard. THD of 0.1% and 40-16,000 Hz was phenomenal performance. We (in W-Germany) also had relatively unbiased consumer report publications. It was completely acceptable and common to disqualify certain products of questionable design. What happened to the mindset or making informed decisions? |
