My Comments on the Infigo Audio IS-1 Signature Streamer

Someone above suggested comparing IS-1 with Aurender's N200, approximately $6300.  The OP later typed the IS-1 replaced a $12k Aurender N20; an N200 comparison seems moot.    

Based on my European friend's experience who AB tested a Mele-based DIY streamer vs. $20k Antipodes vs. $30k Taiko Extreme and bought the latter, IS-1 would better compare to the 2 latter DACs.

I own the Mele and IS-1.    

My Infigo IS-1 (Infigo Streamer 1) drives my Infigo Method 4 DAC. I am an 80 minute drive NE of Salt Lake City. I’d love someone to bring their $20k Antipodes K50 streamer or $30k Taiko Extreme streamer to AB vs. IS-1. Ditto, any cost no object DAC vs. Method 4.

Someone I know in Europe has a system justifying a state-of-the art streamer and DAC. He heard the K50 and Extreme and purchased the latter (no IS-1 at that time.) He compared the Extreme to a DIY streamer I too own so I have an idea how good sounds the Extreme, justifying my optimism to compare IS-1 to the K50 and Extreme.

This same person also compared Infigo’s Method 4 DAC vs. the $50k Lampizator tube DAC and the $80k MSB DAC and purchased the lesser-priced Method 4.

Ages ago I grew familiar with the sound of Different Fur Trading Company’s Scully 2-track half-inch mastering deck chief engineer John Viera modified from 15 to 30 ips. I don’t want to diss anyone’s vinyl, but even a half-million dollar vinyl rig can’t reach that Scully deck’s zip code.

I am shocked how close IS-1 > Method 4 gets to that Scully deck, of course the digital pair adding no audible noise. If we limit the discussion to the DAC output, I estimate 99% of perceived quality is the program source and 1% is the streamer and DAC.

BTW, I'd buy the IS-1 before spending equal amount on any DAC.  Lacking a state-of-the art streamer you'll never know how good sounds your DAC no matter how costly.  

@lalitk 

I am in Texas and I appreciate the demo offer but any Roon based streamer with a requirement to maintain external CORE hardware is a non-starter for me. I don’t see any valid argument why core + renderer can’t be properly implemented in one box.

Roon from day one to today arguably set the industry standard for most intuitive/easiest to learn library user interface.  Many users would never give up Roon.  Conversely though is a growing # of ex-Roon fans who heard the difference giving up Roon and preferred to do just that.  Even using Roon for library function only audibly degrades performance compared to state-of-the-art alternatives that give up a little of Roon's ultimate useability function.  Different strokes for different folks, just like the OP mentioned.  There's no right or wrong, only choices.      

@lalitk 

“But there are some guys that will shoot it down without hearing it.”

There is a valid reason to do so, IS-1 is a half-baked product for ROON users. It appears to be designed targeted for audiences who prefers Audirvana. And that’s ok! Like most things in life, our audio choices are often driven by our preferences and price of admission.  

Your post tells readers more about yourself than the subject.  Labeling your opinion as valid is as "valid" as a mother's opinion about her baby's beauty, e.g. it's expected, it's common and it's virtually universal.  Everyone thinks all their opinions are more valid than all other contradictory opinions.  

A search for "Quit Roon, improved performance," especially at Audiophile Style will yield hundreds or more hits for person who quit Roon in their search for ideal performance.  AFAIK no streamer employing Roon provides ultimate audio and musical performance.  

As always, I have and shall happily continuously agree that Roon sets the standard for library function.  But as usual or always, ultimate ease or luxury and ultimate performance are mutually exclusive.  Being married to Roon as you apparently are and achieving ultimate audio/musical performance are incompatible AFIAK.  

If someone has what they think is a Roon streamer that provides state of the art audio and musical performance, I'm happy to learn otherwise and recant my statement.  

And I admit BTW that I do miss Roon's lyrics and commentary which Audirvana lacks.

IS-1 is a half-baked product for ROON users. It appears to be designed targeted for audiences who prefers Audirvana.

IS-1 is not half-baked in any way.  Roon users can enjoy Roon.  If they compare Roon to Audirvana (free trial,) they can use both and decide between Roon's convenience and Audirvana's audio/musical performance, they just can't get both simultaneously and that's caused by Roon, not and IS-1 "issue."  

If my hypothesis is correct that Roon degrades audio quality, then to blame that on the "messenger" (IS-1) is like criticizing a Porsche GT3 because of its performance with bias ply tires or 89 octane fuel.   

@lalitk

@Roon users have a clear understanding on how to maximize ROON potential beyond the SOTA interface. I’m a minimalist, so I prefer a one box ROON system and IS-1 is clearly not a one box solution for ROON users. For most people, this may not be a deal breaker but in grand scheme of things, you’re introducing lot of variables in achieving optimal sound quality when you run ROON on two separate devices (roon end point + core).

IS-1 can function as Roon End Point but requires an outboard computer for Roon Core function. So IS-1 fails for anyone wanting a 1-box Roon solution. Your "halff-baked" descriptor is hyperbole but it’s fair to say IS-1 is less convenient than a 1-box Roon solution. But IMO your opinion that a 1-box Roon solution can equal the performance of a properly engineered 2-box Roon solution is wrong.

Several times I AB tested the following. The person who built and engineered the entire streamer system is a highly skilled full time professional 30 year experienced college degreed network and security systems professional and audiophile/music lover.

A) Roon Core and End Point in one big custom dedicated computer

vs.

B) Roon Core in the big computer w/Roon End Point in a NUC

B always and without exception outperformed A. You appear to deny this solely because it’s outside your experience.

Small Green Computer has sold thousands of "renderers" solely and exactly for 1 reason, to separate the streamer’s "Core" and "End Point" functions. Your position appears to be that every such purchase of an outboard renderer was in error.

And finally, the fact that you apparently never heard a non-Roon based streamer outperform the best Roon-based streamer proves nothing. Hundreds (possibly thousands) of others and I have heard such a demonstration.

I, like others can list many MS Copilot errors. But I have to agree 1000% with Copilot’s brief descriptions of Roon, HQ Player and Audirvana, 3 of the most commonly used apps in the Antipodes and Extreme streamers. Roon is convenient, HQ Player and Audirvana are refined in performance. As I stated earlier, with rare exception simultaneous maximum convenience and performance is oxymoronic, including for music playing apps.

Antipodes K50

The Antipodes K50 is known for its flexibility and supports several popular music playing applications, including¹:

• Roon: A comprehensive music management and playback software.
• Squeeze: Often used with Squeeze Server for streaming.
• HQPlayer: Known for its high-quality upsampling and playback capabilities.
• MPD (Music Player Daemon): Can be used with MinimServer or MiniDLNA for library management.
• Shairport: For AirPlay streaming.

Taiko Extreme

The Taiko Extreme also supports a range of music playing applications, such as¹:

• Roon: Widely used for its robust library management and playback features.
• HQPlayer: For high-quality audio processing and playback.
• Audirvana: Known for its high-resolution audio playback and library management.

I don’t mean anyone to be unsatisfied with their current streamer. If someone is satisfied with their streamer, avoid this forum! Duh! I would rather invite persons desiring the performance of the $20k Antipodes K50 and/or $30k Taiko Extreme to audition the IS-1. IMO the IS-1 performs as close as you’ll get to those 2 streamers at a small fraction of the price.

I agree with you if your position is that persons satisfied with Roon performance are not the ideal potential IS-1 client.

Dr. Patrick Gleeson personally tutored me in analog synthesizer programming at Different Fur Trading Company in San Francisco, the studio Patrick co-owned with Chief Engineer John Vieira. John upgraded their Studer half-track half-inch 15 ips mastering deck to 30 ips.  By good margin that Studer deck was the best analog source I ever heard before or since.  Admittedly, I've heard only about a half-dozen  analog mastering decks so my sample source is not great. I wish had heard Dave Wilson's Ampex deck with Curl's electronics. I love the best vinyl as much as anyone else but frankly that Studer outperformed the best cost-no-object vinyl source I've heard.  

How much difference does the source make?  That Studer deck playing 1G master tape > (amps unknown, if anyone knows what amps DF used around the time Herbie recorded Headhunters, please disclose it) > JBL 4311 was surely one of my all-time audio highlights and I've heard many of the world's best cost-no-object systems.  (The 4311 was JBL's best compact studio monitor, a 10" or 11" cone/dome 3-way.  Speakers have obviously improved since the 70s but Lynn's Ivor Tiefenbrun's "audio hierarchy" was and is valid: the source is king.)

This is by aural memory; to readers it's worth less than what you paid for it.  Infigo's IS-1 streamer > Infigo Signature Cryo USB cable > Infigo Method 4 gets closer to my listening experience of that Studer deck than anything I experienced prior.  One gets the sense that the music program quality contributes about 99% of the listening experience while the streamer and DAC contribute the remaining infinitesimal balance.

Less than a year ago someone I know in Europe AB tested the Infigo Method 4 DAC vs. the $80k MSB DAC and purchased the former.  His source was the $30k Taiko Extreme streamer.