Thank you for the post! Hans had told me quite a while ago they were working on a streamer. He was mainly responsible for the Resonessence Labs Fluvius streamer which is one of the best devices I have ever heard. That company folded a while ago but Hans kept using the streamer at audio shows, it was that good even being small and pretty affordable compared to his actual Infigo gear. I will definitely look into the IS-1 more now that it is launching. I can only imagine how great it will be if he built on his old design even more.
My Comments on the Infigo Audio IS-1 Signature Streamer
A $5,000 SRP Infigo Audio IS-1 Signature streamer replaced my MAC Book Pro dedicated for music streaming only. Both streamers have Audirvana Studio music player installed. Audirvana Remote is installed on my Apple iPad.
Audirvana Studio enhances audio quality on computers by optimizing the operating system for audio playback and disabling non-essential services. It functions as a third-party player, scanning local music libraries and integrating streaming services like Tidal and Qobuz, but not Spotify or Apple Music. Audirvana offers both subscription and lifetime license models.
My Ethernet source drives a netLINK Ethernet Media Converter model HTB-GS-03 with a fiber optic output driving a fiber optic cable to the streamer. A 5V wall adapter powers the netLINK. The streamer’s only digital output is USB to the DAC. Infigo chose USB as the sole output format because done right it provides ultimate performance. Any other format would increase cost while limiting bit rate, sample rate and ultimate performance.
Fiber optic isolation in this case improves audio quality by eliminating network noise and jitter. This separation between the ‘dirty’ network and the clean audio chain ensures that RF and EMI interference, as well as high-impedance leakage currents from network devices, do not degrade the audio signal. As a result, digital music reproduction is cleaner, quieter, and more transparent, providing a more natural and lifelike sound experience.
It also incorporates ultra-low jitter re-clocking of network audio packets, reducing the need for specialized network equipment. The device supports multiple modes of operation, including Audirvana, uPnP, Roon, and HQPlayer, making it compatible with most music players.
IS-1 employs Intel’s best Quad Core CPU with one core fully dedicated to music processing. This music core runs at a moderately high fixed rate while the other 3 cores vary in speed depending on needs. Intel primarily designed this as a state-of-the-art CPU with maximum speed and power for mobile devices. Infigo chose this CPU for its speed, power and low-current draw, allowing the use of a mandatory linear power supply to meet performance goals.
Onboard IS-1 is a toroidal transformer and 100W linear power supply, about 5x the maximum required for immense power supply headroom. Infigo includes a built-in local webpage (http://infigostreamer.local) for easy control and customization, with dimmable front-panel LED with full-off option.
Each of 4 included footers employs 3 black “star” (synthetic) sapphire bearings. Each footer has a lower half with plain stud and upper half with threaded stud. To minimize cross-threading, and to make it easy, I placed my IS-1 on a small box to raise it. Screw the 4 upper footer halves into the outrigger’s 4 threaded holes. I then placed my IS-1 on its shelf.
Insert 3 sapphire bearings into 3 hemispherical cutouts in one lower footer half and slowly slide them (one at a time) under the footer half with rubber O-ring. Rotate the lower footer half and sapphires till the latter fit fully into the upper footer’s hemispherical cutouts. Now the 2 halves are properly “sandwiched,” the O-ring providing a friction press fit. Repeat for the remaining 3 lower footer halves and 9 sapphire bearings.
In the future, before picking up IS-1, remove all 4 lower footer halves and secure the 12 sapphires in a jar or elsewhere. If not, the lower footer half can unexpectedly detach with risk of lost sapphires.
The sapphire bearings act like a diode, channeling vibration from the streamer into the supporting panel.
see link for more info on the INFIGO IS-1Streamer
FYI: Other operation modes are ‘uPnP’ endpoint, which will present the streamer as an endpoint in the network that can be reached via all music software that can play to a uPnP endpoint. The streamer can also operate as a Roon endpoint; you will need another computer in the network to run the Roon core software, which can then play to the streamer as endpoint. For those that use Roon with HQPlayer for better sound quality, the streamer can operate as an HQPlayer Network Audio Adapter.
This “Signature” version is the base model $5,000; the “Cryogen” version is $7,000. Both versions offer the same audio and musical performance with extra features on the Cryogen version.
The Infigo Audio IS-1 streamer has substantially improved my sound quality. I immediately noticed my system sounds much better. The music is clearer, bass is more powerful, and imaging has improved. My Signature model lists for $5,000 and the Cryogen model $7,000.
The INFIGO IS-1 Streamer is highly recommended.
65 responses Add your response
I’m with Infigo full disclosure. I have tested the streamer against a 10k Melco. I have tested it with our Dac against a 20k esoteric player. The level of openness transparency and musicality is almost startling When playing through the Audirvāna app. I have had mines for 2 months and at this price point it’s a must try. It is designed to have zero background noise but does not come off as sterile our too detailed. It retains the musicality with its transparency. If you are coming to the Capitol Audiofest this weekend in the DC area. We will be in room 823! Come meet us or take a listen Nov. 8-10! |
@yyzsantabarbara we are selling the new improved version of that prototype it is called the INFIGO METHOD 6! |
That’s quiet a statement! Was the comparison done using USB on both units? FWIW the N20 should be evaluated using AES or SPDiF connection in order to leverage the superb OCXO clock in the N20. But even thru USB I’m surprised that the N20 doesn’t sound as good ad the Infigo. |
@audphile1, Thanks. Yes, my Aurender N20 was connected to my DAC using an AES/EBU cable. This is my opinion and I 'guarantee' you that others will have a different opinion. My Infigo Auto IS-1 Streamer sounds excellent, in my system, and I like it very much. I really like using Audirvana and find it easy to use. As we both know, components sound great in one system and not so great in another. There are many variables that cause these differences including the room, cables and the other components. |
hgeifman, "As we both know, components sound great in one system and not so great in another. There are many variables that cause these differences including the room, cables and the other components." What a great post. I wish more people in this hobby would recognize what you posted. I always say there are no absolutes in audio, just preferences based on too many variables. I prefer Antipodes over Aurender, some may prefer Aurender.
|
@hgeifman it’s great when you find a component that provides performance and value. It’s even better when you can replace a much more expensive piece with it! |
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 Streamer sounds better than my $12,000 Aurender N20 did. And, I also really like using Audirvana.” @hgeifman Glad to hear you are enjoying the IS-1. Just for my curiosity and to @audphile1 point, did you compare N20 with IS-1 side by side? |
2 issues with this streamer: * uses Intel which is the worst/out of date processor * uses usb. My dedicated streamer doesn’t even provide isb because the manufacturer knows that usb is terrible. How many demo to clocks/reclockers/cables that separate the usb data and power and the other 100 tweaks/gimmicks on how to make usb presentable, not even in the same ballpark as i2s or Ethernet. The best cpus for the last few years are arm based, which Intel has old technology that can’t compete with the arm procs. |
| Post removed |
@rbstehno there’s nothing wrong with USB interface in streamers when properly implemented. Paired with a DAC that’s optimized for this type of interface will give you better results than the SPDIF would unless your transport/streamer has the best possible OCXO clock a d that’s when the SPDIF beats USB. I’ve done enough comparisons with several streamers and unless the signal is reclocked at the source USB will always beat SPDIF. The only exception and this is when USB is garbage is when you’re using a computer as a streamer. The noise/jitter levels are too high. There’s no way around that. But again, a good implementation in a well designed streamer without ocxo clock using USB is the way to go. |
@audphile1 , I have the Bricasti M21 DAC. My DAC has “Three independent and user-selectable digital to analog signal paths available: delta sigma and ladder dac for PCM conversion and for DSD playback, true direct DSD”. I prefer the ladder DAC. |
Nice DAC! I use Bricasti M3 and really like it. Sounds great with my Aurender N200. I used to use the inbuilt network card as Roon endpoint but adding the N200 was a game changer. I don’t use Roon anymore. I’m planning to step up to either M1S2 or the M21 in the future. So far I’m happy with the way my system sounds though. |
Nothing wrong with USB if done right. Look at Schitt on their USB after many years of saying it was bad. They rolled their own so to speak. ARM processor or INTEL processors have 0 effect on the sonics of a streamer. Get a monkey to process the 1's and 0's fast enough and they would be good enough too. The sonics are related to other factors not the monkey or ARM's ability to process. |
@ everyone. I think you have to sometimes try stuff in your system or trust when another audiophile that you trust tells you he likes a new item over a more expensive thing he owns then that’s a sign that you might wanna try it. I tried the ls1 against the esoteric player as well as a Melco that retailed at 10k and the ls1 sounded wayyy better. I then ran it up against a MacBook using the soulutions 540 and it beat that too. I use the Infigo method 4 dac with the ls1 streamer and I have yet to run into a combination that rivals it. At 5k it’s worth every penny. But then again I’m careful because I speak as an audiophile. If you are in the DC AREA this weekend come hear it for yourself at the Capitol Audiofest nov 8-10. Room 823. Ask for me and I will give you a demo. |
Funny stuff @rbstehno most ever sota DAC and streamer/server uses USB. 2 issues with this streamer: * uses Intel which is the worst/out of date processor * uses usb. My dedicated streamer doesn’t even provide isb because the manufacturer knows that usb is terrible. How many demo to clocks/reclockers/cables that separate the usb data and power and the other 100 tweaks/gimmicks on how to make usb presentable, not even in the same ballpark as i2s or Ethernet. The best cpus for the last few years are arm based, which Intel has old technology that can’t compete with the arm procs. |
All, Please see the link below for more info on ARM vs Intel processors as presented by @tkrtrb125 in his post above. Arm vs Intel link for more info: FYI: "Just ten years ago, even Intel's entry-level CISC-based processors were far more powerful than top-of-the-line ARM-based chips. However, this is no longer the case. Apple has proven with its M1 and M2 chips that ARM-based CPUs can be as capable, if not more capable, than Intel's competing offering. Nevertheless, this doesn't mean that the CISC-based x86 chip is on its way out. Given the large number of computers that run these chips, it will take time before Arm's ARM chips will supplant Intel's x86 offerings. But as ARM processors become more powerful and affordable, its adoption will increase, and soon enough, you'll find that ARM CPUs are powering most computers on the market".
|
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. |
@calvinj I am and appreciate the offer but I am content with my Zenith MK3. |
@tkrtrb125 look. If you are close you don’t have to commit to buying anything if you wanna hear it try it. Report back to the thread if you like. I understand though. I’m so happy with my ls1 I’m done looking for a streamer. I have found my answer. I tried 5 others |
@lalitk I agree. At this stage in my life i want fewer boxes. |
@tkrtrb125 i understand. I’m done myself. My system is gato fm6 speakers. 2 rel 212se subs. Infigo method 6 amp. Method 4 dac. Ls1 streamer. I’m in heaven sound wise. No need to search for anything anymore. Just finding new music to startle me! |
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 our streamer is able to run roon but it is not roon based and does not require you run roon! I personally don’t like roon and my ls1 is not running it. So you understand. I use it with the Audirvāna app. Never have used roon in my life and with the sound I’m getting right now. Never will! |
@hgeifman im just glad you are enjoying our streamer. After I tried several streamers I really pushed Hans to create our own. He worked on it for about 2-3 years. I’m glad you are enjoying it. It’s the best I have heard in my system at any price point. I have tried things 3 or 4 times the cost. I’m happy glad you are too. Enjoy. I’m just glad you found what you needed with us. |
@lalitk im not trying to make a living in this hobby. I have ran a successful business that has nothing to do with audio for 22 years. I do this on the side to help Hans because I think he is an amazing designer who builds amazing sounding equipment. I never said that anything was absolute. I just don’t use roon. I don’t have a need for it. I just enjoy what I have. Glad you are happy what you have enjoy and happy listening my friend. |
No I haven’t heard this streamer, I don’t need to. Even in 2024, usb is still flawed. Here are a couple of snippets from a 2024 paper so my standards have not changed; “let's first discuss the role of a USB connection in your audio system. In modern high-end audio setups, digital audio signals are often transmitted from a source (like a computer or a digital streamer) to a Digital-to-Analogue Converter (DAC) via a USB cable. While USB is convenient and capable of transmitting high-resolution audio, it’s not without its flaws. One of the most significant issues is jitter. In the quest for audio perfection, audiophiles leave no stone unturned, from speakers to amplifiers to DACs. However, a critical and often overlooked element can significantly diminish the potential of even the most high-end audio system: digital signal integrity. USB connections, a standard in music streaming and digital audio, are particularly prone to jitter and timing errors, which can severely impact sound quality by introducing noise and distortion. Imagine investing in the finest audio components, expecting to uncover every layer and nuance in your favourite recordings, only to be met with a sound that lacks clarity, depth, and precision. This frustration is not just disappointing; it's an all-too-common issue that undermines the substantial investments made by serious audiophiles. Standard USB connections, while convenient, simply aren't built with the high-fidelity transfer of audio signals in mind, leading to these detrimental timing errors.” Every review of a component that has usb, and 1 of the following:i2s, or Ethernet, have preferred the sound quality of i2s/ethernet over usb. Every streamer is a computer and most use the same usb hardware, even usb audio 2.0, which still didn’t resolve any of the issues above, it was mostly a speed increase.
My question to you and most audiophiles, when was the last time you judged for yourself if usb was better than Ethernet or i2s? 99% of you will never be able to run these tests because your setups don’t furnish these interfaces. I’ve been able to do this for many years and that’s why I got rid of my auraluc Aries streamer with my attached usb dac 7 or 8 years ago along with my reclocker devices, usb cable that splits the data from power, femto clock devices, and whatever usb tweak I had. Before I recently sold my AQ Diamond usb cable, I did do a couple of sessions comparing usb to Ethernet and i2s. The AQ cable is gone now, no need to ever use usb again. |
Let me add this info. Quite a few high end companies have created their own proprietary links between components to get the best possible sound. What did a lot of these companies use as this interface? I2s. Here is a description from Esoteric on their es-link: ES-Link |
@spkrplus i try to be careful in saying what I say. I’m glad you said what you said. I can buy anything I want. I choose the Method 4 Dac and Ls1 streaming combination because I get all the detail, soundstage and musicality without degrading sound quality. Most that I know that use roon say it’s a slight even though small loss in sound quality to gain functionality. So for me it is a non starter. I have had people and clients get rid of bigger name equipment and cables to purchase the Infigo stuff. I’m glad you are sharing your observations with us. Hans knows how the use the ess Sabre 9038 dac chip like no other because he used to work with the guy who invented the chipset . He believes that any loss of sound quality while building equipment is a non starter. So if it degrades sound quality it’s a no! He built this dac and streamer with that in mind. I been in this hobby 20 years and have never been happier. Anyone who tells you that they don’t need to hear something before they have an opinion on it is someone I wouldn’t listen to. There are some amazing guys in high end audio. Technology is being pushed to the limit in our hobby. There are guys that figure out how to get the best out of already existing platforms and methods. I think Hans has just pushed us to a new limit. I’m proud of the Method 4 and Ls1 and would put it up against anything. The method 4 dac faired well against all of the super dacs in a shootout on the Whatsbestforum Dac shootout last year. I offered to loan my streamer out simply because I’m that confident in its performance. But there are some guys that will shoot it down without hearing it. I don’t worry about that crowd because in this hobby there will be those but most audiophiles enjoy hearing something new. They understand that in each technology method new highs will be reached and there is a sense of curiosity and possible wow factor in each thing you put your ear on. If you already have you mind made up you have a right to. But some are more interested in showing us that they are right and how smart they are over actually listening and trying equipment with an open mind. Whatever you do try as much as you can. Audio is a journey. It’s YOUR OWN JOURNEY NOT THEIRS! @rbstehno i just had the 20k esoteric No1xd in my system 2 months ago while I loaned my dac out and I preferred the sound of the Infigo method 4 with the ls1. I was actually one of the first to get the ls1. Just my opinion. |
One of my last streamers was created by the digital genius behind Playback Designs, Andreas Koch. It used a Plink interface for the best performance. It also had SPDIF which sounded great on that unit. The Plink was implemented using a fibre optic cable something more and more designers are realizing is a magic bullet to kill noise. I also think the SPDIF was also connected to the fibre on the inside of the unit since it sounded so good. I had 2 other fibre streamers to compare side-by-side, Lumin X1 and a Sonore OpticalRendu. They all sounded different. I sold this streamer since I found a much cheaper DAC that I was happy with for the long term and no longer was planning on spending a lot of money on the PBD Dream DAC. I only use fibre based streamers. The DAC connection is no longer the primary factor when I look for a streamer (USB, I2S, SPDIF, etc.). |
I am very confused. The claim that every review prefers I2S or Ethernet over USB for sound quality may not be universally true BECAUSE of the many variables involved. It seems that some reviews highlight advantages of I2S, such as lower latency and less noise due to better shielding, others argue that USB can perform equally well or better depending on the specific DAC and system setup. Additionally, practical implementations vary widely, and many users report different experiences based on THEIR equipment AND environment. Based on my experience, Ultimately, the preference for I2S or Ethernet over USB depends on individual setups and subjective listening tests. There are instances where USB can outperform I2S or Ethernet, particularly in well-designed systems. For example, high-quality DACs that implement asynchronous USB can achieve superior noise isolation and lower jitter compared to I2S, especially when the USB implementation is optimized for low interference. Additionally, some DAC manufacturers argue that USB provides better performance in specific setups, particularly when the source device is low-noise and properly isolates the USB signal from power supplies. Thus, while I2S and Ethernet have their advantages, USB can be the best choice depending on the specific components and configurations used. The bottom line is that there are many options including IS2, USB, Ethernet, ES-Link and others. Everyone has to decide for themselves what implementation sounds best in their environment. There is no right solution for everyone because of the many variables. AND, of course, get ready for the next cable design. Yikes!
|
“But there are some guys that will shoot it down without hearing it.” |
| Post removed |
@hgeifman great points you have made. Implementation of things are very important and there are situations where things will outperform other things because of the way it’s implemented |
| Post removed |
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 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. |
| Post removed |
