Absolute top tier DAC for standard res Redbook CD

Thanks Steve. Appreciate the input.

Please be aware that the Signature Rendu is not the same as the regular (basic) Rendu ($1200 or so). It is an all out assualt and the key is the PDN design by John Swenson who is well known online. I copy Paste Barrows explanation. He consults for Sonore and PS Audio.


barrows - 01-07-2015, 11:18 PM Report Post Reply
Hi folks, let me give some technical information about the differences between the Rendu and the Signature Rendu. The Signature Rendu uses a transformer which is ~4 times the price of the transformer in the Rendu. The Signature Rendu uses (2) oscillators (clock circuits) which ~10 times the price of the ones in the Rendu. The Signature Rendu comes in a beautiful custom chassis (made in USA) costing ~6 times more than the Rendu chassis.

OK, so above you can get an idea on some of the parts costs increases. Here are the technical details which make the Signature Rendu sound better: 1. transformer is high quality Plitron Toroid, and it is cased in a sub-enclosure to guard against EM leakage.
2. the power supply is more robust, uses special ultra fast/ultra soft diodes, has more smoothing capacitance, and uses premium quality parts in all positions. 3. The Signature Rendu adds an additional output-reclocking board. This board holds the oscillators, the isolators, and the re-clocking and SPDIF/I2S output circuitry. This board is the key to the performance increase over the regular Rendu. The output board is isolated from all noise generated on the Ethernet receive board (high speed processor noise). On the output board clean clock signals are generated without interference from the Ethernet board. All signals are re-clocked just before output from the clean clocks.

OK, so how much difference sonically??? That is for the user to decide, as in all things with high end audio, there are diminishing returns: higher performance comes at a exponentially higher price. The original Rendu is very good, the Signature is better. The Signature is for the person looking for the best SPDIF/I2S source for their DAC, without compromise. Many people might be happy with the original Rendu. But do not listen to the Signature if you want to get the original.

I consult for Simple Design/Sonore.

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/section/ca-academy-2/

at this site there are several articles on Ethernet input and advantages/disadvantages compared to a music server.

I have on loan a unit from Waversa from South Korea which has both inputs (USB and Ethernet). Speaking with two friends over there, they believe uniformly Asian audiophile market has moved away from USB for the reasons Steve Nugent mentioned previously on this thread. In essence I found the Renderer (Ethernet input) is a magnitude better than USB.

Setup is more complicated and playback options are somewhat limited. This is the downside I found so far. Maybe others could chime in here.

The renderer (dac with ethernet) has an IP address. You use a remote that can be a portable device app or another computer. The remote only tells what files are sent from your source (HD or NAS or Internet) to your DAC. Some dacs have volume control, like this one. However, if used, the DSD over PCM will no longer work as the bit length is altered and DSD signal cant be determined in the PCM 176 sample rate.

With the IP address, you (or the manufacturer) are able to make processing adjustments remotely, alter other settings or implement firmware upgrades.

Wish I understood more of this. Think I'll be sticking with USB servers for the OSDE as Steve said the USB is the best input on his device. So many choices, lol...which is good.

I am not sure that Dac with Ethernet port is a good idea if the barrier from the crud that packetized data like Ethernet (and USB) brings gets thru.

The idea behind the SSR I mentioned above is to stop that cold and get to spdif (OK) or better yet i2S. The Transport has been the neglected stepchild for far too long.

Please read the post by Barrows I linked above very carefully to understand the KEY point I am making.