Urs

What a coincidence, I went to a dealer this week for listening to Magico speakers and those were driven by the Aurender AP20. Just this device and the speakers... incredible sound from a minimalistic and elegant setup. I would be tempted by this device, if there wouldn't be a show stopper (at least for me): the Aurender is not a Roon endpoint. The big disadvantage of not being a Roon endpoint is, that I cannot use my convolution filters, which are absolutely essential in my room.

Reading your review (many thanks for that), both amps must be sonically very close together. I wonder which one runs hotter (say after about an hour or two in use). I own a BHSE and must admit that during summer time I hardly use it, just because the room gets too hot.

@zerung: I have a comparable setup for my desktop headphone system, i.e.: a) PC with JCAT USB XE card > USB input to Tambaqui > (using the Tambaqui as DAC and Preamp) > Pass Labs XA25 Power amp > Susvara Headphones. b) Roon server > LAN > EtherREGEN > Network input to Tambaqui > rest as above... I am also using the latest firmware for the Tambaqui wrt power: I am using two Furman Sequencers: Furman 1: for PC, Speakers, etc Furman 2: for EtherREGEN, Pass Labs, Tambaqui I don't have the issue (static noise) you are describing. So I am afraid my post is not to helpful, but let me know if I should check something specifically. The main difference might be the operating systems we are using. My Roon core runs under ROCK.

Sorry, I messed it up. That's not the firmware, that's just the latest USB driver for Windows.

@mrtim6 with regard to firmware: I recently sold my Mirus Pro DAC, but still have this file on my hard disk: Resonessence_USBAudio_v4.11.0_2017-06-16_setup.exe Maybe it's helpful for you? It's the firmware for the Mirus Pro. I am not sure if the Signature uses the same firmware as the Pro. Perhaps someone could jump in and confirm? In case you want it, just PM me.

Now it happened again: This leads to connection problems - not always but sometimes. I am afraid that's an unlucky combination. 2) and 3) (see above post) are fine. But 2) is not what I want to do on a regular basis. Looks like I have to step back and use the stock power supply... that's a pity.

"unluckily" today I am not able to repeat the faulty behaviour, no matter what I am doing. But at least some more details about the power lights. With the Farad power supply: 1) When I switch the Furman on, the Farad gets power: Farad LED: goes from from flashing red/blue, red to blue. This takes at least 5 seconds. After the Farad LED is blue it takes at least another second until the ER Power LED becomes green. 2) What I also tried, when every device had power: I unplugged the Farad DC cable from the ER, waited a bit and plugged the DC cable in again. The ER power light becomes immediatly green. With the original supply: 3) When I switch the Furman on, both, the LED on the original power supply as well as the Power LED on the ER are immediatly green. Though I couldn't repeat/verify anything today, I still believe 1) may cause issues

My ER and my PC are both connected to a Furman power conditioner. The ER has three LAN cables attached: A-side: main switch (Cisco) and PC. B-Side: DAC. I use the Furman as the main power switch. This means: once or twice per 24h everything is completely powered off (also the ER). If I use the Uptone standard power supply (as included with the ER), then everything works reliable. This means all connections are available for my PC (LAN and Internet). If I use a Farad Super 3 (9V) power supply instead, then it becomes rather unreliable. This means in more than 50% of the cases when I turn the system on (Furman main power switch, PC power switch), the desktop gets no connection (no LAN, no Internet). Maybe the Farad does not deliver enough stable power to the ER during the first few seconds, when it's switched on... ? So the ER does not start-up properly and remains in a faulty state? Any ideas? The only thing which I cannot do (for other reasons) is to keep the ER powered all the time (24/7).

@The Computer AudiophileThank you for asking and passing the info back to me. Really appreciated. Even if unlikely, it must be a quality issue with the Mogami cable, because: the Mutec AES/EBU output via Wireworld digital cables (3.5m) into my Genelec 8351B speakers works perfectly for any resolution up to 24/192 the AES/EBU input of my emmLabs DAC works also perfectly for any resolution, if I use a 10m long glass fiber cable (Weiss Chiron Glass1) between the Mutec and the DAC.

And this maximum length of more than 1000 feet would be valid for 16/44 as well as for 24/192?

Here's my observation: I connected a Mutec MC3+ smart clock device via its AES/EBU digital output with my DAC (emmLabs) using a Mogami Gold Series digital AES/EBU cable (110 Ohm). The length of the cable was 10m (ca. 33 feet). While this worked for 16/44 files, it did not work for higher resolution files (24/88) and higher. "not work" means either silence or a lot of noise and crackling. I guess that's due to the fact that the cable was just too long. But on the other hand in professional studio environments they also use rather long digita XLR cables. So I am a bit puzzled...

Excellent!!! I read the post. User Omid at avnirvana is right. I also checked the correct syntax here: http://convolver.sourceforge.net/configegs.html I edited my *.cfg file accordingly. It works now as expected, i.e. same behaviour/improvement in Roon as I have in J.River. @asdf1000Thank you very much. 🙂

I am using the latest Audiolense XO version. I have passive speakers (2.0 Stereo). I am using a miniDSP UMIK2 microphone. Speaker measurement went well. For filter measurement I used the default (True Time Domain). I experimented with several target curves and ended up with one which I really like. I created appropriate filters: a set of *.cfg and *.wav files for J.River as well as the corresponding *.zip file for using in Roon. This means the convolution filter in J.River and the convolution filter in Roon are based on the same measurement, filter (TTD) and target, but... now comes my issue: Playing with J.River: activating the convolution filter is a significant improvement compared to not using DRC. Playing with Roon: activating the convolution filter sounds dull and worse compared to not using DRC. Additional info: In J.River, when using the convolution filter, I have to increase the volume for ca. 10dB compared to not using DRC. This is expected and not a problem. In Roon, I have to increase the volume for only ca. 3 dB compared to not using DRC. My observations are valid for all sample rates (44.1, 88.2, 96,...) The situation in Roon does not improve if I enable headroom management and adjust headroom by a few dB, so that any clipping is avoided. I did ask this question in the Audiolense forum. It was confirmed taht Audiolense creates exactly the same correction for both players. So there must be something going on in Roon... All suggestions are welcome. Of course I could ask the same question in the Roon forum, but I wanted to try it here first.

Here comes my proposal: Genelec The Ones. Either 8341A or 8351B It has two big advantages: single point source (treble, midrange and bass). This means you can sit very closely to them (starting from ca 0.4m for the 8341 and from ca 0.5m for the 8351B) built-in digital room correction, i.e. you will use the Genelec GLM software. Even if the listening distance is short, the room correction has a huge influence. You can easily validate this by bypassing the room correction. What I would highly recommend in addition: use the digital input and not the analog. Use the Genelec table stands to move them a bit above the desk. Or use stands and have them placed behind the desk. As an example my setup: Desktop with JCAT XE USB card > mutec mc3+ usb interface > Wireworld AES/EBU Digital Cable > Genelec 8351B on Genelec table stands (Genelec 8000-325). Behind my desk (front wall) and on one sidewall I use Vicoustic absorbers/diffusors (Vicoustic VicPattern Ult Wavewood White) Volume-Adjustment: GLM-Kit (this is necessary for the room correction anyway) and Genelec 9310A Volume Controller. Took me a long way to come to this setup, but I am very, very happy with it 🙂 You wrote "... not an eyesore". I think they look pretty, I have the speakers, the stands and the absorbers in white.

This is how I compare DACs or more precisely: (DAC A + Ethernet Roon Endpoint A) vs. (DAC B + Ethernet Roon Endpoint B) Equipment: Benchmark HPA4 Preamp/headphone amp with its remote control Sennheiser HD 800S headphones Preparation: create a Roon group, which contains Enpoint A and Endpoint B carefully adjust output levels of DAC A and DAC B (if necessary slight usage of the HPA4's input boost function) HPA4: activate the two used inputs, deactivate the unused inputs. Test Procedure: Start a test track Press "next input" button on HPA4 remote control repeatedly a few times. This loops you through the two active inputs. Purpose is, to blind yourself with regard to the selected input. Listen carefully, press next, listen again, decide which sounds better, if you are not sure, press next again, listen, etc. If you have found a preference, check which input is currently active (wich DAC), collect the result. Repeat above procedure with all tracks on your playlist. The null hypothesis is: (DAC A + Ethernet Roon Endpoint A) sounds the same as (DAC B + Ethernet Roon Endpoint B). The question is, can you reject the null hypothesis? and how significantly? Of course this is not rocket science, but it helps to avoid biases caused by expectations and room influences.