Jump to content
Computer Audiophile
  • The Computer Audiophile
    The Computer Audiophile
    Sign in to follow this  

    Sonore microRendu Review, Part 1

    microRendu_1024px.jpg

    1-Pixel.png

    In mid 2014 I received a call from Sonore's Jesus R. He wanted to discuss an idea. Jesus and his team had decided they needed to move the needle, in a huge way, with respect to computer audio playback. They had built, sold, and supported custom high end music servers for years, but were ready to innovate beyond this somewhat traditional approach. Jesus told me they wanted to design and build both the hardware and software for a tiny microcomputer the size of a credit card, that had a single purpose, to reproduce the best sound quality possible. Then he semi-jokingly asked me if I knew anyone with really deep pockets who'd like to bankroll the endeavor. At the end of our lengthy conversation I concluded that this was another great idea that would never come to fruition because it was simply cost prohibitive for a boutique manufacturer.

     

    Fast forward to summer 2015, when I received an email from Jesus with the subject, code name = Toaster. The first two sentences said, "For your eyes only. The small board goes on top of the larger board and it's to scale if you want to print it." Attached was the schematic for prototype units numbered 1, 2, and 3 that were already being made as I read the email. I was pleasantly surprised to say the least. Jesus and his team had successfully pulled off the initial hardware design phase of a project I never thought would see the light of day.

     

    Seeing a product brought to life from its infancy was pretty cool, at least for me. Readers putting two and two together are probably asking what happened from mid 2014 to mid 2015 to the end of April 2016. As anyone with knowledge of hardware design, prototyping, software development and testing, and sourcing components can tell you, there are more trials and tribulations involved in bringing a high precision product to market than Joe Sixpack could ever imagine. But, that's an interesting story for another time. Today, April 28, 2016 marks the launch of the highly anticipated custom designed Sonore microRendu, a purpose-built audiophile microcomputer designed to unprecedentedly process USB audio. [PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]

     

     

    The Team

     

    I want to take one step back before diving into the microRendu because it's important to understand who brought this from an idea to a purchasable product. The microRendu came about through a collaboration between Sonore by simple Design, Small Green Computer and JS Electronics. All three entities have been very active in the development of high quality computer audio for many years. Members of the Computer Audiophile Community are likely well aware of Sonore's products (music servers, signature Rendu, high quality customer support, etc...) and perhaps are as familiar with the Small Green Computer products developed by Andrew Gillis, namely Vortexbox. What most people are completely oblivious to is the fact that Jesus from Sonore and Andrew from Small Green Computer have worked tirelessly behind the scenes with software developers to improve high quality Linux based audio playback. The two have worked for years, herding cats and influencing without authority, to get a global cast of characters to update, adapt, and improve their individually or group maintained Linux software packages. Many improvements to UPnP, DLNA, LMS, MPD, and DSD playback have been driven by Jesus and Andrew, without seeking applause from the countless companies and end users worldwide who have benefited form this work. Then there's "Mr. Wizard", John Swenson. If you want to feel uninteresting and undereducated, have dinner with John. I did at Rocky Mountain Audiofest 2015 and walked away thinking he is one of the smartest people I've ever met, certainly the biggest Shakespeare fan I've ever met, and one of the nicest guys I've ever met. John has been building and designing audio components for decades, including his first DAC that was a whole 4 bits. Around 2000 John started digging deep into computer audio, sound cards, USB DACs, and Linux systems. He has designed some great products over the years, most recently the UpTone Audio JS-2 power supply and the USB REGEN. To pay the bills John has worked at a very large semiconductor company for over thirty years, designing power networks inside custom chips that are used in many devices we depend on every day and the internal circuitry of these chips effects the surrounding components. Trust me, it's way more complicated than that layman's description, but just remember John has likely forgotten more that most of us will ever know.

     

    All three came together to produce the Sonore microRendu. To oversimplify things, you could say Andrew developed the software, John developed the hardware, and Jesus managed the entire project and handled QC. The gritty details are much more intertwined than that description, but the general gist of it holds true.

     

     

     

    What Is The microRendu?

     

     

    To say the microRendu is a computer or microcomputer is true but it's also a bit misleading and may lead to miscategorization. People like to categorize and group things in order to better "understand" them. This is human nature, but it may lead to placement of the microRendu in the same category as Macs and PCs or custom music servers. The microRendu is in a category all by itself. Sure it contains a CPU, RAM, USB, Ethernet, etc..., but that's where the similarities end. The microRendu is a combination of software and hardware, designed to work in concert, to keep processing and ground plane noise a low as possible, while receiving audio over Ethernet and outputting audio over USB to deliver the best possible signal to a digital to analog converter. The end goal is to reproduce the best sound quality possible. How it accomplishes this goal is discussed below in great detail.

     

    First, let's look at this from a more general perspective.

     

    Input bread, depress lever, wait, receive toasted bread. Toasters are dead simple and work every time. Thus, the microRendu's code name of Toaster. Not only must the microRendu produce sonically, it was designed to function like a toaster. Connect to network, play music, hear music. At least that was the idea, and based on my extensive testing, the microRendu is the configurable toaster of computer audio.

     

    The microRendu has a single audio input (Ethernet) and a single audio output (USB). Installation entails connecting the unit to your network and to a USB DAC (or D to D converter like the Berkeley Alpha USB) and powering it up (power options discussed later as well). Configuration, calling it that is a stretch, is done via a web browser by selecting one of about five audio output modes. There are other options that may be necessary depending on one's desired use of the unit, but for the most part it works like a toaster.

     

    I'm sure some readers are wondering why they'd ever need the microRendu or wondering how they might use it in different scenarios. I get it, these same questions were popular when USB DACs entered the market. People used to say, "Why use a computer, can't I just use my CD/SACD player?" The answer is, you can stick with the status quo if that feels more comfortable. You don't need the microRendu in the same sense that you need food and water, but I believe many people reading this will very much want a microRendu. Here are five scenarios where the microRendu really shines.

     

    1. Simplification in combination with sound quality. These two don't often go hand in hand, but the microRendu makes this possible. Currently many people are using a NAS for storage of TBs worth of local music and a music server (Mac Mini, PC, CAPS, etc...) connected via USB to their audio systems. Control is frequently handled by an iOS or Android device. Inserting the microRendu into this chain enables one to remove the music server entirely. This simplifies the audio chain and removes the maintenance and cost of an "extra" computer and all its accessories. The new playback path is simply NAS to microRendu to audio system. All controlled by the an iOS or Android device.

     

    nas-mr-as.png

     

     

     

     

    2. A few people in the industry frequently talk about removing the computer from the listening room. Whether this is because their computers are noisy or they just don't like having computers in their listening rooms, that's beside the point. They just don't want one, but they still want all the benefits of using a music server. In essence, the microRendu takes care of this issue. Even though it's really another computer, it's more appropriate to think of it like an audiophile appliance. Once installed, it just works without requiring maintenance. One example of this scenario is the person who has a music server with a few TBs of internal storage sitting in his audio rack and connected to his USB DAC. Maybe the server runs JRiver Media Center or Roon, and it's controlled by an iOS or Android device. This music server can now be placed in any other room of the house, as long as it's network connected, and send audio to the microRendu that is dropped right into the system where the music server was located. Same Ethernet input and same USB output, but now the "computer" has been removed form the audio room and I'm willing to bet the sound quality is even better.

     

    3. Many audiophiles have components with AES, S/PDIF, or USB inputs and they wish they had an Ethernet interface for sending audio the network. Based on the cost of replacing one's component(s) to get that Ethernet interface or the fact that they may have to switch to an inferior product just to get a networkable component, I don't think many people are lining up at HiFi shops to get this functionality if they are already down the non-networkable road. This is where the microRendu comes into play. Connect a microRendu to a USB DAC or D to D converter and one instantly has a networkable audio system. No need to replace one's favorite DAC with something of lesser quality or greater price, when all that's needed is a microRendu.

     

    4. High quality multi-room audio. Using multiple microRendus connected to any number of USB audio devices in different locations throughout one's house is a great way to get the highest of resolutions to almost any system. Streaming 24 bit / 192 kHz or DSD256 to the same or different microRendus is a piece of cake. Use Roon or JRemote for music selection and control of each zone and call it a day.

     

    5. Audiophiles want the best sounding playback system they can afford. Based on my functionality tests and listening sessions, the microRendu could be the solution. I've never had better sounding audio in my room with any other device or server or streamer. Period. Much more on that later. Those who want the best must give the microRendu a spin.

     

     

     

    Hardware Details

     

     

    The microRendu's hardware was no small task to design. It took John Swenson over a year to get it right. This often meant getting new boards produced with the smallest of tweaks to eke out the final ounces of performance. In fact very close to the data of launch, Jesus decided to throw away all the newly delivered boards because of a single design change. This change could have been made to the existing boards after the fact, but this team is all about perfection. So, out went the "production" boards and a new order was placed.

     

    At a high level, the microRendu consists of a tiny processor module (System On Module) that's directly connected to a carrier board. The processor module contains an i.MX6 chip with a dual core processor and RAM. The processor module is attached to the carrier board via two 80 pin headers. It's this carrier board combined with custom software that separates the men from the boys and turns the microRendu into a true audiophile class component.

     

    The carrier board contains the regulators, oscillators, USB port, and Ethernet port. Let's start with the Ethernet input and work our way to the USB output. The microRendu contains a 10/100/1000 Gbps Ethernet interface. This interface is limited to 470 Mbps due to the internal i.MX6 bus. Audiophile needn't worry about this "limitation" because 470 Mbps is still hundreds of Mbps more than is required for even the highest resolution audio files. The microRendu features signal conditioning, signal isolation, and EMI suppression on this Ethernet input in part by using a radical power network with multiple regulators between the power to the Ethernet PHY and the power to the USB subsystem. These regulators have a very high power supply rejection ration or PSSR. The PSSR is used to describe the amount of noise that can be rejected from a source of power. Readers familiar with commercial motherboards built to hit the lowest price point will understand this is a huge difference because those cheap boards don't contain much isolation between the power to the Ethernet PHY and USB subsystem. This extensive design may be responsible for some of the network immunity or lack of sensitivity I've found with the microRendu. No matter what I do prior to the Ethernet input of the unit, the sound remains the same. Even using CAT7 shielded cables that break the inherent galvanic isolation of Ethernet by using connected shields on both ends.

     

    The carrier board features a very low jitter oscillator that feeds the hub chip, PLL, and clock network that has anything to do with the USB subsystem. The other on-chip oscillator is used to drive the processor and memory. This is where the software customization comes into play. The design team was able to shut off the processor module's internal oscillator circuit and externally clock the chip from the much better oscillators on the carrier board. Just like externally clocking a DAC, Sonore changed the reference clock of the PLLs to point to the external clock that's fed with the low jitter main clock.

     

    The microRendu has extremely low ground noise due in part to its design and linear regulators, but also because everything not used for audio purposes has been eliminated or completely shut off. There are many noisy processor circuits not simply unused, but totally shut off.

     

    The USB output of the microRendu is equally as special as anything else contained on the carrier board. Most, if not all, commercial motherboards contain extremely noisy DC to DC converters and switch mode regulators. Thus, even though an expensive linear power supply may be used on the outside, the power signal is going through a gauntlet of garbage once it hits the motherboard on its way to the USB output that feeds power to the USB DAC. It's like running a linear supply though a terrible switching supply in order to feed one's DAC. This isn't the case with the microRendu. The incoming power goes through a linear regulator on its way out the USB port and on to the USB DAC. This ultra clean path completely avoids switching regulators.

     

    In addition the design of the microRendu's USB architecture generates a completely new USB data signal and is highly optimized for signal integrity and impedance matching. To quote John Swenson, designer of both the microRendu and USB REGEN, "The microRendu does contain a circuit which is essentially an improved REGEN. There is no need to add an external REGEN between it and a DAC."

     

    The microRendu requires between 6 and 9 volts of power. During its approximately twenty-five second boot time it peaks at about 0.4A and during regular playback settles in at about 0.2A. Using the forthcoming Sonore 7V power supply provided for this review by Sonore, the microRendu uses 1.4 watts during playback.

     

    One of the beauties of the microRendu's design is its' separate power supply domains. The individual supply domains receive the appropriate regulation scheme for their functions. The processor domain uses a high quality switching regulator since it requires low voltage at high current.

     

    The PLLs that generate clock signals for many different systems use a single ultra low noise regulator, while the USB subsystem uses three ultra low noise regulators.

     

    One additional note about the hardware design. One of the first items I noticed upon receiving my unit was the SD card. This card is required, as it's loaded with the operating system. I figured that storing the OS on FLASH (eMMC embedded MultiMedia Card) or NVRAM would have been a better option. It's a good thing I didn't attempt to design the microRendu because my figuring was a bit off. According to John Swenson, "The i.MX6 has three memory subsystems, the DDR3, which we need to use for the main memory of the system, a very small simple, low power SD card subsystem, and the generic everything else memory subsystem. The later is what you use for NVRAM, flash chips etc. It is a large complex system designed to run very fast. This uses a lot of power and generates a lot of noise in the chip. "

     

    The SD card controller is slow, low power and generates very little noise, and on top of that has its own power supply pins on the chip which cuts down even more on the noise it generates. So by using the SD card rather than something like NVRAM I can drastically cut down on the noise in the chip. There are also things like SSDs, but they all need some form of high power bus to talk to (SATA, PCIE etc), which would mean I would have to turn on those subsystems.

     

    On the reliability front, I have actually found that using on board FLASH or NVRAM is actually less reliable. I have worked with several embedded boards over the last few years that have had flash chips, that have had problems far more often than ones that run straight off an SD card. I think it has to do with where the controller is. With SD card the flash controller is built into the card, the software doesn't have to know anything about that. The inexpensive flash chips used with these systems do not have a built in controller, they require the OS to deal with the issues specific to flash memory. Linux has some good code for this, but if something happens with the kernel during runtime, it is very easy for the flash to get corrupted. I had one board that if power went out during boot the flash was guaranteed to be corrupted."

     

    The SD card simply clicks into the microRendu and sits there without requiring any user intervention. If the OS is somehow corrupted or there's a problem with the unit, a new SD card can be placed into the slot very easily. I like this option much better than sending the unit back to Sonore to get re-flashed if onboard solid state storage was used.

     

     

     

     

    Part 1 Wrap-up

     

    This is it for part one of the Sonore microRendu review. I hope readers have an understanding of how the product came to be, who designed and brought the product to market, what the product is, how it works, and some of the main hardware design elements. Of course there are some proprietary features that Sonore won't tell me about and some that I can't tell you about, but that's to be expected with a bold new product like the microRendu.

     

    In part two of this review I'll dig deeper into the Sonicorbiter operating system, selectable audio output modes, and compare the microRendu to the Sonicorbiter SE, and discuss the external power supply options. I'll conclude the review with my assessment of how my audio system sounds with the microRendu connected to different D to A and D to D converters. Before heading off to the Super Bowl of audio shows that is Munich High End, I'll leave readers with this listening impression - I've spent hours on end listening to music since I took delivery of the microRendu. I wanted to make sure I wasn't burned by expectation bias, so I compared it to many other sources and methods of audio playback (both blind and sighted). After all this, I can unequivocally say that with the microRendu in place, my audio system has never sounded better than right now.

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

     

     

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]25628[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]25629[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]25626[/ATTACH]

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]25627[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]25625[/ATTACH]

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Product Information:

     

     

     

    • Products - Sonore microRendu
    • Price - $640
    • Product Pages - Link
    • User Manual - Link
    • FAQ - Link
    • Purchase - Link

     

     

     

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

    Sign in to follow this  


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Good technique, it seems a lot cheaper now ;)

     

    So the price of the combination reviewed was in fact $2,048. (I would have corrected my original post but that's not possible now.)

     

    That this combo at circa $2K can 'better' an Aurender W20, as one example, is pretty incredible.

     

    Looking forward to the part II and Chris' more detailed listening impressions.

     

    I would love to see reviews of microRendu with power supplies at different price points.

     

    For example:

     

    entry level (kind of iFi iPower)

     

    mid-level (eg. Sotm battery supply)

     

    Top-level.

     

    I am believer that it's the analog (and power) part that makes digital components sound great...

     

    What kind of sonic attributes are changed by upgrading the power supply?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Chris-

     

    You alluded to this in part 1, but I'd just like to explicitly request that you try at least one or two other power supplies at different price points (less than the top of the line Sonore) to give us some kind of comparison/idea what difference the PS makes for the microRendu.

     

    I imagine many owners will be trying to decide if to order an upmarket PS, and at what level is makes sense for them to invest.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Chris-

     

    You alluded to this in part 1, but I'd just like to explicitly request that you try at least one or two other power supplies at different price points (less than the top of the line Sonore) to give us some kind of comparison/idea what difference the PS makes for the microRendu.

     

    I imagine many owners will be trying to decide if to order an upmarket PS, and at what level is makes sense for them to invest.

     

    I started a thread a few days ago in hopes attracting owner impressions of the effects of various power supplies on the microRendu. So far no takers except my impressions of the 3 supplies I've used so far. Hope others will chime in.

     

    http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f26-sonore-sponsored/sonore-microrendu-power-supply-unit-observations-considerations-and-commentary-28480/

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Okay, I hope people will start posting. First receivers just starting getting the unit on the 4th, AFAIK, so I can see it might take a few days for posts to pop up.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    I'm having a hard time grasping what real-world improvement this could make over a direct-connected USB input to my DAC from my iMac, which is in another room about 15ft away. Doesn't an XMOS interface offer some electrical isolation already? Is the claims that a modern computer is generating so much noise that leakage though USB/firewire ground plane is going to reduce fidelity by a great degree? Teach me here, I'm open and I have a run of CAT6 going to the system, for the SBT already. I gather I could just use a hub with the existing network cable in order to provide a path to both the SBT and optionally to the rendu for Roon/HQP use. Aren't there opto-isolators on the market for USB that would accomplish the same thing?

     

    Wow, a lot of questions, many of which are very deep complicated technical issues. If you really want to delve into the details of some of them I have written a series of articles on audiostream that go into great detail on some of the issues involved with this.

     

    Quick summation: there are several things going on at the same time that cause most USB implementations in DACs to not sound as good as they could. Each is caused by a different mechanism and need a different solution, thus there is no one "silver bullet" that fixes everything. Some of these mechanisms are not well understood, which makes fixing them difficult, it becomes a "I tried this and it makes it sound better", do that even more and it makes it worse. A lot of experimentation to get things sounding the best, and slowly gaining understanding as to what is actually going on.

     

    It is VERY important to realize that none of this is gross level stuff, the audio data bits make it across either way. One of the major mechanisms is the operation of the USB receiver in the DAC itself is generating noise on its own power and ground planes which subtly degrades the performance of the DAC chip it is connected to. USB isolators and such make no difference to this mechanism since it is caused by the USB chip in the DAC itself.

     

    What DOES seem to matter is the signal integrity of the USB signal itself. Its jitter, noise, ramp times etc. That is what the microRendu is all about. Generating a USB signal with the highest possible signal integrity to feed a DAC.

     

    Electrical isolation does also seem to matter, there seems to be at least two mechanisms involved. One is traditional ground loop issues, low frequency noise going through ground connections from the computer to the DAC. A USB isolator does seem to fix these. Note this is NOT noise generated by the computer, it is noise caused by leakage currents from the power supplies of everything in the system going THROUGH the computer to the DAC.

     

    There is a wide spread notion that the big problem with USB is noise generated by the computer traveling through the USB cable and polluting the DAC, I have looked carefully into this and do not see this as a big issue. There DOES seem to be an issue with noise on the power/ground wires in the USB cable coupling into the data wires, because of how most USB cables are made this results in some non-common mode noise which cannot be attenuated by the differential receiver in the DAC. Better designed cables CAN fix this. Lower noise on the P/G wires in the cable can also fix this. A subset of this is unbalanced drive on the cable which actually creates some of this noise on the ground wire.

     

    The microRendu is specifically designed to address these issues, other motherboards, embedded systems etc are not. That is what you are paying for with the microRendu, a simple computer that has been optimized to significantly reduce these mechanisms which subtly degrade the performance of a DAC.

     

    On the questions about network topology and SBT etc, I'll talk about those in a separate post. (maybe in the Dummies thread)

     

    John S.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    I'm having a hard time grasping what real-world improvement this could make over a direct-connected USB input to my DAC from my iMac, which is in another room about 15ft away. Doesn't an XMOS interface offer some electrical isolation already? Is the claims that a modern computer is generating so much noise that leakage though USB/firewire ground plane is going to reduce fidelity by a great degree? Teach me here, I'm open and I have a run of CAT6 going to the system, for the SBT already. I gather I could just use a hub with the existing network cable in order to provide a path to both the SBT and optionally to the rendu for Roon/HQP use. Aren't there opto-isolators on the market for USB that would accomplish the same thing?

     

    Wow, a lot of questions, many of which are very deep complicated technical issues. If you really want to delve into the details of some of them I have written a series of articles on audiostream that go into great detail on some of the issues involved with this.

     

    Quick summation: there are several things going on at the same time that cause most USB implementations in DACs to not sound as good as they could. Each is caused by a different mechanism and need a different solution, thus there is no one "silver bullet" that fixes everything. Some of these mechanisms are not well understood, which makes fixing them difficult, it becomes a "I tried this and it makes it sound better", do that even more and it makes it worse. A lot of experimentation to get things sounding the best, and slowly gaining understanding as to what is actually going on.

     

    It is VERY important to realize that none of this is gross level stuff, the audio data bits make it across either way. One of the major mechanisms is the operation of the USB receiver in the DAC itself is generating noise on its own power and ground planes which subtly degrades the performance of the DAC chip it is connected to. USB isolators and such make no difference to this mechanism since it is caused by the USB chip in the DAC itself.

     

    What DOES seem to matter is the signal integrity of the USB signal itself. Its jitter, noise, ramp times etc. That is what the microRendu is all about. Generating a USB signal with the highest possible signal integrity to feed a DAC.

     

    Electrical isolation does also seem to matter, there seems to be at least two mechanisms involved. One is traditional ground loop issues, low frequency noise going through ground connections from the computer to the DAC. A USB isolator does seem to fix these. Note this is NOT noise generated by the computer, it is noise caused by leakage currents from the power supplies of everything in the system going THROUGH the computer to the DAC.

     

    There is a wide spread notion that the big problem with USB is noise generated by the computer traveling through the USB cable and polluting the DAC, I have looked carefully into this and do not see this as a big issue. There DOES seem to be an issue with noise on the power/ground wires in the USB cable coupling into the data wires, because of how most USB cables are made this results in some non-common mode noise which cannot be attenuated by the differential receiver in the DAC. Better designed cables CAN fix this. Lower noise on the P/G wires in the cable can also fix this. A subset of this is unbalanced drive on the cable which actually creates some of this noise on the ground wire.

     

    The microRendu is specifically designed to address these issues, other motherboards, embedded systems etc are not. That is what you are paying for with the microRendu, a simple computer that has been optimized to significantly reduce these mechanisms which subtly degrade the performance of a DAC.

     

    On the questions about network topology and SBT etc, I'll talk about those in a separate post. (maybe in the Dummies thread) (that didn't come out right

     

    John S.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Leaving the cost behind for a second (though its as important), could you provide some insight as to why not use a Uptone JS-2 with microRendu rather than the Sonore ? The JS-2 has an additional flexible output, choke-filtered and has greater amperage. What does the JS-2 lack that Sonore Signature provides to power the microRendu ? I am just trying to understand the two supplies better tailored to my current and future needs.

     

    I have no personal experience with the JS-2, so I would not presume to comment on how good it will sound with the µRendu. My only comment would be in regard to using the JS-2 as a two output power supply: in my experience, powering two devices (whatever they may be) from a single supply (like the JS-2, which has two outputs fed from the same transformer) is always at least a slight compromise, technically speaking, from having single isolated supplies for each component. Indeed we could go into this ad infinitum and get really complicated regarding the onboard suppiies, and the level of additional regulation, etc... I am confident in saying that additional current availability beyond what the Sonore Signature Supply is capable of is irrelevant to the performance of the µRendu, as the Sonore supply is fully capable of handling the transient needs of the µRendu.

     

    Additionally, suggesting that reviewers should review multiple supplies and rank them, etc, is really putting the reviewer in a tough position. Just sourcing these multiple supplies would be very time consuming (consider how many possible supply options are already discussed in this thread alone), and audio reviewing is taxing enough as it is. The most I would expect to see from a review would be a comparison between a very simple option like iFi, and a more sophisticated one like the Sonore Signature. It is pretty much impossible to make a complete purchase decision based on reviews anyway.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I am under the impression that the iFi is already an upgrade type power supply if it performs as well as the marketing associated with that product are true. The measurements appear pretty good so it will be interesting to see how it compares to my laboratory grade Agilent power supply I have been using.

     

    I'm hoping the iFi is better but will see I gues.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    I have no personal experience with the JS-2, so I would not presume to comment on how good it will sound with the µRendu. My only comment would be in regard to using the JS-2 as a two output power supply: in my experience, powering two devices (whatever they may be) from a single supply (like the JS-2, which has two outputs fed from the same transformer) is always at least a slight compromise, technically speaking, from having single isolated supplies for each component. Indeed we could go into this ad infinitum and get really complicated regarding the onboard suppiies, and the level of additional regulation, etc... I am confident in saying that additional current availability beyond what the Sonore Signature Supply is capable of is irrelevant to the performance of the µRendu, as the Sonore supply is fully capable of handling the transient needs of the µRendu.

     

    Additionally, suggesting that reviewers should review multiple supplies and rank them, etc, is really putting the reviewer in a tough position. Just sourcing these multiple supplies would be very time consuming (consider how many possible supply options are already discussed in this thread alone), and audio reviewing is taxing enough as it is. The most I would expect to see from a review would be a comparison between a very simple option like iFi, and a more sophisticated one like the Sonore Signature. It is pretty much impossible to make a complete purchase decision based on reviews anyway.

     

    I agree asking a reviewer to review 4 or 5 power supplies is too much; but I don't think asking to review 2 or 3 with a device like the microR is. Reviewing just the most and least expensive PS probably is helpful to the least amount of buyers. Most users will probably buy one of the upgrade options short of the Sonore Signature. So having an idea if a $300 or $400 upgrade sounds significantly better than a $50 is a very useful bit of info.

     

    I agree I can't make a "complete" purchase decision based on reviews, but I can't audition all the PS's and send them back, so that's all I have to go on. I think many don't want to spend lots of bucks on shipping 4 or 5 PSes to themselves, and then pay the costs of shipping back, if it is at all possible to return the units. Basically I have to decide on one to buy, and live with that decision.

     

    One of the PS I was considering already get a relatively negative review from one of the early adopters. If it gets another, I'd probably eliminate it from consideration. To me, that's helpful.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    ...

    It is pretty much impossible to make a complete purchase decision based on reviews anyway.

     

    For a device like the microRendu it's pretty much impossible to do it any other way really since no dealers can loan them, hence the importance of thorough reviews user feedback - especially for overseas buyers. At least a renderer should be less system dependent than other components - it's really 'how good is it'

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Good technique, it seems a lot cheaper now ;)

     

    So the price of the combination reviewed was in fact $2,048. (I would have corrected my original post but that's not possible now.)

     

    That this combo at circa $2K can 'better' an Aurender W20, as one example, is pretty incredible.

     

    Looking forward to the part II and Chris' more detailed listening impressions.

     

    Well we don't really know this for a fact, but what the mR will eventually achieve is for other competitors of streamers/servers to lower their prices (hopefully significantly). At least that's what logic says if you can achieve great sound with $649, compared to 2-5-10-20k streamers/servers...just my 2c

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Chris & Team microRendu,

    Chris, with only a few hours of play, I would have to agree with your assessment, …”I can unequivocally say that with the microRendu in place, my audio system has never sounded better than right now.” Using JRiver, JRemote, MinimServer, and the budget PS, I couldn’t be more happier with the results.

    Thank you Team microRendu!

     

    --WynnHiFi

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Additionally, suggesting that reviewers should review multiple supplies and rank them, etc, is really putting the reviewer in a tough position. Just sourcing these multiple supplies would be very time consuming (consider how many possible supply options are already discussed in this thread alone), and audio reviewing is taxing enough as it is. The most I would expect to see from a review would be a comparison between a very simple option like iFi, and a more sophisticated one like the Sonore Signature. It is pretty much impossible to make a complete purchase decision based on reviews anyway.

     

    I agree that there are too many power supplies in the market to do meaningful reviews. At the price of Sonore PS, it should a no brainier comparing with a $50 ifi PS. However, I would really love to see someone doing a comparison between three power supplies

     

    a) low priced like ifi at $50

    b) mid price in the range of $400-$500 and maybe the upcoming Uptone MPS designed by John S will fit this category nicely. If its not available anytime soon, then maybe one from hdplex or teradak.

    c) high price, like the Sonore Signature or Uptone JS-2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The microRendu looks like a fine device, but I'd question why I'd want to spend $640 when I could buy a single board computer like the Raspberry Pi 3 (which has a quad-core CPU vs. the dual-core in the microRendu) for $35 and achieve exactly the same level of audio quality with any decent USB asynchronous DAC.

     

    More concerning though would be how future proof a device like this would be, as it relies on open source software such as Squeezelite and Shairport, which are constantly being updated. There are certain to be incompatibilities in the future with the specific Linux distro and hardware of the microRendu and these rapidly evolving software packages.

     

    By configuring your own renderer with a popular single board computer, and then choosing piCorePlayer, Volumio, Rune, Moode, etc. you also have a large ecosystem of support. And by buying several $8 microSD cards it's easy to try out new distributions. I just downloaded the new 2.05 release of piCorePlayer, which includes a standalone Logitech Media Server that runs on your Pi. And there are recent open source efforts that can add Spotify Connect capability to many of these distros.

     

    Again, nothing wrong with commercial offerings such as the microRendu, but for many people I believe you can get a much better solution at a fraction of the price and more flexibility with software updates by choosing a Raspberry Pi or ODroid SBC and any one of the audiophile Linux distros under constant development.

     

    Here's a recent blog posting by one of my favorite audio bloggers on the renderer he put together with an ODroid-C2 and Volumio 2:

     

    Archimago's Musings: MEASUREMENTS: ODROID-C2 with Volumio 2, and USB digital music streaming.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    ... and achieve exactly the same level of audio quality with any decent USB asynchronous DAC.

     

    Take some time to read the article. Dig through the other treads and find posts from the people involved in creating it (see John Swenson above).

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Take some time to read the article. Dig through the other treads and find posts from the people involved in creating it (see John Swenson above).

     

    I have actually. That's why I included Archimago's blog posting, to provide an alternative point of view.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    I have actually. That's why I included Archimago's blog posting, to provide an alternative point of view.

    Hi skikirkwood - Good post / questions. I think your comments are indicative of both sides of the wonderful hobby of ours. Some people have the skills, knowledge, time, desire to build a Pi based player. These people are also satisfied with forum only support for their self-built product. That's totally cool. The other side of the coin is most people who want to purchase a well built, well designed product from a reputable company who will call them up or remote connect if there is a problem, and these people believe in doing everything possible to squeeze every ounce of sound quality out of their systems.

     

    Its cool when we can all use whatever device floats our boats and talk about the results and share great music. Nobody is right or wrong for selecting either type of product.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Hi skikirkwood - Good post / questions. I think your comments are indicative of both sides of the wonderful hobby of ours. Some people have the skills, knowledge, time, desire to build a Pi based player. These people are also satisfied with forum only support for their self-built product. That's totally cool. The other side of the coin is most people who want to purchase a well built, well designed product from a reputable company who will call them up or remote connect if there is a problem, and these people believe in doing everything possible to squeeze every ounce of sound quality out of their systems.

     

    Its cool when we can all use whatever device floats our boats and talk about the results and share great music. Nobody is right or wrong for selecting either type of product.

     

    Hi Chris, yes, different people have different requirements and priorities, and that's why it's great there are so many solutions out there, both commercial and DIY. As a computer scientist who grew up on Unix, I'm very comfortable with playing around with Linux-based systems, but of course most people are not. But for people getting into the computer audio hobby, even without a technical background, a small degree of learning some basics will give them a great deal of flexibility, and perhaps more enjoyment of the hobby in the long run. It certainly will give you more options.

     

    Regarding the commercial vs. DIY approach, my point here was to raise the issue of how future-proof any commercial packaging of proprietary hardware combined with open source software can be. That, combined with raising the issue of questioning do you actually get better technical support from a hardware vendor for this class of products vs. the community support with the DIY crowd. I own a Squeezebox Touch, and like many owners was shocked to hear Logitech discontinuing the product several years ago. But despite being a software engineer, I needed to call Logitech twice to get the Touch configured on my home network. So I suspect the support costs Logitech incurred was too costly to continue a $299 product. And for low cost (< $1000) renderers, I would be concerned about the same fate, especially as one who has used, configured, and had issues with the open source software packages the microRendu comes with.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Some other forums I am visiting are flooded with DIY guys claiming that they could do things better for a fraction of the money. It seems like products of the uR category act like a red blanket in front of a bull. Also, It is always about cost plus.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Some other forums I am visiting are flooded with DIY guys claiming that they could do things better for a fraction of the money. It seems like products of the uR category act like a red blanket in front of a bull. Also, It is always about cost plus.

    Coming mainly the "audiophile side" of this I find their claims and seeming distress rather laughable.

    The price of most items under discussion could be considered a "pittance" in that realm. I do want, seek and expect the best bang for my buck and the Sonic Transporter/uRendu/iFi power bundle I bought punching WAY above its price point.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Some other forums I am visiting are flooded with DIY guys claiming that they could do things better for a fraction of the money. It seems like products of the uR category act like a red blanket in front of a bull. Also, It is always about cost plus.

     

    I think an interesting comparison of commercial vs. DIY is the upcoming Bryston BD-Pi unit. Looks like it will cost about $1200, but under the hood it's based on a $35 Raspberry Pi 2 and $45 HiFiBerry Digi+ board. Of course Bryston is adding a beefy power supply, and a fantastic looking machined aluminum case with an OLED display. Still not clear exactly what Linux distro they are using and what mods they are making, but I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't choose Volumio, Rune or Moode.

     

    So let's say you could add a decent power supply and case to the $80 base parts here, and flash one of the above distros. Does the Bryston unit justify the huge delta in price over the DIY approach. My main stereo has been based around a Bryston amp and pre-amp for over 20 years. I love the company, and what they stand for, so I'd say for many people, the answer is yes. If Bryston can offer 20 year warranties on their electronics, I trust they will offer fantastic support for this product. And the unit looks fantastic, so sure, if a friend asked me for a recommendation in this area, and they didn't want to ever ssh into a Linux shell and type obscure Unix commands, I'd suggest looking at a unit like this.

     

    I also really like what Bryston has done here, being totally transparent about what's under the hood. Virtually all high end renderers are based upon some commodity single-board ARM-based computer and a Linux distro. By choosing a Raspberry Pi and Digi+ board, they are tapping into both the great economies of scale these hardware products have, as well as the large and rapidly evolving software ecosystems behind them, and I think it's a great move.

     

    That said, I'm very happy with my two Raspberry Pi's with their IQAudio Pi-DAC+ I2S DAC's, one running Volumio, the other piCorePlayer, both supporting Airplay via the Shairplay emulator, and the open source Spotify Connect having been added to Volumio.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    . Virtually all high end renderers are based upon some commodity single-board ARM-based computer and a Linux distro .

     

    But that is what is different about the microRendu, it is NOT a commodity single-board ARM-based computer. It is a custom designed board specifically designed to produce the highest possible signal integrity on the USB signal, which with most DACs will produce a significantly improved sound quality.

     

    John S.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    But that is what is different about the microRendu, it is NOT a commodity single-board ARM-based computer. It is a custom designed board specifically designed to produce the highest possible signal integrity on the USB signal, which with most DACs will produce a significantly improved sound quality.

     

    John S.

     

    Hi John, well the bottom line is how do all of these systems sound in comparison to one another. So with the Bryston unit about to ship, I'd be interested in any group of people who could compare the sound of the microRendu, the BD-Pi, and an off the shelf Raspberry Pi 3 with a $10 power supply.

     

    My bias is that with any good asynchronous USB DAC they would all sound exactly the same, but I'd welcome any data points that showed otherwise.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Skikirkwood, no that is YOUR bottom line. Have fun comparing those and let us know. I, myself, have already been through enough poor USB implementations to completely understand the specific focus of the uRendu project. But since you do not have that experience, and assume bits are bits, then I understand your need for comparisons. And it's nice to hear your plans to commit to your ideas. Please let us know what you find.

     

    With a few days of the uRendu inhouse it certainly has a sound quality that utterly redefines what a $600 appliance should be able to do, let alone it's multiple modes/feature-sets. And I would bet that it most improves systems that, unbeknownst to the user, have poor USB signal integrity, be it an average USB ansynch DAC or a previous pedestrian design from the source. USB was never considered to be the best choice for a DAC interface, but has become ubiquitous. It's nice that companies like Sonore and Uptone have decided to tackle that aspect of computer audio gremlin DNA.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Guest
    This is now closed for further comments

  • Superphonica
×