Auralic Aries (Hardware) - Impressions and Information

[Doak]

37 minutes ago, Morph said:

So it seems that we will see G1 and G3 products as well. Interesting.

Curious, this coming from official channel?

[Morph]

16 minutes ago, Doak said:

Curious, this coming from official channel?

No. It was mentioned in the final line here, https://www.audiostream.com/content/auralic-g2-series

Makes sense though.

[mikey8811]

7 hours ago, Morph said:

No. It was mentioned in the final line here, https://www.audiostream.com/content/auralic-g2-series

Makes sense though.

 

It was said in an email reply to me to. G1 is the lower model and so on.

 

I think if you are in the market for a streamer,you will be spoilt for choice later this year. There is now the SOtM SMS-200 Ultra (also rumoured to be coming in a larger form factor incorporating all the separate box tweaks), Sonore ultraRendu (maybe you don't need the ISO Regen for this),ELAC Discovery Q in the pipeline.

 

For slightly less than the G2 you can also get the dCS Network Bridge.

 

I hope there is a suitable one box solution that doesn't require any external USB, galvanic and/or ethernet  isolation, linear or battery power supply, etc.

[deuch]

Does the next firmware will be able to convert DSD128 and higher in PCM or DSD64 ? My DAC is not handling more than DSD64 and i've some files in DSD128 or 256 (no release in DSD64) ?

 

The new VEGA G2 will handle DSD512 and i suppose that the internal streamer too ? As the streamer in the VEGA G2 is an original Aries, i can suppose that the actual Aries will be able to handle DSD512 too ?

[Blade1001]

Can any beta testers confirm that the upsampling is limited to PCM - i.e. there is no option to upsample everything to DSD?

 

DSD upsampling and room correction were two features that were 'promised' (I use the term lightly) right from the release of the Aries. I'm going to assume that with the proposed release of the new upscale G2 product line (particularly the Sirius Processor), that these features are unlikely to see the light of day now on the standard Aries models?

[FIndingit]

Maybe Auralic found out that such heavy processes compromise sound quality too much and need the more capable processing power of the upcoming G2. 

[Leeuwarden]

Still wonder/hoping if roomcorrection wil come to the Aries.

[Blade1001]

Maybe - but the sceptic in me thinks it more likely a marketing decision to retain features for a new upgraded product.

 

I don't wish to sound overly negative incidentally, I think Auralic is an excellent brand and I wish them every success with the new line, and I may well be in the market for their Sirius depending on how it works.

[deuch]

1 hour ago, Blade1001 said:

Can any beta testers confirm that the upsampling is limited to PCM - i.e. there is no option to upsample everything to DSD?

 

DSD upsampling and room correction were two features that were 'promised' (I use the term lightly) right from the release of the Aries. I'm going to assume that with the proposed release of the new upscale G2 product line (particularly the Sirius Processor), that these features are unlikely to see the light of day now on the standard Aries models?

I confirm that no option to upsample everything in DSD. And no downsample to PCM for DSD128 and higher

[pl_svn]

1 hour ago, FIndingit said:

Maybe Auralic found out that such heavy processes compromise sound quality too much and need the more capable processing power of the upcoming G2. 

 

 

I believe they are already pushing Aries' hardware to its limits with this damned upsampling everyone, lately, wants to do no matter if HW is not really up to the task 

As soon as I install fw 5 beta I get EMI/RFI on my tubes preamplifier. It goes away as soon as I revert to 4.1 (or move the Aries underneath, instead of on top of, the Metrum Hex which, with his large metal box, acts as a shield)

 

I'm using the Aries as Roon endpoint and if I were to do any upsampling I'd rather do it on my quad-core i7 Mac mini!

 

Only solution I was offered as a fix is... locking my Aries to fw 4.1

I'm pretty upset with Auralic and I'm not sure I will trust, in the future, yet another company that does "what people want"  instead of what is right in a given condition. They should have rather said: "Sorry guys, in the end we found current Aries not to be up to the task so, who *needs* upsampling etc. will be offered a trade in program for a G2"

[Doak]

4 hours ago, pl_svn said:

 

 

I believe they are already pushing Aries' hardware to its limits with this damned upsampling everyone, lately, wants to do no matter if HW is not really up to the task 

As soon as I install fw 5 beta I get EMI/RFI on my tubes preamplifier. It goes away as soon as I revert to 4.1 (or move the Aries underneath, instead of on top of, the Metrum Hex which, with his large metal box, acts as a shield)

 

I'm using the Aries as Roon endpoint and if I were to do any upsampling I'd rather do it on my quad-core i7 Mac mini!

 

Only solution I was offered as a fix is... locking my Aries to fw 4.1

I'm pretty upset with Auralic and I'm not sure I will trust, in the future, yet another company that does "what people want"  instead of what is right in a given condition. They should have rather said: "Sorry guys, in the end we found current Aries not to be up to the task so, who *needs* upsampling etc. will be offered a trade in program for a G2"

I have not found "upsampling" to improve sound - not with the Aries and not when using the computer.  I have found it a method for smoothing out he sound of less poor sounding music but then, to me, it sounds artificial. So, I play everything "straight" and enjoy it the most that way.

Yes, I agree that is a mistake to push this current Aries to or past its limits with such unnecessary processes.  

[deuch]

Same thoughts here. I would like to be able to match all the input signal of my DAC with downsampling to the right signal. It misses me the downsampling of DSD128 and higher.

 

for the upsampling, i don't care

 

i've tested some albums in MQA with upsampling (24/88) and it sounds more artificial than the 24/44.1 PCM file. I uses the precise mode (don't sure it affects MQA decoding but it seems).

 

Same things with PCM upsampling, it sounds more digital and without soul.

[mjb]

6 hours ago, pl_svn said:

Only solution I was offered as a fix is... locking my Aries to fw 4.1

I'm pretty upset with Auralic and I'm not sure I will trust, in the future, yet another company that does "what people want"  instead of what is right in a given condition. They should have rather said: "Sorry guys, in the end we found current Aries not to be up to the task so, who *needs* upsampling etc. will be offered a trade in program for a G2"

 

Well, a simple fix would be for Auralic to add a toggle switch "Upsampling function: On/Off" in their web interface. I'd like the option to turn off "Lightning Server" too.

[pl_svn]

54 minutes ago, mjb said:

Well, a simple fix would be for Auralic to add a toggle switch "Upsampling function: On/Off" in their web interface. I'd like the option to turn off "Lightning Server" too.

 

I suggested doing right that instead of being locked to fw 4.1: no reply 

[2string1]

5 minutes ago, pl_svn said:

 

I suggested doing right that instead of being locked to fw 4.1: no reply 

HAHA if they did that I bet you would not hear any difference.  Maybe for the bad....NOOOO sales... 

[mikey8811]

On 30/05/2017 at 0:00 AM, mjb said:

If you're running beta software and have issues, don't forget to notify the developer - which is what beta testing is all about... In other words: expect bugs in beta's, but report them.

 

I did notify Auralic about the missing library issue and the slowness in scanning, as well as errors with splitting tracks from a single FLAC, APE file with cue.

 

Anyone facing the same should also do so as in their reply to me, they seem to blame it on a slow network connection even though I can stream 1080p material at 20 Mbps on the same network and did not have slow scanning with previous firmware.

[mikey8811]

14 hours ago, deuch said:

Same thoughts here. I would like to be able to match all the input signal of my DAC with downsampling to the right signal. It misses me the downsampling of DSD128 and higher.

 

for the upsampling, i don't care

 

i've tested some albums in MQA with upsampling (24/88) and it sounds more artificial than the 24/44.1 PCM file. I uses the precise mode (don't sure it affects MQA decoding but it seems).

 

Same things with PCM upsampling, it sounds more digital and without soul.

When you tested MQA files were they from Tidal?

 

Apparently, Tidal already does the first unfold up to 24/96, so I am unsure if it is the Aries that is doing the upsampling. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

Also, I tested some Tidal MQA albums and the quality varies with source material. For the material I listened to, MQA sounded like EQ pretty much blown up for presence and I can't really say I preferred it to the same FLAC files I had of the same material.

[mikey8811]

On 30/05/2017 at 1:34 PM, mikey8811 said:

 

It was said in an email reply to me to. G1 is the lower model and so on.

 

I think if you are in the market for a streamer,you will be spoilt for choice later this year. There is now the SOtM SMS-200 Ultra (also rumoured to be coming in a larger form factor incorporating all the separate box tweaks), Sonore ultraRendu (maybe you don't need the ISO Regen for this),ELAC Discovery Q in the pipeline.

 

For slightly less than the G2 you can also get the dCS Network Bridge.

 

I hope there is a suitable one box solution that doesn't require any external USB, galvanic and/or ethernet  isolation, linear or battery power supply, etc.

 

Add to that list of streamers the Bricasti M5 that is mentioned in another thread - also competitively priced.

 

I wonder how these alternatives are with firmware updates that improve sonics at no additional cost to the user. Auralic have been decent with these.

[Frankie61]

1 hour ago, mikey8811 said:

 

I did notify Auralic about the missing library issue and the slowness in scanning, as well as errors with splitting tracks from a single FLAC, APE file with cue.

 

Anyone facing the same should also do so as in their reply to me, they seem to blame it on a slow network connection even though I can stream 1080p material at 20 Mbps on the same network and did not have slow scanning with previous firmware.

Streaming video is not so demanding as streaming Audio ...... i had to by a new router before my Audio streaming was stable and i had a 100/30 connection before ...... it vas NOT stable streaming Audio ( no problem when streaming Video ) ..... now i got a new router and only 20/10 connection BUT it´s STABLE streaming Audio now ! 

The new router is a 4G Huawei and my connection streams hirez on wifi without any problems now ! 

[Blade1001]

46 minutes ago, Frankie61 said:

Streaming video is not so demanding as streaming Audio ...... 

 

No, streaming video is significantly more demanding than streaming audio.

 

DSD128 for example maxes out at around 11Mbps, a Blu-Ray rip by comparison can go up to 50+Mbps.

 

Any basic router should be able to stream audio over a wired connection without issue. If you're looking at wireless, that's a different matter, then all bets are off.

[deuch]

4 hours ago, mikey8811 said:

When you tested MQA files were they from Tidal?

 

Apparently, Tidal already does the first unfold up to 24/96, so I am unsure if it is the Aries that is doing the upsampling. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

Also, I tested some Tidal MQA albums and the quality varies with source material. For the material I listened to, MQA sounded like EQ pretty much blown up for presence and I can't really say I preferred it to the same FLAC files I had of the same material.

Yes i've made some testing from Tidal.

 

Tidal does not do the first unfold, the stream is 24/44.1 or 24/48. Normally the streamer unfold from this stream. It's what the Aries does. With the firmware 4.1, MQA was played as 24/44.1 or 24/48 (pass-through in fact).

 

[Frankie61]

3 hours ago, Blade1001 said:

 

No, streaming video is significantly more demanding than streaming audio.

 

DSD128 for example maxes out at around 11Mbps, a Blu-Ray rip by comparison can go up to 50+Mbps.

 

Any basic router should be able to stream audio over a wired connection without issue. If you're looking at wireless, that's a different matter, then all bets are off.

Well ..... could be a wireless issue ..... don't know ..... but when i got the new router i have no problems  though my speed if under half what it was before ! 

 

[mikey8811]

2 hours ago, deuch said:

Yes i've made some testing from Tidal.

 

Tidal does not do the first unfold, the stream is 24/44.1 or 24/48. Normally the streamer unfold from this stream. It's what the Aries does. With the firmware 4.1, MQA was played as 24/44.1 or 24/48 (pass-through in fact).

 

 

I thought that was the case initially but then I read this article on Audiostream which says it does do the first unfold

 

https://www.audiostream.com/content/against-mqa-unfolded

[deuch]

2 hours ago, mikey8811 said:

 

I thought that was the case initially but then I read this article on Audiostream which says it does do the first unfold

 

https://www.audiostream.com/content/against-mqa-unfolded

The desktop tidal application does it but not the Aries. I did my test with Tidal in lightning server/DS.

[bhobba]

On 02/06/2017 at 3:17 AM, deuch said:

The desktop tidal application does it but not the Aries. I did my test with Tidal in lightning server/DS.

 

The desktop application certainly does that.   But exactly what the Aries does is uncertain.  I suspect its doing the first unfold then the second by its own propriety technology. 

 

With some very experienced Audiophiles it was split as to which sounds better.   So far 4 of us have done critical listening with albums we all know eg Hotel California and Blue..  At first we all liked the MQA and was actually blown away but since then have done critical comparisons against 444,1 with a bit different results.  Me and another guy much preferred MQA - it some times displays 96/88.1 indicating the fist unfold and sometimes 176/192 and even on occasion  DXD sampling (ie 352) so it makes some kind of intelligent (well hopefully anyway) choice based on content.  The other 2 preferred non MQA - straight 44.1.   It was on a very high end system using speakers you probably haven't heard of but are simply the best any of us have ever heard.  For me the MQA was simply more harmonically rich and convincing - to the other it was bloomy.

 

We will be doing a lot more comparisons in the future.

 

But I do have a technical issue I will no a separate post about and hopefully some of you guys can help.

 

Thanks

Bill