Measurements of Sonore microRendu Streamer

[Don Hills]

You can learn a lot from this pathetic little setup I have on my desk for my office system. ...

OMG, your mains wiring...

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

You can learn a lot from this pathetic little setup I have on my desk for my office system. I have dirty SMPS's, clean SMPS's, Clean LPS's, Discrete class A opamps, IC opamps, a regulator board with extremely low noise regulators and very high PSRR, and separate DC inputs for every section of the DAC board.

View attachment 2140

See, this is how the really great things in audio get designed!

 

[Mivera]

OMG, your mains wiring...

Beautiful isn't it? This setup is ready to be boxed and sold on CA. That green ground wire is doing the same thing as a $25000 grounding box. It's the secret of the sound I'm getting.

 

[Don Hills]

Amir's results show that the mR, not unreasonably, can't improve an already good input. One test I would like to see is what it does when the input is less than perfect.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim,

Just generally most people make audio decisions by listening. Even earlier in this thread when Michael was asked about why he changed his amplifiers, it was a listening decision. And the responder discussed how certain amps might sound brighter, and different op amps would change the sonic signatures. Nowhere in this back-and-forth are there precise measurements detailing these changes. It was a brief audio discussion, which is what most people do. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but it seems it can be rather selective and not necessarily fairly applied to all.

Regards
Bob

Yeah, nowhere in there is there an example of something that can be heard, but can't be measured. And whenever one asks for examples, this is the kind of answer you get. "I heard it." With all biases fully engaged. And when the biases are removed, and only ears are being used to judge, what we hear goes away. Funny how that works.

Tim

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Amir's results show that the mR, not unreasonably, can't improve an already good input. One test I would like to see is what it does when the input is less than perfect.

In fairness, and in spite of claims to the contrary, the basic function of the device is to enable longer cable connections than USB can support by using Ethernet and converting that to USB for input to the DAC. If it did that perfectly and with no degradation, I might consider it a useful product. Although, I really do not know what else is out there that might also perform that simple function with no degradation. I have not checked back to see where additional claims, like it somehow makes the bits better, came from. But, it does use Swenson's signature Regen technology. Is that a bonus? Not to me, actually. Tried Regen and stopped using Regen.

So, if people are buying this as a USB "filter" to alleviate all the horrible nasties of USB, you have a point. Except, if it introduces its own nasties, as has been shown unless it has the magic of just the right PS, I am lost as to why we need to go further into that with the device. It seems to have a fundamental and fatal flaw.

 

[amirm]

So, if people are buying this as a USB "filter" to alleviate all the horrible nasties of USB, you have a point.

Since introduction, the key benefit touted has been improved fidelity. That is why I shelled out $700 to test that aspect of it.

 

[Geardaddy]

I would still like to know if (from a measurements standpoint) there is any merit to the concept of a NAA.

Interesting tidbit from the CA thread: http://archimago.blogspot.co.za/2016/05/measurements-odroid-c2-with-volumio-2.html

Awaiting response (and measurements) from Swenson....

 

[amirm]

Was reading the review of microRendu on CA and noticed this:

"During this review I used both the 7 volt Sonore Signature Series linear power supply ($1,399) and the 9 volt iFi iPower power supply ($49). The differences between these two power supplies, when powering the microRendu, are somewhat similar to the differences between the mR and Sonicorbiter SE. If one is satisfied with having less than the best, then start with the $49 iFi iPower. It's a no brainer. Fortunately for iFi and mR customers, the iPower is a terrific power supply. The sound quality I squeezed from the microRendu using the iFi iPower was stellar. It's amazing what solid engineering can accomplish for less than fifty bucks. The iFi is so good, I don't hesitate to suggest that readers who purchase a much more expensive PSU, also purchase the iFi to compare the two units. What's not to like about a $49 experiment that may lead to a substantial savings? "

Clearly then testing with iFi power supply is merited given the high recommendation from a reviewer here. I wonder what he thinks about the fact that this combo serves to pump power supply noise into the output of the DAC that didn't exist without microRendu and iFi in the middle.

 

[Mivera]

I would still like to know if (from a measurements standpoint) there is any merit to the concept of a NAA.

Interesting tidbit from the CA thread: http://archimago.blogspot.co.za/2016/05/measurements-odroid-c2-with-volumio-2.html

Awaiting response (and measurements) from Swenson....

That would all depend on your setup. If you were Michael with his shiny new NADAC, there wouldn't be any merit to using the NAA protocol. You can always drag your Imac into your listening room and find out. However the USB interface on your DAC definitely doesn't represent what 98% of others have.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Maybe JS likes a little noise and designs by ear. In the pick the best of 5 DACs thread, he said 4 sounded the same and not good. One was better than the others. One of those 5 was an upsampling of the original files. The one JS picked was a Nexus 6p phone. It features an SNR in the high 70 db range over the audible band. The others had much lower SNR.

 

[Purité Audio]

Do 'Ifi' pay for advertising on Computer Audiophile, usually such high praise is reserved for advertisers only.
Keith.

 

[tr1ple6]

Do 'Ifi' pay for advertising on Computer Audiophile, usually such high praise is reserved for advertisers only.
Keith.

Yes they do. http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f30-abbingdon-music-research-ifi-audio-sponsored/

 

[bibo01]

Was reading the review of microRendu on CA and noticed this:

"During this review I used both the 7 volt Sonore Signature Series linear power supply ($1,399) and the 9 volt iFi iPower power supply ($49). The differences between these two power supplies, when powering the microRendu, are somewhat similar to the differences between the mR and Sonicorbiter SE. If one is satisfied with having less than the best, then start with the $49 iFi iPower. It's a no brainer. Fortunately for iFi and mR customers, the iPower is a terrific power supply. The sound quality I squeezed from the microRendu using the iFi iPower was stellar. It's amazing what solid engineering can accomplish for less than fifty bucks. The iFi is so good, I don't hesitate to suggest that readers who purchase a much more expensive PSU, also purchase the iFi to compare the two units. What's not to like about a $49 experiment that may lead to a substantial savings? "

Clearly then testing with iFi power supply is merited given the high recommendation from a reviewer here. I wonder what he thinks about the fact that this combo serves to pump power supply noise into the output of the DAC that didn't exist without microRendu and iFi in the middle.

I honestly believe that the reviewer wrote what he subjectively heard, but one also has to admit that he was getting 2 (sponsors) with 1 (review).

 

[Purité Audio]

Chris is no worse than other reviewer, probably better in fact, he has a family to feed,I completely understand.
When you take money integrity has to be put to one side.
Keith

 

[Thomas savage]

Chris is no worse than other reviewer, probably better in fact, he has a family to feed,I completely understand.
When you take money integrity has to be put to one side.
Keith

Even if once money has been taken one feels they are still balanced and objective, it's very possible that despite their best intentions this won't be the case..

You don't have to be corrupt, it's just human nature. No incentive to be objective either as a conscious choice or just natural consequence of such a comprising dynamic.

Unintentional favouritism could be at play... No slight on the individuals involved.

 

[FrantzM]

The Market doesn't require it. Luxury markets don't require integrity in reviews. Someone is anointed the Guru or the Critic and from that point on is heard by the masses ... HP was at that level, Valin is there and so are Fremer and John Atkinson; there are others but those seem to tower over the rest.

 

[March Audio]

Tim, my measurements so far have shown me that the working principles behind the Regen & microRendu are not shown in simplistic measurements & I have no alternative measurements that would help or be of any great service to anybody. Yet, I know that the Regen itself improves the sound & greatly improves the sound when powered differently because I have experimented with it & I & others have heard the effects. Are they measurable? Not in any way that I have tried to measure them.

JK, I wasnt aware that you possessed any relevant measurement equipment. Can you tell us about the kit you have bought and what measurements you have conducted.

.......and the blind tests I have condusted show that people cant tell the difference.......

 

[March Audio]

What concerns me about small boutique audiophile manufacturers is not that they don't publish measurements that even the "big guys" don't publish, it is the very real possibility that they are developing products and bringing them to market without conducting even, as John would say, the most "simplistic" measurements.



Tim

We know this to be the case. Uptone admitted they didnt have the kit to test the regen in any meaningful way.

 

[John Kenny]

Just to be clear, JK, I did not say that PS's in the computer itself made an audible difference.

But isn't the micoRendu a computer albeit stripped down to it's bare essential hardware?

As I said, Like you, I have seen no clear objective evidence of that.

And that is why I asked you the question I did - I have not seen measured evidence of the output of a USB DAC showing 10-15dB lower noise when the computer it is attached to uses an improved PS. To my mind, this is the first such evidence.

What I was referring to were the power supply mind games with external devices like this one, Regen, DACs, etc.

These are not power supply mind games, Fitz - they are sincere & mostly effective attempts to address head on the issues of noise transmission between computer & USB audio device. And is it a negative that they are PS dependent? Give me a device that improves by 10-15dB when powering it with a better PS than one that is immune to such PS improvement & measures 10-15dB higher "noise floor"

And, CA forum is loaded to the gills with claims of this or that PS being way "better" under totally uncontrolled, sighted, subjective listening.

Not going to discuss that

Personally, I would prefer not to think of the PS as a separate component. I think it should be considered an essential part of the design of the component, particularly if the PS can affect things as much as with this device.

I agree that the PS is fundamental to every audio system - it's the foundation from which all else emanates. What is perhaps controversial is that the PS is still fundamental to digital audio as it is often considered that digital audio is relatively immune to noise.

But, like audiophiles and their power cords, etc. computer audiophiles just like to have fun swapping stuff and swearing they heard this or that magical "improvement" in post after post.

For every one of your comments about CA members/audiophiles there is an equivalent but opposite comment about measurists but I'm not going to go there

At least in regular, non-computer audio we get to see measurements from time to time, though still not as much as we should. Computer audio is still the Wild West in terms of actually believable claims, especially from manufacturers who avoid measurements like the plague. Published measurements, like these here and which provide some meaningful insight, are quite rare, and they are often bashed by the majority of computer audiophiles who "trust only their ears" in the uncontrolled, sighted listening they do.

So do you concur with the meaningful insight I just gave on these measurements i.e that they are the first evidence that an improved PS has been seen to substantially reduce the "noise floor" of a USB DAC?

Just as an aside but apropos to this thread & as an example that maybe Thom will be interested in as he raised it earlier in the thread as a question - I just came across a Stereophile review of the M2tech Young DAC & associate Palmer battery supply. In the review Jon Inverson stated "I'm curious to see what John Atkinson's measurements reveal, because the Palmer battery supply was easily distinguishable from the wall wart. Voices and sound effects came into better focus—or, to put it another way, a slight hashy buzz around the parts fell away when the battery replaced the wall wart."

But Atkinson only measured this difference "With the Palmer battery supply, the Young's noise floor was clean and very low in level. Changing to the wall wart introduced a series of spectral components at 60Hz and its odd harmonics (fig.4), but at –110dB and below (<0.0003%), these won't be audible as hum. I'm not sure, therefore, why JI found the sound with the Palmer so much better."

So have the correct measurements not yet been identified which correlates to this universally acknowledged improvement in audibility with better PS or is it a case that the stuff down at -110dB is audible?