Aurender N150 vs M1 powered MacBook Air

[AnotherJohnson]

I thought this was an interesting video.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eoMUdMQqxvM&t=5s

It reminds me of the Nucleus vs MacBook Air comparison I recently experienced.

This is a different problem. He uses the Aurender
and the computer for their streaming, but feeds both signals via usb to an external DAC.

His description of sound differences was eerily familiar when I consider what I heard here.

My comparison sent the signals via my network to an external DAC. I was streaming from Qobuz through Roon.

Just as occurred for the YouTuber, I thought the MacBook Air performance was great … until I heard the Nucleus (dedicated device) in comparison.

[admin]

Interesting video. Reinforces that dedicated hardware designed for a specific performance can outperform general use devices. After all, streamers are nothing but dedicated music playing computers.

[AnotherJohnson]

Aurender appears to be another high-ender who is unwilling to use WiFi. There’s a pattern here.

The N150 is at the bottom of their lineup, but I think it still costs $3500 without extra storage. An M1 powered MacBook Air with plenty of storage is considerably cheaper.

If you don’t care that there might be a difference, it’s easy to see why you might make the choice based on cost.

[admin]

It's an interesting choice for them not to support wifi as the entire song is first downloaded to the internal drive before it plays. Reading their webpage it sounds like the choice was for reliability. Getting away from wifi and the need for good signal strength, lack of interference, and no need for passwords, etc... seems like a smart move for these manufacturers. In Aurender's signal pathway, I can't see how it would influence the sound as the entire file is already downloaded and not streamed in real time.

[AnotherJohnson]

Yes, the file is loaded before Aurender processing.

Packet loss is real. Late packets are probably correctly inserted in their original place. If average jitter is a quarter of a second or more, which was true here, the downloaded file from bad WiFi may well not perfectly match the original.

I agree that reliability is probably the primary motivation. But we’re not going to resolve the IT agnostic or IT atheist position that the theoretical specs of the switches, wires, wifi, etc don’t tell the full story.

Several dCS components have identical specifications. Yet a discerning listener can hear the differences in the way they present performances. Specs don’t constitute proof that people don’t perceive these things differently.

You don’t have to be a Luddite to argue that IT as it relates to human perception is not yet mature.

The problem is that IT is understood at a level that facilitates many applications. Like Newtonian physics, it may be inadequate to describe all phenomena.

[audiobill]

FYI, Aurender in the past has not been "roon ready". They are in the process of changing that to be compatible.

[AnotherJohnson]

FYI, Aurender in the past has not been "roon ready". They are in the process of changing that to be compatible.

You can probably either confirm or correct this, but as I understand it, “Roon Ready” means that the RAAT package from Roon is installed in the device so that the Roon Core works extremely well with the device.

Roon Tested means that Roon has tested a device that does not have RAAT and found that the device is compatible with the Roon Core.

dCS is Roon Ready. McIntosh and Levinson are Roon Tested.

[audiobill]

Correct. So, in the case of the Aurender N200 network player (no dac inside), there was no way to use it with Roon in any capacity. You would have to use Aurender's player app.

Soon, with Aurender's OTA software upgrade, there will be, and it will be Roon ready.

My Mc D1100 digital pre and C2600 tube pre are Roon tested, but have no Roon inside.