Sonore's microrendu is out - the first audiophile microcomputer?

[amirm]

strange but you are the only one who seems to have heartburn about this product.

I have no hearburn about the product. We created a forum where we can discuss audio technologies. Lots of strong statements were made by OP that got me interested in discussing them. During the entire time, I have repeatedly said this product could do what it says. I am simply asking for some data, anything, to validate what it does.

By all accounts at CA this is a terrific product and has none of the issues that you feel are paramount. Perhaps you might want to ask Jesus to loan you one so that you can work your wonders with your uber expensive measuring equipment. Let me count now how many manufacturers you have trashed here. The good thing as I see it is that no one really cares and remain heavily invested in the products that you say are crap..

I will buy one to evaluate when I through the long list of stuff on my list to evaluate. And yet again, I have not once said it is crap. Your emotions are getting in the way of reading my posts. Put that aside, and you see that I am simply asking for some data, anything I can hang my hat on, that this device improves fidelity over USB. USB audio is important to me. If something improves it measurably, even if it does not so audibly, I would still champion it. So the bar is not that high.

As far as your analogy about me and medicine as compared to you and your expensive instruments, I can say that I had a gold scalpel, much more expensive than the others. Did it make me a better surgeon.....Not in the least

I said nothing about instruments in my statement to you. I grew up with analog electronics/audio as my hobby in 1970s. My older brother was into it and taught me a ton about both analog and digital electronics. I got in trouble in school at age of 12 (?) for selling RF transmitters I had built. I went on to naturally get my electrical engineering degree in 1982. Until I retired in 2008, I made my entire living in designing hardware, software and hiring and managing thousands of engineers doing the same. I imagine this is similar story to you going to school and becoming a doctor and practicing the same. So when someone says I don't know what I am talking about, and you give him a pat on the back, I call that disingenuous and unkind.

Instead of being advocate of learning the technology which is at the core mission of this forum, you seem to be on some other mission. What that is, I don't know. But this is what I have done since inception of this forum. Please don't denigrate it with such personal remarks when you would not stand for it in kind.

 

[Steve Williams]

I have no hearburn about the product. We created a forum where we can discuss audio technologies. Lots of strong statements were made by OP that got me interested in discussing them. During the entire time, I have repeatedly said this product could do what it says. I am simply asking for some data, anything, to validate what it does.


I will buy one to evaluate when I through the long list of stuff on my list to evaluate. And yet again, I have not once said it is crap. Your emotions are getting in the way of reading my posts. Put that aside, and you see that I am simply asking for some data, anything I can hang my hat on, that this device improves fidelity over USB. USB audio is important to me. If something improves it measurably, even if it does not so audibly, I would still champion it. So the bar is not that high.


I said nothing about instruments in my statement to you. I grew up with analog electronics/audio as my hobby in 1970s. My older brother was into it and taught me a ton about both analog and digital electronics. I got in trouble in school at age of 12 (?) for selling RF transmitters I had built. I went on to naturally get my electrical engineering degree in 1982. Until I retired in 2008, I made my entire living in designing hardware, software and hiring and managing thousands of engineers doing the same. I imagine this is similar story to you going to school and becoming a doctor and practicing the same. So when someone says I don't know what I am talking about, and you give him a pat on the back, I call that disingenuous and unkind.

Instead of being advocate of learning the technology which is at the core mission of this forum, you seem to be on some other mission. What that is, I don't know. But this is what I have done since inception of this forum. Please don't denigrate it with such personal remarks when you would not stand for it in kind.

it must be wonderful going through life being perfect, always correct and never being wrong

This forum was a peaceful place until some recent threads, sort of like where we used to be and personally I won't let it get there again

 

[jkeny]

I am making measurements these days that if any fellow engineer saw me doing, would campaign to get my EE degree rescinded. No one is more willing to accept these theories to be correct from objectivity camp than me. Get me any tweak in the world and I will spend the time measuring it.

As we all know, measurements is a meaningless term. Measurements which are genuinely directed at uncovering the possible workings of a device are always welcome. Recognising the limitations of what's measured & what isn't measured is part & parcel in characterising a device. So far, you produced limited measurements, don't say what the limitations of such measurements are & don't state what you didn't measure. Furthermore you reject all suggestions about RF & or other measurements requesting those who suggest such to bring data.

Your last assertion is also completely wrong. I measure. Then use psychoacoustics to determine audibility. I don't stick my wet thumb in the air and declare every scheme out there as good yet be unmeasurable.

I suggested that you prove you are up to the job by doing measurements on the analogue outs of a USB DAC which is audibly changed by the inclusion of the Intona & show us what measurements correlate to the audible differences. This would go a long way to demonstrating their value.

I anticipate that this will never be done lest the whole charade is exposed for what it is!!

If you get personal one more time John, violating TOS, I will hand you a sanction. Stay on the topic of the thread.

You mean about my accusing you of "bluff & bluster"? I should have expanded it, agreed. You talk about your expertise a lot & drop names of those who consulted to you & the group you managed along with the VLSI devices & hardware designs you were involved in.

Can you put some meat on these claims & reveal some details of the noise budget for these hardware designs, the testing they went through - some examples of the ones that failed the noise budget & why. In other words, you claim an expertise at a level of detailed knowledge yet I see you producing no actual evidence in any of your posts - hence I called it "bluff & bluster" - if you produce some detail as requested above that shows I am wrong, I will apologise openly to you.

 

[amirm]

it must be wonderful going through life being perfect, always correct and never being wrong

I have made no statement about anything for it be right or wrong. I have asked questions. I have asked for data. You didn't practice your medicine without data, but you want the audio world to be that way. Which is fine. That is the side of audio world you bring, and this is what I bring.

This forum was a peaceful place until some recent threads, sort of like where we used to be and personally I won't let it get there again

The forum is still peaceful. The last battle I saw was in the three amigos thread which I had little to do with. The rest is actually quite fine. If it goes south, we better have done everything in our power to be friendly and not take up arms ourselves. Because the moment we do, that is when everything thinks it is OK to go to war. Please don't go there.

 

[BobShermanEsq]

careful his measuring equipment is bigger than yours


I see this piece of equipment as a valiant attempt by Jesus and his partner to make a computer desirable for music lovers.It is a computer at its core with differences from a common computer. Jesus has never once made bold claims and what do we see? Once again an attempt to cast shadows over yet another product. They utilize linear regulators on some of the unit's circuits and they don't include circuits they don't need. For better or worse that is the concept. They do not hide the fact that it's based on Linux at it's core. They make no claim that this makes a difference. They use it because it headless, simple, robust and has the features they need to meet the product goals.They can't respond to what people are saying, but their product website is pretty straight forward. At the end of the day they are just a couple of guys making a new product.

Look at the grief he has taken


Just my $0.02

Thank you Steve. My feelings exactly. There are good people out here, trying to make good products and they keep getting attacked by the RULER with his ruler...

 

[BobShermanEsq]

Of course. I have managed the development of full computer system including design of VLSIs that go in them. In addition, I have years of experience working on the operating system that goes into them and taught classes for 10+ years at University of California to others. I post a link to my book on the topic. Computer systems, architecture, hardware, software, performance, networking, etc. are all what my 35+ years of professional career was all about.

Do a bit of research for heaven's sake before making such comments. Or ask questions.

Now, what are your qualifications in this regard?

With all that you have built up some serious bias, and it shows.

 

[jkeny]

Thank you Steve. My feelings exactly. There are good people out here, trying to make good products and they keep getting attacked by the RULER with his ruler...

Yea & instead of talking about who he managed, etc. he could actually demonstrate that he has some experience with the various noise considerations that are a necessary part of the design of any VLSI chips and of motherboards. This would indeed add to the body of knowledge.

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

I am not myself in the market for a device such as this. But, here is an alternative that appears to do much of the same thing as the microRendu, but for under $100, with measurements:

http://archimago.blogspot.com/

Yes, this is not represented as "audiophile", and it is a little bit more of a DIY project. Earlier postings at that blog describe the construction of the device, which is minimal. But, the good news is it "does no harm" to the signal in its role as an Ethernet-USB converter. Perhaps the microRendu is just as good, though it would be hard to imagine it was provably "better". But, to each his or her own.

BTW, there is an interesting measured comparison there between powering this device with an SMPS wall wart and a battery: no measured difference at the DAC output.

 

[jkeny]

I am not myself in the market for a device such as this. But, here is an alternative that appears to do much of the same thing as the microRendu, but for under $100, with measurements:

http://archimago.blogspot.com/

Yes, this is not represented as "audiophile", and it is a little bit more of a DIY project. Earlier postings at that blog describe the construction of the device, which is minimal. But, the good news is it "does no harm" to the signal in its role as an Ethernet-USB converter. Perhaps the microRendu is just as good, though it would be hard to imagine it was provably "better". But, to each his or her own.

BTW, there is an interesting measured comparison there between powering this device with an SMPS wall wart and a battery: no measured difference at the DAC output.

You can get a Google Chromecast Audio device for $30 or so & it produces pretty good audio. What's being addressed by the MicroRendu is the attention to the various power domains & power requirements in these devices. Various voltages are required - often 3.3V, 1.8V, 1.2V, 0.8V at various current ratings. The use of DC-DC converters & power management chips to handle these power requirements & the consequent varying ground noise issues is one of the factors that the MicroRendu seems to be addressing.

 

[dallasjustice]

These "audiophile" NAA or Linux streamers are best characterized by what they do NOT do rather than what they can do. For example, the micro rendu cannot do multichannel. In fact, I'm not aware of any Linux streamer which can do multichannel, even though it should be possible if the endpoint is UAC class compliant.

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

These "audiophile" NAA or Linux streamers are best characterized by what they do NOT do rather than what they can do. For example, the micro rendu cannot do multichannel. In fact, I'm not aware of any Linux streamer which can do multichannel, even though it should be possible if the endpoint is UAC class compliant.

I agree. But, I also expect the best they can hope to do in terms of audio performance is to not change the sound in any way vs. a straight USB connection to the DAC. Archimago's cheap DIY device is that way, but I am sure that there will be claims of massive sonic improvement, unproven objectively of course, about the microRendu because it is an "audiophile" design.

 

[dallasjustice]

I agree. But, I also expect the best they can hope to do in terms of audio performance is to not change the sound in any way vs. a straight USB connection to the DAC. Archimago's cheap DIY device is that way, but I am sure that there will be claims of massive sonic improvement, unproven objectively of course, about the microRendu because it is an "audiophile" design.

Jesus sent me an email. He said that it does support MCH via MPD mode. However, it hasn't been tested yet. I use a prism Titan which is UAC class compliant.

To me, there's real value in moving my server further away from MLP. If that's possible, I'd consider buying one of these. I'd prolly have to use HQplayer for convolution tho. Maybe when I have some free time I'll investigate further. Jesus has always been nice about allowing the customer to test the gear without financial obligation.

I agree that there's likely no sonic benefit to using such a device, assuming competently designed gear is downstream.

 

[YashN]

I have met John and have tested his products. John's background is in VLSI design unrelated to audio.

You're wrong about that...

nor in my opinion, understanding of what matters in audio fidelity+computing technology.

According to me, he does, and a lot more than people think.

That is why his Regen has not performed as stated.

Performs as stated. I don't think you've understood its main purpose and how it differs from the now various similar products available on the market (iFi, Intona, Mutec, etc...)

If you don't know what it does, then you won't know what to measure nor how...

Furthermore, I am not sure you're aware your "where are the measurements" is becoming your own set of "jangly keys". Do you remember that?

Note: I am not saying measurements are not important, they are. But, you need to know what to look for, then you need to know how to measure properly, and with what equipment, and when the equipment is not readily available yet, what process you need to use to derive the measurements properly.

There are already three people who have vastly more experience measuring and understanding the audio chain than you: Swenson, Caelin Gabriel and Peter Stordiau to name just these (there are others). So, if you really want to understand, ask them questions. Gabriel is right here on this forum. Both Swenson and Stordiau also interact at CA.

 

[jkeny]

You're wrong about that...

According to me, he does, and a lot more than people think.

Performs as stated. I don't think you've understood its main purpose and how it differs from the now various similar products available on the market (iFi, Intona, Mutec, etc...)

If you don't know what it does, then you won't know what to measure nor how...

Furthermore, I am not sure you're aware your "where are the measurements" is becoming your own set of "jangly keys". Do you remember that?

Note: I am not saying measurements are not important, they are. But, you need to know what to look for, then you need to know how to measure properly, and with what equipment, and when the equipment is not readily available yet, what process you need to use to derive the measurements properly.

There are already three people who have vastly more experience measuring and understanding the audio chain than you: Swenson, Caelin Gabriel and Peter Stordiau to name just these (there are others). So, if you really want to understand, ask them questions. Gabriel is right here on this forum. Both Swenson and Stordiau also interact at CA.

Agreed with all above. Maybe Amir can tell us his experience in VLSI design as I asked before - noise budgets, etc? It would give us all a point of reference to judge John S experience Vs Amir's in regard to power distribution network & ground noise issues.

If he really wants to find out what these issues can cause in audio & how to measure them he could also contact John Westlake on PinkFishMedia & Rob Watts on Head-fi - both audio current designers with a long history of product design & audio-related e'ee experience, who both use APX-555 - & ask these how to do the measurements required to uncover these issues.

 

[amirm]

You're wrong about that...

No sir. I spent extensive amount of time with him. Here is his bio: http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-john-swenson-part-1-what-digital#jzzB0sJ8LaFQtQ01.97

I will skip the hobby parts and get to this part which is what he does for a living:

"Somewhere along in there I got very involved in power supply design and how the supply can be a major part of the sound of most audio equipment. [also hobby work]

In order to finance all this I work for a semiconductor company laying out large complex chips, with a specialty in internal power networks and how what is going on inside the chip disturbs its own power delivery network in the chip, the package and board."

Power supply design other than switchmode is trivial. And while I respect his VLSI design experience in that field, it brings next to no value in audio products. He is an audio hobbyist that works in a different electronic field during the day.

The topic of his background came up because I asked him how it is that he designs audio systems all day but doesn't have any kind of audio measurement tool. That is when he told me his day job has nothing to do with audio. So he doesn't even have access to such gear at work.

You want to call me a liar, you need to do your homework.

According to me, he does, and a lot more than people think.

Are you an audio designer? Electrical Engineer? Because if you are neither, it is obvious why you are so confused about his true background. Technical terms are thrown around that you don't understand so you take it for expertise.

There are already three people who have vastly more experience measuring and understanding the audio chain than you: Swenson, Caelin Gabriel and Peter Stordiau to name just these (there are others). So, if you really want to understand, ask them questions. Gabriel is right here on this forum. Both Swenson and Stordiau also interact at CA.

And I have spent a lot of time with Caelin also. Caelins background is in IT networking. I don't know Peter but if you are this confused about the other two, I don't care to look him up.

What nonsense hero-worshiping.....

 

[amirm]

Performs as stated. I don't think you've understood its main purpose and how it differs from the now various similar products available on the market (iFi, Intona, Mutec, etc...)

Come again? Its stated purpose is to add new distortion products to my DAC that were not there without it? http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...t-Jitterbug-and-Uptone-Regen-USB-Conditioners

All that theory of why Regen should make USB better, didn't work because the designer didn't measure, and only hypothesized. And as I mentioned, his hypothesis of what he was improve was wrong anyway.

So now, enlighten us on what its "main purpose" is if it is not to improve what comes out of my USB DAC. You won't have an answer because in the process of hero worshipping, you skipped the part where a smart consumer asks for some validation.

 

[microstrip]

(...) So now, enlighten us on what its "main purpose" is if it is not to improve what comes out of my USB DAC. You won't have an answer because in the process of hero worshipping, you skipped the part where a smart consumer asks for some validation.

Some smart consumers will see the graphs and conclude that nothing in them shows any audible distortion. Then they can have some hope that when the DAC is connected to his whole system something positive happens when the regenerator is inserted in their systems. And they will try it, preferably with a decent money back option to help suppressing bias expectation.

 

[BobShermanEsq]

No sir. I spent extensive amount of time with him. Here is his bio: http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-john-swenson-part-1-what-digital#jzzB0sJ8LaFQtQ01.97

I will skip the hobby parts and get to this part which is what he does for a living:

"Somewhere along in there I got very involved in power supply design and how the supply can be a major part of the sound of most audio equipment. [also hobby work]

In order to finance all this I work for a semiconductor company laying out large complex chips, with a specialty in internal power networks and how what is going on inside the chip disturbs its own power delivery network in the chip, the package and board."

Power supply design other than switchmode is trivial. And while I respect his VLSI design experience in that field, it brings next to no value in audio products. He is an audio hobbyist that works in a different electronic field during the day.

The topic of his background came up because I asked him how it is that he designs audio systems all day but doesn't have any kind of audio measurement tool. That is when he told me his day job has nothing to do with audio. So he doesn't even have access to such gear at work.

You want to call me a liar, you need to do your homework.


Are you an audio designer? Electrical Engineer? Because if you are neither, it is obvious why you are so confused about his true background. Technical terms are thrown around that you don't understand so you take it for expertise.


And I have spent a lot of time with Caelin also. Caelins background is in IT networking. I don't know Peter but if you are this confused about the other two, I don't care to look him up.

What nonsense hero-worshiping.....

Yes sir... People are only only allowed to worship you.

 

[jkeny]

Come again? Its stated purpose is to add new distortion products to my DAC that were not there without it? http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...t-Jitterbug-and-Uptone-Regen-USB-Conditioners

All that theory of why Regen should make USB better, didn't work because the designer didn't measure, and only hypothesized. And as I mentioned, his hypothesis of what he was improve was wrong anyway.

So now, enlighten us on what its "main purpose" is if it is not to improve what comes out of my USB DAC. You won't have an answer because in the process of hero worshipping, you skipped the part where a smart consumer asks for some validation.

A smart consumer judges an audio product based on it's sound & not on measured differences which many state are beyond or below audibility.
I have heard the Regen in enough different systems to judge it's effectiveness & I have modified it's power to know that it is effective

I get it Amir, you don't believe in John S theory about ground noise issues & their audibility. You want measurements to "prove" this to you. You have done some measurements which confirm your view that you can't find anything that would benefit the audio signal.

Have you considered that your measurements may be limited by this restricted viewpoint?

 

[amirm]

A smart consumer judges an audio product based on it's sound & not on measured differences which many state are beyond or below audibility.

Nonsense. Before you buy the product, you have no way of judging its sound. Listening to someone pontificate what they hear or imagine to have heard, gives you no idea of the product's real capability.

Measurements however, shine a bright light on the product, exposing whether it has done something and whether that something is good or bad. In the case of John's other product, the Regen, based on testing by multiple parties, the Regen shows to degrade the output of the DAC measurably. It is perfect example of someone's theory of some tweak being perfectly wrong.

I have heard the Regen in enough different systems to judge it's effectiveness & I have modified it's power to know that it is effective

So what? How do I ascertain the validity of your results? With measurements, others can and did duplicate the flaws in the device.

I get it Amir, you don't believe in John S theory about ground noise issues & their audibility. You want measurements to "prove" this to you. You have done some measurements which confirm your view that you can't find anything that would benefit the audio signal.

Have you considered that your measurements may be limited by this restricted viewpoint?

Not at all although you talking about restricted point of view cracks me up . Where you not my best friend when I was passing some of those critical listening tests? Nothing was wrong with my viewpoint then, when I took on objecitivists. Now that I show that I call both sides to the table to demonstrate effectiveness of their opinions all of a sudden I have restricted point of view?

No, I am not biased that way. I am after engineering excellence. I actually accept measured improvements that are NOT audible. The engineer in me wants to applaud better design.

But you have to give me something to hang my hat on. A flawed theory that in implementation actually damages the DAC's measured fidelity is not my friend. That is yours, shows an unbiased point of view on your part.

You argue with words. You need to argue with data. Somehow you think engineering and fidelity discussions can be data-free. Please advocate that to someone even more stupid than me.