Next step up on the streaming food chain?

Cant have this conversation without mentioning the two gorillas, Wadax and Taiko.  Can't justify the cost at this point for the Wadax, but maybe someday.

 Disagree strongly with audiotroy - had an Innuous server in house (think it was the Zenith - was their $15-20k model) and the Aurender W20 smoked it. (Its also strange that he so strongly recommends a random Belgium made server he happens to sell as superior to products 3-4x the price.  Can't comment specifically on the product, since I have never heard it, but if you check out their web site, its got some goofy stuff even by audiophile standards).

I have Grimm MU1. I haven’t compared to Auralic but was a huge upgrade to Innuos Zenith MK3.

Edit to add:  I don't think Auralic does Roon.  Grimm does not work without roon.  so it may not be a good choice for you.

Dimensionality and roundness are not quantifiable properties. Figments of the OP's imagination!

@jasonbourne71 current measurement techniques and equipment do not adequately qualify ALL sonic properties such as soundstage dimensions (just one example). Besides, you are barking up the wrong tree here, almost no one here cares for the measurements crowd blather, the ASR forum is where you should be barking.

@zavato I think your DAC is fine for now, upgrading your streamer is the best 1st step, Lumin Aurender Innuos Antipodes Grimm are all good choices, hard to go wrong, budget around $8-12K to get the best value models, after narrowing your choices it comes down to software differences, if possible audition in your own system.

FWIW I have a Lumin P1 and it was the best upgrade to my system so far in my digital front end journey.

@kairosman @jasonbourne52 Dimensionality and roundness are indeed figments of the listeners imagination, as are all things stereo. But that is neithervthe question or the issue. The question is whether or not they are repeatable and reliable. If they are, then they are true, if unquantifiable. Likewise claims of blacker (a visual term) backgrounds attributable to lower noise are specious at best when the current noise floor is well below the listeners background noise floor to begin with. 'Improved dynamics' is another questionable term because dynamics have in our context a very specific definition: The change in the voltage envelope describing the event. A guitarist plucks a note. The microphone picks up that sound, its 'dynamics' defined by its voltage envelope. Pluck it harder, the voltage envelope increases. Absent an increase in the voltage envelope there is no change in dynamics. Likewise, a DAC whose output variations are greater than the input ('improved dynamics') is demonstrably defective. I'm not saying all equipment sounds identical. I'm saying if it does sound or present differently there are reasons, some quantifiable, some not. But to be valid they must be consistently repeatable.