surrender n200 vs n20

spoke to them today, they say the n200 is very close to the n20 when streaming is the main source, n20 better when listening to files

I was very surprised how good the N200 sounds with .wav and .Flac files pulled from a HDD or my Vault.   Really good.   

Both units are very good, but the N20 will present with richer tonal density, more separation and clarity, and a wider, taller soundstage. Its internal clock is admirable, and if you go with the N20 then be prepared to use AES to take advantage of the internal clock. 

The Aavik is a very clean sounding unit. If you are pairing it with Borresen speakers (which is what I have), you may benefit from the N20 as it will provide more of that tonal density and weight. The N200 is spectacular but right there in the center of neutral, and the N20 provides a bit more bloom and simply a bit more of everything. 

In full disclosure, I am an authorized Aurender dealer.

I've owned a N20 for almost one year now and I can honestly say it's the best source component I've ever had, both digital and analogue. It's very slightly bettered by the N30 by a very small margin, not worth paying double the price.

I've never demoed the W20SE or the N200.

It's real strength is having a master/word clock input which really elevates its performance amongst it's peers.

Aurender's literature states that AES/EBU is the best sounding output but I must disagree. The USB with external clock is far superior even though an external clock isn't supposed to help USB - go figure. Only USB or I2s will play native DSD.

I need to buy another streamer but it's difficult accepting anything less than the N20 and I know the external clock has a big part to play.

The N20 is THE total package this side of $20k.

I clicked on the support icon at night and when I woke up there was a response.  So far I feel this was one of the most worthwhile upgrades on a long time.  
 

I keep meaning to install the 4 TB SSD  but I can’t stop listening to it.